esrosedotblog

REELING

The art of Arthur Miller is the deep layering of thought that lies within his plays. There is the surface story and then there are the characters who act it out and then there are the words and thoughts that come out of the characters' mouths and then, there is the spectacular web of meaning that projects from the action, the people, and the words.

I have seen The Crucible (1994) done before. There have been 4 television productions and the play is produced 'all the time' 'all over the world'.

I guess I skipped the film when it came around because I thought I had seen it all. Now, I know that I had not. The film has added a visual element to the story, the people, the words, and the meaning. Miller revised for the film and so it has the master's hand on the wheel.

A lot of people did not like this version. Ebert, with whom I invariably agree only gave it two stars. He got pissed off at the opening scenes and never forgave the production.

I was taken in totally. There is a lot of reality in the set and location and the decoration. We are in the 17th Century. The use of the camera to take the story 'outdoors' and to sweep in large brush strokes is powerful particularly in gathering up the group hysteria that infects the people of Salem.

The acting is great. Paul Scofield takes center stage as the trial judge. He is formidable. And everyone else from top to the bottom of the cast are great too. Who would have thought that Winona Ryder could be so terrifying? This is not the first time I have been surprised at her skill. This is why it would be better if we knew nothing of the private lives of any artists.

And then there is Daniel Day-Lewis (sigh) who we will see many times in the Great Film series.

I lived through the McCarthy era. When our class visited Washington D.C., I played hookie and went to watch the crowds coming out of the Senate Office building. I saw Joseph Welch.

I was aware of the HUAC hearings. My Congressman Frances Walter was either on it or one of the red-baiters. He was the coauthor of the McCarran-Walter immigration act which was not so far in spirit from what many of the anti-immigration people want now.

It was a scary time as it is now. There is no doubt that a lot of the work in this film focuses on the hypocrisy of the church and church people as well as politicians who manipulate the them to serve themselves; an evil synergy. The story is no less timely today than it was then.

And, it is a universal theme. Saving your own ass at the expense of others.

I liked it a lot and it 'got' me again. I will give it a 5 out of Netflix5. Roger Ebert be damned. I am still reeling from the experience. How many reels in a two hour film?