NOTE IMDb
7,8/10
14 k
MA NOTE
Un prisonnier accusé à tort échappe de justesse à un lynchage et est laissé pour mort. Il décide alors de se venger en se faisant passer pour mort et en incriminant les lyncheurs pour son pr... Tout lireUn prisonnier accusé à tort échappe de justesse à un lynchage et est laissé pour mort. Il décide alors de se venger en se faisant passer pour mort et en incriminant les lyncheurs pour son présumé meurtre.Un prisonnier accusé à tort échappe de justesse à un lynchage et est laissé pour mort. Il décide alors de se venger en se faisant passer pour mort et en incriminant les lyncheurs pour son présumé meurtre.
- Réalisation
- Scénario
- Casting principal
- Nommé pour 1 Oscar
- 5 victoires et 4 nominations au total
Avis à la une
An idealist sets out to visit his girlfriend, whom he hasn't seen for a year, but he is picked up by the cops for no real reason and thrown into a cell because a flimsy piece of evidence hints that he might be the kidnapper of a young woman. A rumor flares in the small town and soon most of the populace is standing outside the police office demanding retribution.
I won't outline the plot any further, because there are many twists and turns to come. Fury is basically a study in justice, guilt, revenge, and mindless fury. Spencer Tracy and Sylvia Sydney star and are exceptional. The supporting cast is excellent also. Lang's direction is often amazing. It is always stylistic, expressionistic and it challenges you every step of the way. Watch for one scene near the center of the film where Lang cuts together a series of close-ups. His timing is incredible here. The script is imperfect. In fact, there are a lot of instances of unbelievability and silliness in the film. It is a testament to the rest of the script (and the other aspects of the film, too) that Fury ends up being such a great film. I like it nearly as much as M. It may not be quite as good, but it moves at a brisker pace and is thus often more exciting and suspenseful. 9/10.
I won't outline the plot any further, because there are many twists and turns to come. Fury is basically a study in justice, guilt, revenge, and mindless fury. Spencer Tracy and Sylvia Sydney star and are exceptional. The supporting cast is excellent also. Lang's direction is often amazing. It is always stylistic, expressionistic and it challenges you every step of the way. Watch for one scene near the center of the film where Lang cuts together a series of close-ups. His timing is incredible here. The script is imperfect. In fact, there are a lot of instances of unbelievability and silliness in the film. It is a testament to the rest of the script (and the other aspects of the film, too) that Fury ends up being such a great film. I like it nearly as much as M. It may not be quite as good, but it moves at a brisker pace and is thus often more exciting and suspenseful. 9/10.
Famed German director Fritz Lang's first American film, Fury, is loosely based on a story by Norman Krasna, "Mob Rule", which itself was based on the tale of California's last public lynching, in 1933, of Thomas Harold Thurmond and John M. Holmes, the kidnappers and murderers of Brooke Hart, the "son" in San Jose's L. Hart and Son Department Store. Fury is a fine exploration (although not an analysis) of the mentality of vengeance, whether from a mob, as in the first half of the film, or from an individual, as in the latter half. It is loaded with fine acting and an unusually constructed script by Lang and co-writer Bartlett Cormack, although it is not without flaws.
Joe Wilson (Spencer Tracy) is deeply in love with Katherine Grant (Sylvia Sidney). Wilson lives in the Chicago area in a small apartment with his two brothers, Charlie (Frank Albertson) and Tom (George Walcott). Wilson wants to marry Grant, but they're short on money. Despite the relationship hardships it will entail, Grant returns to Texas to work--she'll be making good money there, while Wilson tries to improve his lot in Illinois. Wilson finally manages to buy a gas station with his brothers, and earns enough to buy a car and take a road trip, with his dog Rainbow in tow, to meet Grant so they can get married. When he's almost there, Wilson is suddenly stopped by a sheriff's deputy in the small town of Strand. They question him about a kidnapping. Two minor details make him more suspicious, and so they decide to hold him in the town jail while the D.A. looks into his background. Rumors makes their way around the town and things go horribly wrong, bringing us to mob mentality, lynchings and vengeance.
