Inherit the Wind (1999) Reviews

• Disappointing

  
  By on 1999-11-18
  Anyone who has never seen the Spencer Tracy/Fredric March version of this classic play (based on the famous Scopes Monkey Trial) will probably enjoy this version, but despite the facts that I was eagerly awaiting this release and that Jack Lemmon and George C. Scott are/were two of my all-time favorite actors, I was disappointed. The performances lacked the passion and just flat did not measure up to the original ones, with one exception--Lane Smith (the prosecutor from My Cousin Vinny) was his usual marvelous supporting self in the role of the minister. Still, it's not the worst movie you can rent; the play is so good it would probably be impossible to make a bad movie out of it and with the recent resurgence of the Evolution vs. Creationism debate, it is certainly topical.

  Also, if you want to see Jack Lemmon in a remake of a film classic that's excellent, try 12 Angry Men.
  
  

• A thought provoking film. George C.Scott gives a compelling

  
  By A3CWH6VKCTJAD on 2000-04-18
  This film is a remake of a 1960 movie about the 'Scopes' monkey trial in July of 1925, argued by prominent statesman William Jennings Bryan (for the prosecution and the Bible) and equally the prominent Clarence Darrow (for the defense, scientific thought and Darwin). Rather than compare it with the original, which I understand was brilliant, I will evaluate it on its own.

  This is a powerful and thought provoking courtroom drama about a school teacher who was arrested for teaching evolution, then considered a heresy against God and the bible. The topic is unfortunately as timely today as it was 75 years ago. The film is extremely effective at illustrating the pervasive ignorance and fear so prevalent in fundamentalist religions. It depicts with great clarity, the frenzied and irrational efforts undertaken to suppress any knowledge that threatens to debunk the myth and simple minded traditions that bind the faithful together.

  Unfortunately, the presentation of the story had certain flaws that kept it from being a truly great film. My biggest objections are all directorial. First, this film was visually mediocre and pedestrian. The camera basically followed the speaker around the room at the same angles from pretty much the same distances. There were very few reaction shots which would have greatly enhanced the drama. I don't think there was a single reaction shot of any member of the jury and only a couple from the gallery.

  Director Daniel Petrie takes enormous artistic license in presenting the trial. The way it was portrayed it seemed more like an unmoderated debate between the lawyers than a criminal trial with rules of court. Granted, it was a small town in 1925, but this was ridiculous. In real trials, lawyers have two opportunities to give speeches in a trial, in opening and closing statements. During the trial itself, they are only to ask questions and gather evidence under very strict rules. They can't give speeches or lead the witness or inject their opinion about a witness' testimony. This was flouted in the film as lawyers violated these rules repeatedly with nary an objection from the other side. Ironically, the most important speeches of the trial, closing arguments were completely missing from the film.

  I found Jack Lemon's portrayal of defense lawyer Henry Drummond to be disturbingly restrained. Lemon is clearly capable of unfettered rage and indignation, yet he played his character with resignation and defeatism rather than frustration and wrath. He simply didn't fight hard enough for the principles in which he supposedly believed. I blame this on Petrie.

  Without question, the performance of the film belonged to George C. Scott in his last performance before his death (a stunning coincidence since William Jennings Bryan, on whom Scott's character is based, died shortly after this trial. So it was his last performance as well). Scott is magnificent as the bible thumping prosecutor rattling the rafters of the little courthouse with his booming gravel voice. This was the type of part Scott was born to play and it may have been his best performance since Patton. For this reason alone this film should be on every film buff's list. If only Lemon brought similar fire to his part, this film would have been riveting.

  Beau Bridges was a bit overly obnoxious as the sardonic reporter E.K. Hornbeck. The role called for a good deal of cynicism, but Bridges got carried away.

  Lane Smith gives a terrific performance as the Lord possessed Reverend Brown, who damns his own daughter to hell for refusing to renounce her love for her fiance Cates, the accused school teacher. His sermon at the prayer meeting was more than worthy of any cable TV evangelist.

  I gave this film a 7/10. I think it would be rated higher by most people who think of a courtroom as more of a dramatic setting than place of justice. Overall it is a credible update of a topic that should remain in the forefront of our minds if we hope to continue living in a free and rational society.
  
  

• One of the few remakes that stands up to the original

  
  By A2EDZH51XHFA9B on 2000-06-19
  Hold the phone. It's a remake that's almost as good as the original.

  Much of the brilliance of the new version of Inherit the Wind comes from finding two old fogeys who have the same love/hate chamistry brought to life in the original by Frederic March and Spencer Tracy; in this case, the friendly adversaries are George C. Scott, in his last performance before his death, and Jack Lemmon. Toss in Beau Bridges as the wisecracking journalist and a surprisingly downbeat performance by Thom Evertt Scott as the teacher who ends up a guinea pig in one of the biggest trials of the century, and you got yourself a fine film. The comic timing is impeccable on all counts, the lines from the film that have become cliche are delivered with the same freshness that ignited them decades ago, and one can almost believe that Scott and Lemmon actually are Bryan and Darrow haggling it out in a Tennessee courtroom.

  If you've never seen _Inherit the Wind_, start with the classic Spencer Tracy/Frederic March version from 1960. If you're a fan of the film already, and have been avoiding this remake because nothing can do the original justics, well, you're right... but it comes as close as possible.
  
  

• Inherit the Wind (1999)

  
  By A28CSED4PDC5GF on 2000-08-27
  A truly excellent remake of an American classic. Once you get past any inital reservations you may (understandably) have about the film's made-for-cable origins, you will find a work that is, in my opinion, just as engaging as the 1960 version. Two gripes: 1.As mentioned by another reviewer, the direction and camera work is a bit static and elementary. 2. As also mentioned by another reviewer, Beau Bridges at times is too obnixious and over the top. On the other hand, Jack Lemmon and George C. Scott (in his final performace) are absolutely riveting. Piper Laurie is also very compelling as Scott's sympathetic and diplomatic wife. This incarnation of the film is extremely faithful to its predecessor, virtually a frame by frame re-shoot. Yet the dialouge, performaces and subject matter are just as fresh and stirring as they were 40 years ago. Fans of the 1960 release should certainly enjoy, or at least appreciate this latest adaption.
  
  

• Invaluable

  
  By A2XQDBGIJK5QVL on 2000-12-13
  As a high school science teacher I deal with common myths and misconceptions involving evolution on a daily basis. This movie does a nice job of helping kids understand the passion of the issue. Evolution is the cornerstone of modern day biology and it is important kids understand why it needs to be taught. The amazing thing about science is that if evidence comes along to disprove a current school of thought, the discipline may change. When religion is questioned the only response is to lash out with hostility and anger. Why can't we question the way Man believes in God?
  
  

• Inherit the Wind
• 12 Angry Men
• Inherit the Wind
• Inherit the Wind (Cliffs Notes)
• Summer for the Gods: The Scopes Trial and America's Continuing Debate Over Science and Religion