Un rostro en la multitud

A timeless story,as evidenced by all the allegories to recent personalities here ( Howard Stern, Clinton, etc...)...HOWEVER..the film is based (loosely) on a personality of the mid-50s: one Arthur Godfrey..yes, the IL' Redhead himself. Skillfully wrapped in the cliché of 'country boy makes good' story, the Godfrey story was hot news in 1957,and there weren't too many people back then who missed its allusions For those who do not know: Arthur Godfrey was one of THE hottest things in the country in the early to mid 1950's: he literally had about two or three different TV shows on the schedule, plus a radio show that was among the most popular in the day. Godfrey was JUST like this movie in this respect: on the air, he was America's home-spun hero..telling folksy stories....crooning in an off tone baritone, and presenting pure, CLEAN entertainment. OFF the air,however the legend that is Arthur Godfrey to this day is one of THE biggest control freaks in show biz history..to the point of controlling the lives of all of his 'family'..unfortunately that turned out to be downfall...One Julius LaRosa had been a singer that Godfrey had 'discovered' in the US Navy Band...after he was discharged LaRosa became a singer on Godfrey's nighttime TV show "Arthur Godfrey and Friends",where he became an instant star among the bobby sox set. In time, LaRosa started a recording career,and started to have VERY successful records..then suddenly, in 1953, Godfrey suddenly fired LaRosa from his show for the mysterious reason of him having 'no humilty' ...it has been assumed since then that Godfrey was extremely jealous of Larosa's success...Anyways, this exposed the 'real' Godfrey to the public.,and while it didn't happen as quickly or as totally as Lonesome Rhodes' career,Godfrey's career as a superstar was effectively over after that..he eventually was reduced to hosting game shows and such. Writer Schulberg obviously also puts in his 2 cents on fame...politics..the show business...and early television here, but as I said,there wasn't NO ONE in those days who didn't know it was about Godfrey....

Like a lot of people who've commented on this film, I didn't get around to seeing it until late in life, and it seems as relevant today as ever, maybe even more so. I find it interesting that different people, depending on their own viewpoint, project different contemporary personalities into the mold of the film's detestable hero, Lonesome Rhodes. The list of various people Rhodes is compared to includes Bill Clinton, Ronald Reagan, Howard Stern, Rush Limbaugh, Michael Moore, or George W. Bush, suggesting that there's enough BS from all sides to go around. I did a double-take on watching this film when the reactionary right-wing presidential candidate that Rhodes promotes begins to pontificate about how un-American the notion of social security is, and how it's high time it was dismantled. That was 1957, and that cause is being worked harder than ever today. I was not aware, until reading some of the other comments here, how central a target Arthur Godfrey was in this story. In fact, I believe Godfrey is actually mentioned by name in the film when Rhodes says something like "Have Arthur Godfrey fill in for me, and tell him I'll return the favor some time."

Anyway, while this film hardly needs yet another accolade, I'll add mine to the list and say that it's one of the great under-appreciated films of its time, and only grows with stature as the years go on. And hallelujah – there's now a well-made DVD of this film that includes an interesting documentary in which we hear from Schulberg, Griffeth, Neal, Franciosa, and some film scholars. About time, too.

The fictional story of a vagabond who is discovered and becomes a mega entertainment star who not only aquires fame and fortune but also political power. I came away from this film with the thinking that in 1957 when the picture came out in a strange way it must have terrified viewers. The film was clearly ahead of its time. By todays standards the egotistical, cynical and power hungry Lonesome Rhodes actually is quite tame but in 57 he must have been viewed as a cross between Hitler and Arthur Godfrey. Andy Griffith is nothing less than brilliant as Rhodes. Superb support from Patricia Neal, Walter Matthau, Anthony Franciosa and Lee Remick in her first motion picture. The movie never lags as it grips the viewer from the opening right to the final scene.

hymn Most people will think this movie is about Andy Griffith as Lonsome Rhodes, hick entertainer storyteller megalomaniac. What this film REALLY is is a condemnation of mass media and how the media builds up people to images they can't possibly fulfill. Take Griffith, small town drunk, in jail, with a story to tell and a woman to record it. His story goes over with the public and the woman decides to make Rhodes a media darling. On the other side of the screen is the smoke filled room political machine out to publicize a washed up yokel as politician that they put up for election. Sound familiar? See the film NETWORK and compare Rhodes to the Peter Finch character, Howard Beale.

This film is a scathing indictment of misuse of media, pseudo stardom and all that goes with it. It is allegory to be sure, but then everything old is new again. Take a look at the so called "celebrities" of today and how they got that way and what makes them tick... then watch "A Face In The Crowd!!!!!

I just saw this movie very late the other night, and I must say WOW! Like the rest of you, I saw "A Face In the Crowd" on a regular VHS edition, but it wouldn't matter which edition I saw it in because this was one of the few movies recently that made the jaw of this movie snob literally DROP with amazement over how daring, how edgy, and how much mastery this movie had over the film-making craft.

I'm beginning to realize that in the 1950's there was a short period of time (1955-1960, say) where the world of Broadway and the theater, Television, and Hollywood came together, and the careers of people like Rod Serling, Sidney Lumet, and "A Face In the Crowd"'s own Budd Schulberg were started. The best screenwriters in the movie business became innately aware of the increasing importance and influence of the new media form Television, while the best directors (like Elia Kazan), many of whom had directed numerous plays, knew how to cull the talents of Broadways hottest and most gifted performers, and at least for a couple of years, managed to get some awesome performances out of them. That's why I view this movie in the same sort of category as "The Sweet Smell of Success", that ever so sour and bitingly satiric parable on the corruption of American glamour and fame, and how publicity is just as much of a curse as a blessing. The performances in that film are like few others in the same era, and I think its no coincidence that "A Face In the Crowd" came out the same year as the other film. The main scribes of both those films, Clifford Odets and Budd Schulberg, were experienced with TV work by the time they penned their masterpieces (though Schulberg could also claim as his masterpiece 'On the Waterfront').

So anyway, I suggest to all who can hear me and have a love enough for this film to want to see it given the presentation it deserves, that we all write to the Criterion Collection and other DVD distributing companies and ask, no DEMAND that a restored, cleaned up version of "A Face In the Crowd", with as many special features as can be rustled up, be released as soon as possible. It's like writing your congressman, except instead of asking for a new factory of national park, we're asking for the wider availability of a piece of art that has gone with far too little acclaim for far too long. Who's with me?!?