Lynchings were an emerging social problem in the early 1930s. There were 60 known lynchings in the U.S. between 1930 and 1934. Beginning in 1934, the earliest of the "anti-lynching" bills was presented to the U.S. Congress, and that number grew to 140 different bills by 1940. The visual arts also voiced in on the issue--one museum held "An Art Commentary on Lynching" exhibition in 1934. So Fury was certainly pertinent to our culture at the time, and was one of many films to come, such as Mervyn LeRoy's They Won't Forget (1937) that centered on strong anti-lynching sentiments (believe it or not, there were also pro-lynching films, such as Cecil B. DeMille's This Day and Age, 1933).
It's interesting to note that although lynching was primarily a "racial"-oriented phenomenon, Lang was not allowed to comment on that very much. There are a couple shots of blacks in the film, but they are extremely innocuous. Anything even more slightly controversial was excised at MGM's (and specifically Louis B. Mayer's) behest.
Fury's structure is very unusual, contributing even more to its unpredictable, captivating nature. It begins as an almost bland romance while Lang sets up the characters and their slightly exaggerated innocence, turns into an interesting hardship film, briefly becomes a road movie, switches gears again when Wilson is arrested, and actually presents a profoundly impactful climax at the midway point--it seems as if the film could end there. The second half makes a major u-turn as what could be seen as an extended tag/dénouement becomes an in-depth courtroom drama that builds to a second climax. The second half allows Lang to explore the same vengeance mentality as the first half, except from an individual rather than the previous mob perspective.
Although the second climax denotes a fine work of art on its own--there are some very moving performances and developments towards the end of the courtroom stuff, the star attraction is the gradually building mob material in the middle. What begins as an annoyance for Wilson turns into widespread tragedy as the rumor mill gears up and easygoing conformism rears its ugly head. Of course it is well known that Lang came to America to escape Nazi Germany, where he had been asked to act as Hitler's minister of film, so Fury, although sometimes criticized as a commercial film for Lang, certainly had personal poignancy for him. Lang shows rumors gradually distending in a game of "Telephone" with serious consequences, and inserts a humorous shot of chickens to symbolize "clucking women". He shows how easily a situation can go from those kinds of increasingly misreported claims to dangerous action due to conformism. Most folks are shown as all too eager to go along with the crowd and avoid local conflict.
For a few moments, the mob mentality leads to a situation that presages John Carpenter's Assault on Precinct 13 (1976). And overall, Fury is sometimes said to have anticipated film noir. However, despite some highly stylistic shots, such as the early, shimmering reflections of rain soaked windows on opposing walls, or the almost comically exaggerated action/reaction shots of the mob in full force (some of the more poignant material in the film), much of Fury's cinematography is more pedestrian. In his interview with Peter Bogdanovich that serves as the bulk of the DVD's "director's commentary", Lang states that he prefers simple, straightforward cinematography, to emphasize realism, or "truth". That may sound odd coming from the man who gave us Metropolis (1927), but at least for Fury, it is consistent.
But this isn't a flawless film. A few dramatic transitions are awkward, including two very important ones--the initial "capture" of Wilson, which is fairly inexplicable, and the final scene of the film, which leaves a significant dangling thread. But the underlying concepts, the performances and more often than not the technical aspects of the film work extremely well, making Fury an important film to watch.
