Un governatore elegge senatore un uomo di strada quale uomo di paglia per sfruttare traffici loschi. Non dovendosene più servire, lo accusa di illecito. Ma l'uomo saprà bene come difendersi,... Leggi tuttoUn governatore elegge senatore un uomo di strada quale uomo di paglia per sfruttare traffici loschi. Non dovendosene più servire, lo accusa di illecito. Ma l'uomo saprà bene come difendersi, facendo valere l'onestà.Un governatore elegge senatore un uomo di strada quale uomo di paglia per sfruttare traffici loschi. Non dovendosene più servire, lo accusa di illecito. Ma l'uomo saprà bene come difendersi, facendo valere l'onestà.
- Regia
- Sceneggiatura
- Star
- Vincitore di 1 Oscar
- 8 vittorie e 12 candidature totali
Riepilogo
Recensioni in evidenza
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.
Stewart's performance is important right from the beginning - hardly anyone else could have been believable as the earnest unknown who suddenly becomes an important political figure. Even his wide-eyed appreciation for what he sees in Washington comes across believably. As the story gets more complicated and his character is developed further, Stewart is even better.
The secondary characters are also important, because the story itself is a rather stylized, though still worthwhile, statement about politics. The characters are more believable than are many of the plot developments. Rains contributes a lot as Stewart's troubled colleague, and Jean Arthur is a natural for this kind of role. Arnold plays his devious character well. Capra holds it all together with his craftsmanship, keeping the story on track and getting the most out of the situation.
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.
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."
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.
Lo sapevi?
- QuizThe scenes where James Stewart wanders around in amazement at the Washington monuments were "stolen", since the US Parks Service had denied the studio permission to film near them.
- BlooperUnder the Standing Rules of the Senate governing debate, Senator Paine would not technically have been allowed to attack Senator Smith's character and accuse him of graft. The rule states: "No Senator in debate shall, directly or indirectly, by any form of words impute to another Senator or to other Senators any conduct or motive unworthy or unbecoming a Senator."
- Citazioni
Jefferson Smith: You see, boys forget what their country means by just reading The Land of the Free in history books. Then they get to be men they forget even more. Liberty's too precious a thing to be buried in books, Miss Saunders. Men should hold it up in front of them every single day of their lives and say: I'm free to think and to speak. My ancestors couldn't, I can, and my children will. Boys ought to grow up remembering that.
- ConnessioniEdited into High Hopes: The Capra Years (1981)
- Colonne sonoreColumbia, the Gem of the Ocean
(1843) (uncredited)
Written by David T. Shaw
Played during the opening credits and often in the score
I più visti
Dettagli
Botteghino
- Budget
- 1.900.000 USD (previsto)
- Lordo Stati Uniti e Canada
- 144.738 USD
- Fine settimana di apertura Stati Uniti e Canada
- 83.205 USD
- 14 ott 2018
- Lordo in tutto il mondo
- 146.123 USD
- Tempo di esecuzione2 ore 9 minuti
- Colore
- Proporzioni
- 1.37 : 1