Opiniones de usuarios

A senator suddenly dies and a replacement needs to be named. The other senator for the state, Joseph Paine (Claude Rains), along with Jim Taylor (Edward Arnold), his corrupt businessman backer, decide to name a truly surprising candidate, one Jefferson Smith (James Stewart). He's meant to be nothing more than a seat warmer so that Paine and Taylor can push through a new piece of legislation concerning a dam, meant to make them filthy rich. Unfortunately Mr. Smith is something they've rarely seen and are utterly incapable of understanding: a good and honest man. And a boy scout to boot.

The film is corny and filled with pathos. Phrases like "the American dream", "truth and honesty", "reliability", and so many like those, get thrown around all the time. Politicians are nothing more than hungry jackal fat cats, aiming to filch the hard-earned pennies of the good American people. True way of life is to be found outside, on the prairies where grass leans on the wind. On the mountains reflected against the noon sun. I could feel my spleen turning red, white and blue as I watched this film.

And yet, despite all that, the film is magnificent. Perhaps it's because 'It's a Wonderful Life', another film from director Frank Capra, also stars Stewart, but for some reason or other this film reminds me of Christmas. Because Christmas is also corny and filled with pathos. It is. But it's also the best time of the year. When it's okay to be a bit sentimental. Or a lot sentimental. When it's okay to remind ourselves of the values we all hold dear, but which we usually don't talk about because it's seen as embarrassing.

Hopefully people still watch this film. Because even though it's old, and corny, and sentimental, and even a bit silly, it's values, themes and lessons are as relevant today as they were back then. Perhaps even more so.

Frank Capra was an idealist for sure, but he certainly was clear-eyed in seeing some of the darkest problems with humanity and its institutions. At the beginning of this film, he shows us politicians who are firmly in the pocket of special interests, the degree to which is startling. A state governor (Guy Kibbee) is in charge of picking a new senator after one of the two serving for his state has passed away, but it's immediately clear that he operates as a puppet for a big businessman (Edward Arnold), a guy whose clout got the governor his position, and now who expects to call the shots as payback. We see it as one of the fundamental problems of representative government in 1939, just as it is today, so the film is highly, highly relevant.

Now it's laughable that the governor would go rogue and put the head of the Boy Rangers, Jefferson Smith (Jimmy Stewart), in there instead, based on the pleading of his children and a coin flip that lands on its edge, but that's the premise of the film. It's an obvious call to clean up Washington, and get decent, upright people in there as representatives, and in delivering this message, Capra does not attempt subtlety or realism. And I may as well say it now before I blab on, it's laughable how the kids play the role they do later in the film too, and how the other senator (Claude Rains) behaves in the end. Maybe the film is pointing out that progress will always depend more on the next generation, and that ultimately it will require those in power to summon their sense of decency and stand up for what's right.

One thing I love is just how reverentially Smith treats the job he's about to undertake. First of all, he knows it's not about him. He's also not sure how well he'll do, but says "I can promise you one thing: I'll do nothing to disgrace the office of United States Senator." After dropping off his crateful of pigeons (lol), we then see him wide-eyed as he tours the landmarks of Washington DC. The shot Capra gets of him beneath the giant statue of Lincoln perfectly captures his humility, and others the deep respect he has for the institution he's going to serve. We get a heavy dose of the ideals the country aspires to, with shots of Lincoln's second inaugural address ("With malice toward none, with charity for all") and a recitation of a part of the Gettysburg address by a young boy, while his grandfather and an African-American man look on. It's quite flowery and may have the lip curling of every cynic who sees the film, thinking of all of the times America has done evil in the world, but just about to head into WWII was not one of those times, and regardless, I can't help but admire this scene. If only all of America's representatives went with a reverence for these ideals, respected the institutions from their hearts, and felt real humility and a need to not let down his or her constituents, or the leaders who came before them.

Everyone else is aware of how the system in Washington actually works though, including the other senator (Rains), his handler (Eugene Pallette), and his secretary (Jean Arthur). Heck, even the young page who shows him to his seat is savvier. Smith says to the boy, "I'm just going to sit around and listen," meaning that he feels he has a lot to learn and shouldn't go in with guns blazing. The kid answers "That's the way to get re-elected," reflecting how deep the cynicism of the process runs. Later it's parenthetically said that "You can't count on people voting. Half the time they don't vote." These little bits are pointing out the same thing, that while we may decry the state of government, at the same time, to make it better we need to be active participants in it.