Joe Wilson (Spencer Tracy) is deeply in love with Katherine Grant (Sylvia Sidney). Wilson lives in the Chicago area in a small apartment with his two brothers, Charlie (Frank Albertson) and Tom (George Walcott). Wilson wants to marry Grant, but they're short on money. Despite the relationship hardships it will entail, Grant returns to Texas to work--she'll be making good money there, while Wilson tries to improve his lot in Illinois. Wilson finally manages to buy a gas station with his brothers, and earns enough to buy a car and take a road trip, with his dog Rainbow in tow, to meet Grant so they can get married. When he's almost there, Wilson is suddenly stopped by a sheriff's deputy in the small town of Strand. They question him about a kidnapping. Two minor details make him more suspicious, and so they decide to hold him in the town jail while the D.A. looks into his background. Rumors makes their way around the town and things go horribly wrong, bringing us to mob mentality, lynchings and vengeance.
Lynchings were an emerging social problem in the early 1930s. There were 60 known lynchings in the U.S. between 1930 and 1934. Beginning in 1934, the earliest of the "anti-lynching" bills was presented to the U.S. Congress, and that number grew to 140 different bills by 1940. The visual arts also voiced in on the issue--one museum held "An Art Commentary on Lynching" exhibition in 1934. So Fury was certainly pertinent to our culture at the time, and was one of many films to come, such as Mervyn LeRoy's They Won't Forget (1937) that centered on strong anti-lynching sentiments (believe it or not, there were also pro-lynching films, such as Cecil B. DeMille's This Day and Age, 1933).
It's interesting to note that although lynching was primarily a "racial"-oriented phenomenon, Lang was not allowed to comment on that very much. There are a couple shots of blacks in the film, but they are extremely innocuous. Anything even more slightly controversial was excised at MGM's (and specifically Louis B. Mayer's) behest.
Fury's structure is very unusual, contributing even more to its unpredictable, captivating nature. It begins as an almost bland romance while Lang sets up the characters and their slightly exaggerated innocence, turns into an interesting hardship film, briefly becomes a road movie, switches gears again when Wilson is arrested, and actually presents a profoundly impactful climax at the midway point--it seems as if the film could end there. The second half makes a major u-turn as what could be seen as an extended tag/dénouement becomes an in-depth courtroom drama that builds to a second climax. The second half allows Lang to explore the same vengeance mentality as the first half, except from an individual rather than the previous mob perspective.
Although the second climax denotes a fine work of art on its own--there are some very moving performances and developments towards the end of the courtroom stuff, the star attraction is the gradually building mob material in the middle. What begins as an annoyance for Wilson turns into widespread tragedy as the rumor mill gears up and easygoing conformism rears its ugly head. Of course it is well known that Lang came to America to escape Nazi Germany, where he had been asked to act as Hitler's minister of film, so Fury, although sometimes criticized as a commercial film for Lang, certainly had personal poignancy for him. Lang shows rumors gradually distending in a game of "Telephone" with serious consequences, and inserts a humorous shot of chickens to symbolize "clucking women". He shows how easily a situation can go from those kinds of increasingly misreported claims to dangerous action due to conformism. Most folks are shown as all too eager to go along with the crowd and avoid local conflict.
For a few moments, the mob mentality leads to a situation that presages John Carpenter's Assault on Precinct 13 (1976). And overall, Fury is sometimes said to have anticipated film noir. However, despite some highly stylistic shots, such as the early, shimmering reflections of rain soaked windows on opposing walls, or the almost comically exaggerated action/reaction shots of the mob in full force (some of the more poignant material in the film), much of Fury's cinematography is more pedestrian. In his interview with Peter Bogdanovich that serves as the bulk of the DVD's "director's commentary", Lang states that he prefers simple, straightforward cinematography, to emphasize realism, or "truth". That may sound odd coming from the man who gave us Metropolis (1927), but at least for Fury, it is consistent.
But this isn't a flawless film. A few dramatic transitions are awkward, including two very important ones--the initial "capture" of Wilson, which is fairly inexplicable, and the final scene of the film, which leaves a significant dangling thread. But the underlying concepts, the performances and more often than not the technical aspects of the film work extremely well, making Fury an important film to watch.
