L'intrus

No movie could ever do justice to Faulkner's command of the English language. but they did a pretty good job here. Lucas Beauchamp is exactly the way I pictured him in the book, as is Chick. What the movie couldn't really go into was how Beauchamp wasn't liked by the Negro people either, because he was equally as stubborn. Not that it is a bad thing, but from my take on the book that was his attitude toward the world (yet, I got the feeling it was white society's racism that started it and it spilled over into Negro society, until that became his attitude toward everyone).

the best part of the movie is that you get to see Yoknapatawpha county (actually, Oxford, Mississippi) exactly as Faulkner wrote about it (the film was made when Faulkner was alive and writing). It doesn't look that much different today. Because of this alone, the movie is worth a watch considering it is filmed in Faulkner's backyard. A true must see for Faulkner fans.

I usually don't like movies based on famous and well-established authors, "sure bets". They seem to be telling the public "You can't POSSIBLY dislike this!!!" I tend to prefer movies that take chances with unknown authors or actors, movies that care for art, not money. But this one is so well-made. Everything works: the photography, the acting, the pacing, and it has that documentary beauty of real life that so few movies have (love those window shots where you see small town downtown traffic!). It's historic interest also makes it enjoyable. A kind of poetry pervades this movie that makes it far more effective than the similar "To Kill a Mockingbird". Hernandez is pure dignity - character and actor - and Jarman is a most refreshing contrast to today's smart-alecky youth. He has a humility that is touching. It is hard to imagine another actor in that role. Is this movie on the side of the angels? Sure. And the black and white poetry saves it.

"Intruder in the dust" is unfairly forgotten today.Nowadays almost every movie involving racism,murder,lawyer and infuriated crowd ends up in the court,in an endless trial .This one does not,everything happens in a small south town,or in the country around.It features intriguing scenes ,particularly the one when two teenagers and an old lady open a grave at night to exhume a dead body;even stronger is the scene when the same lady keeps the crowd from entering the jail,without a gun, sitting on her chair while a brute is pouring gas around her.Juano Hernandez is equally efficient in his part of an innocent black man-I've rarely seen so much dignity in this kind of role-.

Also remarkable is the almost complete absence of music,which gives the movie a modern feel.Excellent dialog,with brilliant lines ,towards the end of the movie,between the lawyer and his nephew .This young lad plays a prominent part in the story,which is not surprising,coming from Clarence Brown,who perfectly directed young actors ("the yearling" and "National Velvet")

Director Clarence Brown does a tremendous job in presenting Juano Hernandez as a dignified man living within a southern community steeped in Jim Crow. Hernandez is falsely accused of murder and is resigned to the fact that this prejudice will lead to his incarceration or worse.

The movie is full of surprises and, happily, ends on a positive note. One of the major movies on racial or cultural prejudice of the era, it was done after Gentlemen's Agreement (1947), Crossfire (1947), but precedes Sidney Poitier's No Way Out (1950) by a year. Clearly, the only other movie that touched on this issue beforehand was the first version of Imitation of Life (1934).

This era was a time when the motion picture industry was struggling with this issue and showed an earnest attempt at portraying this problem with dignity. Hernandez's role as Lucas Beauchamp was no ordinary role for a black actor during this time when the movie industry was still under the control of whites. All in all, this is one of the greats.

Great supporting acting from David Brian, Claude Jarman, Jr. and Elizabeth Patterson.

Take a look at those faces alongside the entrance to the jail. They're not the faces of Hollywood extras. Somebody in production was really smart to take filming to Oxford, Mississippi, because you can't get that kind of authenticity from a studio backlot. Scope out the narrow dusty roads, the frozen earth beneath, and the skeletal trees just barely hanging on. No wonder those faces look hard and unforgiving; they're just reflecting the soil from which they spring. Old man Lucas (Hernandez) better fear for his life, but then he springs from that same hard earth.

The movie works because it tells a good story that neither preaches nor sentimentalizes and even has some suspense. Old man Lucas is not very likable. He's a victim and we sympathize, but he's also haughty and unfriendly. Wisely, the script refuses to sweeten him up. That way we're forced to recognize the effects of racism and injustice on even the less sympathetic. The script also wisely avoids dealing directly with racism since that tends to become preachy and less effective. Instead, we're shown how easily prejudice can convict an innocent man and condemn him to a horrible death. So, it's through our common instinct to see justice done that the effects of racism are exposed, a much more effective pathway. It also makes the actions of the sheriff and the lawyer more understandable since they are otherwise part of the Jim Crow system.

Note how the movie doesn't attack segregation. It's doubtful that old man Lucas would want to mix with whites anyway and there's no hint that even lawyer Stevens (Brian) wants to cross the color line except to see justice done. No, the possibility of reconciliation lies in the future as symbolized by the kid (Jarman) whose head is not yet filled with "notions". He's not exactly friends with Lucas, but he has glimpsed the common humanity of being befriended after falling into the frozen creek. The last line of dialogue also shows him siding with his uncle, the lawyer, instead of his more hidebound parents (the dinner table scene is important and easily overlooked). The lawyer might not join a future civil rights march, but the kid might. That's the movie's realistically hopeful side.

There was a bunch of racially themed movies during this brief 3 year period, 1949-51, (The Well, No Way Out, Home of the Brave, Lost Boundaries). Even famously detached MGM got into the mix with this little gem. Unfortunately, the McCarthy purges in Hollywood put an end to "problem" films that might not serve Cold War ends. Even so, each of these is worth catching up with, not only because they're good movies, but because even with the passage of 60 years and Jim Crow, they're still relevant.