Stewart is fantastic in the film, with lots of memorable moments, such as when he nervously reads his proposal for a boys camp on the senate floor, and then later when his eyes are opened to deep corruption, which includes his father's friend and mentor, Rains's character. When he takes the Senate floor to filibuster and angrily yells "No, sir, I will not yield!" it's a fine, fiery moment, with palpable tension between the two men. I also love the softer scene with Arthur where he channels Walt Whitman in quoting his father, a man who died fighting for the little guy and the free press: "My dad had the right idea. He had it all worked out. He said: 'Son, don't miss the wonders that surround you. Every tree, every rock, every anthill, every star is filled with the wonders of nature.' He said, 'Have you ever noticed how grateful you are to see daylight after coming through a long dark tunnel? Well,' he said, 'always try to see life as if you'd just come out of a tunnel.'"

Arthur turns in a solid performance with her character, who is also inspiring. She knows how congress operates, giving Stewart (and the viewer) a little tutorial, and then coaching him from the balcony. We see that her character is jaded, but that there is still a glimmer of idealism in her, and also a healthy amount of disgust for politics. "You're half-way decent, you don't belong here," she tells Stewart. We see both of these characters go through the inevitable response to the ugliness of politics - considering leaving the aggravation and frustration of it all, because it's the fight of an underdog to try to change it, or to stay and fight, because that's the only way anything will ever change, and what great leaders have had to do too as well. As this is a Capra film, you can guess which one of these paths they take.

It's certainly an arduous path, as the political boss is incredibly powerful. There is real evil, greed, and corruption here, and Arnold plays his part perfectly. The scene where he tries to get Smith to play ball is reminiscent of Potter calling George Bailey into his office in 'It's a Wonderful Life,' and has a similar outcome. When Smith stands up in revulsion, the boss immediately turns to Plan B, which is crush him. He does what corrupt and deceitful people in politics have always done - he drums up charges of the very same things he is guilty of against those who oppose them. He also uses his power over the press to wage a misinformation and propaganda war. Maybe you'll recognize these patterns from the present day.

The ending is a little messy, and I would have liked it more had Smith somehow been shown swaying the other senators with arguments and reason. How does one reach across the aisle and bridge such a gap of disagreement and entrenched special interests? However, I have to give the film credit for shining a light on corruption in politics, and I loved how its truthful message was so powerful that many offended politicians branded the film as communist propaganda. As Smith says, what's needed in politics is "plain, ordinary, everyday kindness. And a little looking out for the other fellow too." Indeed.

Accomplished, honest and heartfelt, this will reinspire you to believe in the goodness of people even though the messages conveyed by those in power these days suggest anything but. James Stewart plays the innocence and naivety required for the role to perfection while you can genuinely believe that Jean Arthur has actually fallen for him for real. The great Claude Reins fills the boots of the corrupt senator with aplomb while Edward Arnold reminds us of a few of his type that are still around today. Probably the best film you'll ever see with the most mundane of titles.

James Stewart and Frank Capra. One needn't know much more going in to be assured that this will be an enjoyable film. Together they take on the Washington elite with this dramatic comedy about a naïve Washington outsider who gets appointed to the Senate and stands alone against corruption and graft. Jefferson Smith (James Stewart) is appointed from an unnamed state after one of its Senators dies. He is appointed because the political fat cats need someone who will not seem like a crony, but who will not stand in the way of a graft scheme for a pork barrel dam that will make bigwig Jim Taylor (Edward Arnold) millions. When the wide eyed Smith gets to Washington, he discovers the corrupt bill because the dam will stand in the way of his own proposed bill for a children's camp. When he tries to stop the project, Taylor's political machine frames him to make it seem like he is the one taking graft. This leads to the dramatic confrontation in the Senate, where Smith filibusters in an attempt to get the truth out.

This film is wonderful in so many ways. The story is a classic struggle between good and evil. In typical Capra style, the protagonist and antagonists are exaggerated so there is no confusion as to who are the good guys and who are the bad guys. If there is one clear message in Capra's films it is that those with strong moral fiber never give up hope. He likes to create utterly hopeless situations for characters to test their integrity, and rewards unswerving adherence to basic values and principles by triumph against the odds.

I was dismayed to see a comment, obviously from a young viewer of this film, that said that the characters weren't realistic because no one used profanity. This is a sad testimonial to our culture, when it inconceivable to young people that there was once a time when profanity was the exception and not the rule.