Eighty years after its first release, this story of mob violence in USA is a savage indictment of the American system of mob "justice" from the 1880s to the 1960s. The fictional events of this movie, based upon a true incident, took place in the 1930s. Produced by Joseph L. Mankiewicz, directed by Fritz Lang, it stars Spencer Tracy and Sylvia Sidney in the key roles; with an excellent supporting cast, this is a story that stands the test of time.
I won't comment much on the plot and the story, both of which have been adequately addressed by the storyline on the main IMDb page, and a ton of detailed reviews here.
However, without Lang and Mankiewicz on this production, the dramatic irony would not, I think, have been as effectively portrayed - for two reasons. First, Lang coming from a Germany where Nazism was ascendant, knew all too well what injustice was all about and how people can prostitute their principles for what is perceived as justifiable retribution. Second, Mankiewicz was a highly experienced actor/producer/director who has shown, throughout his career, that injustice in all its forms must be shown for the evil it is. With such a combination at the reel wheel, this movie was guaranteed to be hard-hitting.
Lang's direction is very much on form, using lighting and shadow for full effect; using close up, quick editing in mob scenes; using the camera in extreme close up to ensure viewers note a particular item; and cross-cutting and inter-cutting scenes to heighten suspense. Not the first director to use those techniques, but Lang was a master at it.
For the most part, the script and dialog are excellent. My only critique centers upon the courtroom scenes and dialog which, by today's standards, are somewhat stagy; the repartee, between the prosecution and defense counsels, is particularly so, too often for this viewer. And the very last scene, seemingly preachy and even corny, which involves a long verbal exchange between the judge (Burton) and one of the main characters, can only be fully appreciated in the context of the times: a long history of lynching across the USA, an economy in the midst of a Great Depression and a nation on the cusp of another world war.
For Lang enthusiasts, Fury is a must see movie, despite the presence of a couple of handy coincidences, an improbable result with the use of dynamite and a glaring loose end - at the very end. Still, this is a movie that should be seen by all, and one I heartily recommend. Eight out of ten.
April 24, 2015
I won't comment much on the plot and the story, both of which have been adequately addressed by the storyline on the main IMDb page, and a ton of detailed reviews here.
However, without Lang and Mankiewicz on this production, the dramatic irony would not, I think, have been as effectively portrayed - for two reasons. First, Lang coming from a Germany where Nazism was ascendant, knew all too well what injustice was all about and how people can prostitute their principles for what is perceived as justifiable retribution. Second, Mankiewicz was a highly experienced actor/producer/director who has shown, throughout his career, that injustice in all its forms must be shown for the evil it is. With such a combination at the reel wheel, this movie was guaranteed to be hard-hitting.
Lang's direction is very much on form, using lighting and shadow for full effect; using close up, quick editing in mob scenes; using the camera in extreme close up to ensure viewers note a particular item; and cross-cutting and inter-cutting scenes to heighten suspense. Not the first director to use those techniques, but Lang was a master at it.
For the most part, the script and dialog are excellent. My only critique centers upon the courtroom scenes and dialog which, by today's standards, are somewhat stagy; the repartee, between the prosecution and defense counsels, is particularly so, too often for this viewer. And the very last scene, seemingly preachy and even corny, which involves a long verbal exchange between the judge (Burton) and one of the main characters, can only be fully appreciated in the context of the times: a long history of lynching across the USA, an economy in the midst of a Great Depression and a nation on the cusp of another world war.
For Lang enthusiasts, Fury is a must see movie, despite the presence of a couple of handy coincidences, an improbable result with the use of dynamite and a glaring loose end - at the very end. Still, this is a movie that should be seen by all, and one I heartily recommend. Eight out of ten.