Stewart is brilliant as the idealistic and awe struck kid from the backwoods who is overwhelmed by the glory of Washington, with its monuments and history. The story brings us a confrontation between political expediency and idealistic principles with the message that the truly great men are the ones that don't compromise their principles to hold on to power. Stewart also brings a whole treasure chest of bumbling comedic sight gags that make him all the more lovable in the part.

Jean Arthur is fabulous as the tough and savvy assistant who is jaded by Washington politics, but gets a fresh injection of fervor as she listens to Smith's noble homespun philosophies. Claude Rains is also masterful as the adulterated Senator, who sold his soul to corruption for a chance at the presidency. He plays the simultaneous sense of guilt and ambition with a torment that is clearly ripping his heart out, and the power of both emotions portrayed in his performance makes his character both repugnant and pitiable.

This film is a national treasure. It is in my top 50 list of all time. The story of corruption in politics and the greatness of the men who resist it is timeless and would not be lost on the politicians in Washington today. A 10/10.

Now, I must admit that this is one of my top five favorite films. There is a warmth, idealism, and kinda simple feeling of hope, that makes one believe that things will work out in the end. Capra knew exactly what he wanted, and it shines. Jimmy Stewart, in the role of his life, makes us believe, what we know is almost impossible in todays crass world.

Claude Rains is incredible as Senator Smith's evil mentor. Jean Arthur, as his confidant, plays the part so well,that we just want her to save the day.

The final scene, where the filibuster is taking place, is among the greatest ever made.

BUT THE PROOF, YOU ASK?

In the early 80s, I showed this film, over three days, to a group of 15 year old inner city teenagers. I taught Political Science in a very difficult school in Chicago. It was a new class, and not all of the "best" students took it.

I decided to show this film at the end of the year, just to see how long I could keep the students attention. I didn't expect much. Fifteen is a very tough age to keep any kind of attention span, and it was at the end of the day, 2:30 -3:15 pm. which made things worse. As the film began, there was rustling in the seats, boredom, that famous oh what a waste of time look...Mind you, this is 43 year old film, about a white Senator, in those "old" days, and being shown to a totally Afro-American crowd of 15 year olds, late in the day, (over a three day period, which meant the students would have to wait till the next day to see what was going on. ..By the end of the third day, Capra had worked his magic, and the entire class was spellbound by this film. They were there till the very end, and you could see how much they enjoyed seeing a film, that they wouldn't have looked at in a thousand years..Comments were wonderful. Any film that could accomplish this, more than 40 years after its conception, to a crowd that no one would believe would have any interest in, deserves to be truly called a "great film."

Besides a brilliantly written story, and brilliant acting by James Stewart, there is one element of this movie that can't be overlooked: Jean Arthur's acting.

With her voice and facial expressions, she pulls you through the storyline. The movie may be about Mr. Smith (Stewart), but much of it is seen through Saunder's (Arthur's) eyes. When she falls in love with Smith, we can't help but do it too.

This is Capra's opus, and contains not one, but two of the best acting performances I've ever seen.

Since the beginning of the art form, movies have generally fallen into two categories: the realistic, and the fantastic (fantasy-based). There are some that point out that the films of Frank Capra unduly fall into the latter, that they are completely far-fetched and fastened in their own time, and even invented a pejorative term "Capra-esque" to describe any non-cynical, heartwarming picture that has a message. His great films, like It Happened One Night, It's a Wonderful Life, and of course, Mr. Smith Goes to Washington, however, are not fixed in a single era, but all eras, the truest definition of a classic. And considering it was released among true powerhouses in 1939, a year as important to movies as 1998 was to baseball, its ideals, story, and general excellence shine as bright today as it did over 60 years ago.

A Senator from an unnamed, middle America state dies and a new one must be appointed by Governor Hubert Hopper, a puppet whose strings are held by newspaper magnate Jim Taylor. They need to find one that would be easily controlled by the now-senior Senator Joseph Paine (played brilliantly by Claude Rains), so a bill allowing a building of a dam near land by the Willett Creek owned by Taylor can pass in the Senate. After his initial choice is rejected by Taylor, and Taylor's handpicked man is shot down by the public, the governor chooses Jefferson Smith, played to perfection by James Stewart, a boy scout leader and local hero who is both wholly idealistic in his patriotism for America but naive and blind to the actual process. After he gets embarrassed by the local print media, Mr. Smith begins to learn the harsh realities of DC. Paine, Smith's boyhood hero, takes him under his wing and suggests that Smith try to create a bill. Smith agrees, and with his assistant, Clarissa Saunders (played by Jean Arthur), they create a bill to create a campground for boys from all over the country to learn about each other and the civic process, much to the initial dissuasion by Saunders. Smith then wants to choose a site near the Willett Creek, the same site where the dam is to be built and when his superiors and true string-pullers find that out, major complications ensue.

Although the basic premise is David vs. Goliath, the story is wholly originally and was probably one of the earliest pictures to suggest the government as corrupt. The characters are played excellently by all principal actors, with Mr. Smith you root for whole-heartedly, Mr. Taylor you root against for his sheer arrogance and greed, and Mr. Paine, who you pity as you see a man who lost his initial zest to serve the public and is now a jaded shell of his former self. A great performance was given by Harry Carey, Sr., who plays the Vice President/President of the Senate for comic relief. The lines where completely believable and the parts of Smith's final filibuster that were shown give the most impact. There is a beautifully shot scene with images of the monuments and sights of Washington with several national anthems synchronized as the score. The climax is as tension-packed as drama can get, and while the ending may seem rather sudden, and everything isn't completely or neatly resolved, it works perfectly and ends the movie on a happy note.

Obviously, few if any people elected to public office has the moral character, conviction, and general good heartedness of Jefferson Smith, and I doubt whether the government would be better if it was. The movie showed an ideal, a supposed "lost cause" of truth in government. And although it is next to impossible for Capra and the eternal good guy Jimmy Stewart to ever fully change the world of politics with just a motion picture, at least it shows that maybe once in a great while, being the good guy has its definite rewards. If (using the same analogy of the 1998 baseball season) The Wizard of Oz and Gone With the Wind were the Mark McGwire and Sammy Sosa of 1939 moviemaking, then this would be like Cal Ripken voluntarily ending his Iron Man Streak, something done with full class and the highest respect in mind, and that elevates an ideal of being the good guy and sticking to your dedication brings the greatest of riches. This picture is flawless in all respects and a true classic, with thought-provoking ideas, wit, a little bit of platonic romance, and an excellent cinematography and score, and deserves the rank as a 10 out of 10. And in giving this rating, either I'm damn right or I'm crazy.

Mr. Smith Goes to Washington is a wonderful film about a man Jeff Smith (James Stewart) who believes that children are the future and should be able to enjoy the outdoors, while taking in knowledge of their great Country. When a senator dies in Smith's state, the governor is forced into an awkward position of electing the new senator. While the governor is sitting down to dinner, his young children propose the idea of Jeff Smith who is head of the Boy Rangers and prints a weekly newspaper for the local children. Mr. Smith is elected into office in the funniest way, a coin toss.

When Mr. Smith arrives in Washington with his colleague Mr. Pain, (Claude Rains) he is amazed by all the greatness that Washington possesses. After being sworn into the Senate Mr. Smith comes up with idea to propose a Bill that would let boys come together and enjoy the wilderness, and the perfect spot would be in his home town next to a creek. What he doesn't know is that his colleague Mr. Pain has his own plans with that same land. The film then releases the full fury of what corrupt politicians can do to a truthful man.

The plot of the film will grab the viewer within the first five minutes and will not let go until the astonishing end. Even though this type of thing is implausible it's still very funny and unique in its own way.

The acting was superb! James Stewart will always represent the good guy trying to make his way through life in an honorable way. Claude Rains character was perfect for him, a good man gone bad by the power of politics. Jean Arthur's character was something that isn't normally seen in the movies. She played an ambitious woman trying to get to the top without anyone's help, but is still the great old fashioned woman she was born to be. James Stewart and Jean Arthur were very charismatic together. There could not have been a better pair.

The lighting in the film was great in two scenes when Mr. Smith is at the Washington memorial the light shines on sentences of the constitution that added a lot to the emotion of the character and helped set the tone for the scene.

This is a classic film that should be recognized and cherished forever. Mr. Smith Goes to Washington is a great film for the whole family, the film is not only captivating and genuine but there is also a moral in the story. Definitely a ten out of ten, and should be part of your home video library.

Well, this is like any other political film oozing patriotism, where the small guy gets the big guy. The underdog wins. All American. Better yet, it is Frank Capra, with James Stewart. Can we get any more cliché? Oh, wait. The main character is a Jefferson Smith.