April 24, 2015
Fritz Lang's first US film is arguably the best he made there,containing elements of his most celebrated film,M,though this time here the mentality of mob violence does not have a genuinely evil monster (so brilliantly portrayed in M by Peter Lorre) as it's point of retribution,but a decent,ordinary man in the shape of an equally superb Spencer Tracy.The first reel or so of FURY is somewhat dull,with Tracy and his fiancé Sylvia Sidney struggling to raise money for their wedding in what seems a straight-forward domestic story.But the film soon gets into gear when Tracy is mistaken for a kidnapper and held in a small town jail,and is lynched by most of the town's population,led by waster and bad boy Bruce Cabot.Or it seems he is lynched......Tracy somehow escapes,and totally hardened by the experience,is determined on exacting revenge against the perpetrators.
The film wasn't a particular critical or box-office triumph in it's day,maybe because it told some unpalatable truths in aspects of American life at the time.While not necessarily Hollywood's best-loved or most effective leading man,Tracy was arguably it's best actor from a technical viewpoint,and his performance is outstanding here.His transformation from an innocuous everyman to vicious criminal is totally convincing.After he makes his way back home to his brother's apartment,his speech detailing his ordeal and his thirst for vengeance is a quite brilliant piece of screen acting.Tracy had this and other memorable big screen monologues to his credit in a distinguished career (watch other fine examples in such films as STANLEY AND LIVINGSTONE,STATE OF THE UNION,INHERIT THE WIND and GUESS WHO'S COMING HOME TO DINNER),and there were few,if any,that could equal him in similar circumstances.There are no forced histrionics,no exaggerated hand or facial gestures,no bellowing out of words,just a careful and believable building up of rage until he explodes on the final word he comes to.......,DEATH!
Aside from Tracy's excellence,the film is at it's most effective in the setting up and brief aftermath of the lynching itself.Lang's penchant for Germanic expressionism and moody lighting is very effective here,especially in the scene where the converging of the mob on the police station is represented by a subjective tracking shot,a remarkably powerful scene which is the film's highpoint.
The film goes slightly downhill in the courtroom sequence,which although has interesting elements (the use of newsreel footage as evidence),tends to get over-melodramatic and obviously contrived(Tracy's peanut habit and word misspelling are not too convincing plot devices),and Lang was reportedly very opposed to the somewhat sappy ending tagged on by MGM(as Hollywood's moral code demanded in the 30's).That aside,fine support performances(Ms Sidney,Walter Brennan,Edward Ellis,Walter Abel,etc.),a good musical score(Franz Waxman),stylish visuals(Joesph Ruttenberg)and bravura direction by Lang still make FURY,despite dated elements,a powerful and effective essay on lynch mob rule seven decades later,which most of it's contemporaries can certainly not boast.
RATING:7 and a half out of 10
The film wasn't a particular critical or box-office triumph in it's day,maybe because it told some unpalatable truths in aspects of American life at the time.While not necessarily Hollywood's best-loved or most effective leading man,Tracy was arguably it's best actor from a technical viewpoint,and his performance is outstanding here.His transformation from an innocuous everyman to vicious criminal is totally convincing.After he makes his way back home to his brother's apartment,his speech detailing his ordeal and his thirst for vengeance is a quite brilliant piece of screen acting.Tracy had this and other memorable big screen monologues to his credit in a distinguished career (watch other fine examples in such films as STANLEY AND LIVINGSTONE,STATE OF THE UNION,INHERIT THE WIND and GUESS WHO'S COMING HOME TO DINNER),and there were few,if any,that could equal him in similar circumstances.There are no forced histrionics,no exaggerated hand or facial gestures,no bellowing out of words,just a careful and believable building up of rage until he explodes on the final word he comes to.......,DEATH!
Aside from Tracy's excellence,the film is at it's most effective in the setting up and brief aftermath of the lynching itself.Lang's penchant for Germanic expressionism and moody lighting is very effective here,especially in the scene where the converging of the mob on the police station is represented by a subjective tracking shot,a remarkably powerful scene which is the film's highpoint.