Bribery, corruption, conspiracy, lies and deceit. It is all here. Shady deals, ulterior motives. In other words, politics.

In case it was not already obvious, I am not very political. But guess what? In all the above ways, yes, this is like all those other films. But it the most important ways, it is not.

What makes it different? In one word, Stewart. Sure, the clever writing, the directing, the supporting cast are all assets to the film. But he makes this film. His character's name is in the title, after all. Through his heartfelt performance as Jefferson Smith, the audience is inspired; even the most cynical of us might find ourselves beginning to really like this country, appreciate what we have today that our ancestors did not, and maybe even believe that we can make a difference by getting involved in politics. His naiveté is practically excruciating at times. His first glance at the White House can be compared to a little kid in a candy store. His first evening exploring all the monuments along and around the National Mall is shown in montage form with patriotic backgrounds music. Cheesy, yes. But somehow it was not as bad as it sounds. As he, an everyday man, tries to acclimate himself in the world of politics, each blunder brings new laughs. His awkwardness in palpable and his character lovable. Eventually, of course, he must learn the truth- that it does not really exist in the government. We all cheer for this everyday Smith as he tries to pave the way for all the little guys. As far as high school or even grade school education goes, this should be on a list of required viewings. Along with School House Rock's classic "How a Bill Becomes a Law", of course. I would have loved to learn about government, the Senate, bills, and filibusters this way.

**** Spoilers ****

Sadly, it was the ending that brought the greatest disappointment. It was extremely sudden and cheap. After all that determination and rallying from Smith; after how far Paine was willing to go to condemn the man he supposedly felt was "like a son" to him, after all his stubbornness to do the right thing, he gives up and confesses everything on the Senate floor? Highly unlikely. Even worse, it cheapens all that Smith has done.

It's interesting how Mr. Smith Goes to Washington feels so dated and yet so relevant at the same time. This movie itself feels like Jefferson Smith, naively striding into the homes of the cynical and skeptical modern public, only to prove that it does, indeed have something important to offer. This movie still packs an emotional punch almost 80 years after it was made and it's easy to see why it's a classic.

Through a series of fortunate, and unfortunate, events, an unsophisticated local hero, Jefferson Smith, is appointed a US Senator. The people pulling the strings in his party and State figure that he will be compliant and malleable and basically stay out of the way of their plans, some of which aren't entirely ethical, or legal. However, a well-intentioned deed sets off a dramatic chain of events, a series of events that will see him at odds with his colleagues, with the shadowy, bullying powerbrokers and with the entire Senate.

Brilliant movie from Frank Capra. While Capra also gave us such great movies as It's A Wonderful Life, Meet John Doe and It Happened One Night, this is his greatest work. A superb indictment of politics and how democracy has been undermined and corrupted, told with the trademark Capra brand of wholesomeness and practical idealism. Considering how politics has even further degenerated since 1939, even more relevant today than when it was released in 1939.

Clever, engaging plot that doesn't waiver for a second. Not an ounce of deadwood in the movie - every scene is perfect and important. Some great twists and turns and some great tension towards the end as Smith struggles to preserve his name and ideals. Wonderful themes and morals too, as you would expect from Frank Capra.

Add in some excellent performances, especially from James Stewart in the lead role and Jean Arthur as Ms Saunders. Both received Oscar nominations, as did Harry Carey for playing the President of the Senate.

In all, Mr Smith Goes To Washington was nominated for 11 Oscars, including Best Picture, but won only one, for best original screenplay. Unfortunately for it, the 1940 Oscars belonged to a juggernaut known as Gone With The Wind...

After a vacancy opens, Jefferson Smith (James Stewart) is appointed to be the junior senator of some western state (Montana in the book). He does not know much about the procedures of the Senate, but quickly gets a crash course on how politics works. His one and only project he wants to push through, a boys camp, turns out to be a very contentious issues.

This film has been nominated for and won a number of awards. And why not? It's an interesting tale of an ordinary man who goes to the government to get something fairly normal done. It's a film many people could identify with. I think it is also a strength of the film that no one is ever identified as a Republican or Democrat, essentially making it a story about civics and not about politics.

I was not impressed with the cinematography, including the "hat shot" where the camera follows Smith's hat to show how awkward he is, or the use of the "soft lens", which just strikes me as blurry and ineffective. A face and music can be more powerful than a fuzzy frame.