The film goes slightly downhill in the courtroom sequence,which although has interesting elements (the use of newsreel footage as evidence),tends to get over-melodramatic and obviously contrived(Tracy's peanut habit and word misspelling are not too convincing plot devices),and Lang was reportedly very opposed to the somewhat sappy ending tagged on by MGM(as Hollywood's moral code demanded in the 30's).That aside,fine support performances(Ms Sidney,Walter Brennan,Edward Ellis,Walter Abel,etc.),a good musical score(Franz Waxman),stylish visuals(Joesph Ruttenberg)and bravura direction by Lang still make FURY,despite dated elements,a powerful and effective essay on lynch mob rule seven decades later,which most of it's contemporaries can certainly not boast.
RATING:7 and a half out of 10
... because you have this typical Depression era love story with a young couple in love but not enough money to get married at a time when married women were not expected to work after marriage. The guy, Joe WIlson (Spencer Tracy) is an optimistic fellow, living with his pseudo gangster brother and his baby brother that the gangster brother is trying to influence.
Joe quits a dead end job and buys a gas station and starts to make plenty of money. His fiancee (Sylvia Sidney) has been away from him a year working as a teacher to also save money. And then the day comes for them to reunite - there finally is enough money. He drives a car across country to meet up with her. And she waits and waits for him. Joe is never late. But little does she know that things have gone terribly wrong. That's where this tale goes to a very dark place.
Without giving away too much, a chain of events are set off that rips all optimism away from Joe and leaves him a changed and bitter guy, and he sets off on a really terrible yet understandable road of revenge.
This is probably the first real meaty role at MGM that Spencer Tracy got, and others followed soon after. It's also a rare 1930s message picture from that studio, dealing with mob mentality and violence. Although most mob violence was directed at African Americans during that time, so it does not quite have the courage of its convictions, it is still engaging.
Joe quits a dead end job and buys a gas station and starts to make plenty of money. His fiancee (Sylvia Sidney) has been away from him a year working as a teacher to also save money. And then the day comes for them to reunite - there finally is enough money. He drives a car across country to meet up with her. And she waits and waits for him. Joe is never late. But little does she know that things have gone terribly wrong. That's where this tale goes to a very dark place.
Without giving away too much, a chain of events are set off that rips all optimism away from Joe and leaves him a changed and bitter guy, and he sets off on a really terrible yet understandable road of revenge.
This is probably the first real meaty role at MGM that Spencer Tracy got, and others followed soon after. It's also a rare 1930s message picture from that studio, dealing with mob mentality and violence. Although most mob violence was directed at African Americans during that time, so it does not quite have the courage of its convictions, it is still engaging.
Le saviez-vous
- AnecdotesThis was Fritz Lang's first film in Hollywood, and he wasn't accustomed to labor laws that require meal breaks. Shortly after filming began, Lang ate a quick lunch between set-ups and resumed filming. Some of the crew members wondering about their lunch break asked Spencer Tracy, who in turn pointed out to Lang that it was "1:30 pm and the crew had yet to take their break". Lang replied that it was his set and that "I will call lunch when I think it should be called." Tracy then smeared his make-up with his hand, knowing that it would take at least 90 minutes to fix it, yelled "Lunch!" and promptly walked off the set with the crew.
- GaffesWhen Joe is listening to Katherine's testimony, the filaments of the radio's tubes (visible thru the open back of the radio) are not lit, indicating no power to the radio, yet the broadcast can be heard.
- Citations
Joe Wilson: The mob doesn't think. It has no mind of its own.
- Bandes originalesThe Wedding March
(uncredited)
From "A Midsummer Night's Dream"
Written by Felix Mendelssohn
[In the score during the opening scene as Joe and Katherine stand in front of the bridal shop]
Meilleurs choix
Connectez-vous pour évaluer et suivre la liste de favoris afin de recevoir des recommandations personnalisées
- How long is Fury?Alimenté par Alexa
Détails
Box-office
- Montant brut mondial
- 11 789 $US
- Durée1 heure 32 minutes
- Couleur
- Rapport de forme
- 1.37 : 1
Contribuer à cette page
Suggérer une modification ou ajouter du contenu manquant