All in all a great film, though perhaps a bit long for some people's tastes. James Stewart is great as always (though I prefer the more mature Stewart), Jean Arthur is a decent female lead, and Jean Arthur's hats really do a fine job in the supporting actor role.

The media and those in Washington, D.C. cringed in 1939 when Frank Capra (Oscar-nominated for directing) come out with "Mr. Smith Goes to Washington". Capra, fresh off amazing successes like "Lady for a Day", "It Happened One Night", "Mr. Deeds Goes to Town", "Lost Horizon" and "You Can't Take It With You", used his power to slap some bigwigs in the face with a powerful medium---the motion picture. The result was an immediate backlash by publications and politicians, but cheers from critics and the audience. As with society, the critics and the masses won out as the movie is a masterpiece in every way. A U.S. Senate vacancy leads to a dilemma. Who should be put in office? Everyone believes the apparently naive and gullible James Stewart (Oscar-nominated) is the logical choice because he will be easy to manipulate and he won't rock the boat. Stewart, the leader of the Boy Rangers (a local camp association for youngsters), gets blind-sided by many high-ranking officials who have alterior motives (Oscar nominees Harry Carey and Claude Rains in particular) when his idea for a national boys' camp goes by the wayside. Thus the only thing left for Stewart is to beat those in charge by beating them at their own game---creating a filibuster (a never-ending governmental argument for his cause). Stewart is solid as always here and the supporters (love interest/reporter Jean Arthur and drunk newspaper man Thomas Mitchell included with the aforementioned players) are all terrific throughout. The Oscar-winning screenplay is deceptively intelligent and Capra just had the uncanny ability to mix comedy, drama and interpersonal characterizations together to make consistently wonderful American film experiences. 5 stars out of 5.

Critics of "Mr. Smith Goes to Washington" will call it cheesy, saccharine, and over-the-top in its character portrayals. Truth be told, I really can't call those critiques "wrong". But the thing is, this is such an endearing, aspirational film that I'm always able to look past the cheese-factor and enjoy the performances and overall message.

For a very basic overview, 'Mr. Smith Goes To Washington" tells the story of Jefferson Smith (James Stewart), a wide-eyed, aww-shucks, country boy rube who gets nominated for a U. S. Senate seat in large part to be a straight-ticket voter for the political machine of Senator Joseph Paine (Claude Rains). Once in Washington, however, both get a rude awakening: Smith discovers the graft in politics, while Paine begins to realize--to his horror--that Smith isn't just going to "tow the party line".

This movie remains an all-time classic for me because of the earnestness of its message. It isn't quite as perfect as Capra's more famous "It's A Wonderful Life", but I do see similarities between the two pictures. Here, the story strikes such a simple--yet highly emotional--chord. Though deep down I think we all realize that corruption and compromise are likely unavoidable aspects of politics, we like to cling to ideals of honesty and supreme integrity. That is precisely the journey that Smith takes viewers on. This isn't "politics as it is", but rather "politics as we want it to be", and I think there is equal room for both in politically-minded films.

Of course, casting Stewart is the cherry on top of all this. I'm not sure there has been a better individual born to play the Jefferson Smith role. His stuttering, stammering, "golly gee whiz" routine is perfect, yet when the chips are down he delivers a filibuster monologue almost guaranteed to have you in tears. Rains is fine as the corrupt Senator and Jean Arthur has a nice sidekick supporting role, but "Mr. Smith Goes To Washington" is memorable because of Stewart. I very much liken his performance here to that of Henry Fonda's in "12 Angry Men". It's what we all wish we could be like--but know we'll probably never quite get there.

The only reason I can't give this a full 10 stars? It was made in 1939--or back when Hollywood didn't really know how to properly end movies other than an emotional flourish and a fade to black. With a less-rushed, more nuanced endgame, this one could have ascended even higher.

Overall, though, I consider this to be one of my favorite political films of all time. Make all the gritty, tough governmental thrillers you want (I love some of those too!), but I hold steady that a more aspirational, positive-minded effort like this isn't out-of-date or irrelevant simply because of that nature.

It was a lot of fun watching Mr. Smith Goes to Washington in a class where the professor noted how this was the sort of film that was of historical importance while not taking itself too seriously. And I think that's the way Frank Capra wanted it, in a sense. Perhaps in the time of 1939 America this film was seen as being of merit to the American Government's due (though according to the trivia, it was denounced at showing corruption and even banned for showing how democracy "works"). But the director is also wanting to make an entertaining movie, of the kind of Hollywood appeal that brings 8-to-80 years olds in attendance. What had me interested throughout, particularly in that climactic, rousing twenty-minute sequence in the Senate with Jimmy Stewart's constant, un-faltering filibuster, is how it really is a patriotic kind of bravura to be shown on the screen. Here is how it SHOULD be done, to an extreme perhaps, in getting things done in government. But at the same time, Capra keeps it entirely watchable with that group of kids up on the balcony, keeping the audience laughing and smiling all the way through the great lines that Stewart says. "Great principles don't get lost once they come to light. They're right here; you just have to see them again!" This is a kind of talent that I'm sure few other filmmakers at the time, or even after, could have pulled off.

The rest of the film isn't just Stewart's struggle to be heard as a young, new-in-town senator. It's also a witty, more often than not true look of how government tends to really work as opposed to how it should. Basically, the core of the story is the fish-out-of-water type, where Stewart's Jefferson Smith (one of his better Hollywood performances), leader of the Boy Rangers is called to be the senator of his state. He has a childhood hero in town in the form of a senior senator (Claude Rains, terrific as always). And there's even a woman (Jean Arthur) in the mix that's growing an interest in him, at first dubious. But despite the corruption that is almost thrust upon smith by Jim Taylor (Edward Arnold, as skilled a character actor as could be asked for), Smith fights it all the way to his final filibuster, which includes a reading from the Constitution, in-and-out cheers from the Boy Rangers, and general guffaws from the other senators. In other words, it's really much in that pure spirit of Frank Capra that 'Mr. Smith' is working in, and even at its cheesiest and sometimes most-dated moments, it's a very successful picture for what it wants to do. It's really an equal-opportunity kind of film about people in politics that should be able decades later to appeal to both the hopeful and the cynical, and it works as good as it does a comedy as it does a piece to show in history of film or American government course.

... since James Stewart is really not a lead in "Philadelphia Story". Instead he was more of a supporting actor there. But the Academy probably felt they should have given Stewart the Best Actor trophy for this film and were just correcting a bit of history, which they have often done over the years. But I digress.

In an unnamed state - because if Capra had named it they would have sued - a sitting senator dies. The corrupt state political machine ends up appointing babe-in-the-woods Jefferson Smith (James Stewart) to fill the seat because they see him as so naive that they can control him. His dad, a newspaper editor, was murdered when he was fighting for a lost cause. Smith's dad's lifelong friend happens to be his state's senior senator, Joseph Paine (Claude Rains).

It so happens that Paine is in on the plan to put forth a bill that will build an unneeded damn on land that has been bought up by state machine puppet master Jim Taylor (Edward Arnold) so that he can get a big payout from the federal government. Paine has justified this and a hundred other corrupt acts over the years by the thousand ways he has served his state honestly. Selling oneself to the devil is seldom done in a single transaction. The problem is that Smith wants to use the same land to build a summer camp for boys, and in the process he learns of the corrupt land deal he was never supposed to know about. Complications that involve famous cinematic history ensue.

Today, post Watergate, it's hard to believe that somebody such as Jefferson Smith could exist as an adult who knows so much about American history but nothing about corruption in government to the point he is flabbergasted by it. Lots has been said about Stewart's performance, with him rising from playing in all kinds of inane and minor MGM films to a leading man in an American classic in just a couple of years. But consider Claude Rains's performance. Rains portrays a complex character who struggles with his conscience and past choices and it is killing him that he has to betray the son of his best friend the way that he does. He is an essential gray character in a bunch of black and white ones.

Apparently this received lots of backlash during its release for portraying US Senators as folks capable of being corrupted through money. Maybe that was unrealistic for the 1930's, but in 2023, this film is practically a documentary.

Thomas Mitchell was one of the greatest American stage and screen actors of all time. His accomplishments as a fine performer of great range are legendary. Whether on the stage as Willy Loman in Death of a Salesman or on the screen in the moving family drama Make Way for Tomorrow--Mitchell's roles were always carefully crafted, honest, believable and engrossing.

The year 1939 was the diamond jeweled crown of the Golden Age of Hollywood. Books have been written on the subject. And 1939 contains five Mitchell films that represent the art of Hollywood moviemaking at its very peak. Four of them are bona fide classics (Stagecoach, Mr. Smith Goes To Washington, Gone With The Wind and Hunchback Of Notre Dame), and one of them (Stagecoach) earned him an Oscar for Best Supporting Actor of 1939. Only Angels Have Wings may have been a notch below the other 1939 Mitchell films simply because there should be a quantifiable difference between the rankings of "Excellent" and "Outstanding."

In Mt. Smith Goes To Washington, Thomas Mitchell revisits the pal/buddy role he played so effectively in Only Angels Have Wings. This time, his friend is Jean Arthur rather than Cary Grant, and the relationship is less emotional and accordingly more subdued. Mitchell is advisor, confidant, chum and platonic lover of Ms. Arthur. But out of a profound sense of personal decency and fairness, he shares his affections equally with the Mr. Smith character of James Stewart. In doing so, Mitchell supports the logic and honorable outcome of the story's final resolution. Wouldn't all of us like to have a real honest to goodness friend like reporter Diz Moore? No wonder that Frank Capra liked working with him so much.

Mitchell was able to create five very different superlative roles in these five fine 1939 films from Hollywood's Greatest Year. It is astonishing to realize that this assembly of cinematic excellence was all accomplished in the time span of just one year!

Mr. Smith is as good as it's legend. Sometimes I'm disappointed when a universally acclaimed movie isn't as enjoyable as I thought it would be. But here, that is not the case. James Stewart is deservedly remembered most for this role. That's saying a lot given his impressive body of work. This is also Frank Capra's signature film along with Mr. Deeds. The idealism of Jefferson Smith might feel a bit anachronisitc today but, and I know this is a cliché, the world could use more people with his values. The supporting cast is also spot on. Jean Arthur plays the same type as she did in Mr. Deeds and Claude Rains is terrific as the mentor who betrays Smith. Strongly recommended, 9/10.

This film shows the corruption of the goverment, many movies did it better and more intriguing, but it's still a pretty good film.

What a wonderful film. What an exaggerated, corny, fantastic, beautifully acted, exciting, wonderful film.

"Mr. Smith Goes to Washington" is a classic for good reason. It reinforces qualities that many of us have lost along the way: idealism, strong, unshakable belief, never quitting, honesty, and commitment.

Today, patriotism and "American values" have taken on another connotation. They have become the property of the right wing. But there isn't anything wrong with the kind of patriotism and American values expressed by Jefferson Smith, which are different from what is being expressed today.

Is anyone today as idealistic as Mr. Smith was when he first came to Washington? Can one really win against a powerful force like the Taylor machine? As one who was involved in a legal case where the other side had all the clout and all the money, I sadly have to answer that I don't think so.

In the real world, as Court TV has taught us, things don't work that way. Is anyone as corrupt as Senator Paine and Jim Taylor? Sadly, I'd have to say probably. Would they ruin anyone who got in their way? Yes. Have they? Definitely.

"Mr. Smith Goes to Washington" is a fantasy, but it's a fantasy that uplifts us and reminds us of what we could be and, like Jean Arthur says in the film, maybe being jaded isn't such a good idea all the time.

James Stewart had the role of a lifetime, and he was perfect. Homespun, intelligent, boyishly good-looking, his career and tremendous popularity even today speak for themselves.

His filibuster scenes are incredible, passionate, and strong. We were lucky we had him as long as we did. There will never be another.

Jean Arthur was fabulous in her role as a streetwise assistant who finds something to believe in. Claude Rains, as the unlikable, weak Senator Paine, gives a powerful performance.

The bad guys - and Capra always makes sure they're real bad - were all great. As for Harry Carey, the sympathetic speaker, you want to hug him. A fantastic job.

Frank Capra knew how to make movies. The pace is swift, the story strong, and the scenes tense and exciting. One gets caught up in the world he fashions. A shame it isn't real.

7/10 - a fascinating look at American politics and corruption holds true to this day and will keep audiences well-entertained.

This film is a study of a Good Guy, who wants funding to start a national boys' camp for the "Boy Rangers", going against the Bad Guys, who want to build a dam on the same land only for their own selfish interests (not hydro-electricity or anything, you fool). You may ask why taxpayers would want to pay for a camp only a few of the nation's boys could live near; you may ask why the camp couldn't be built on a different piece of land; you may ask why a private organization should get federal funds; you may ask if there were any issues that constituents would have found more pressing. Well, apparently that's because you're one of the Bad Guys too.