Aggiungi una trama nella tua linguaA down-on-his-luck driver joins a criminal's heists. Media coverage fuels public interest as their crimes grow bolder. When a hostage situation goes wrong, arrested suspects face danger from... Leggi tuttoA down-on-his-luck driver joins a criminal's heists. Media coverage fuels public interest as their crimes grow bolder. When a hostage situation goes wrong, arrested suspects face danger from angry mobs. Police struggle to maintain order.A down-on-his-luck driver joins a criminal's heists. Media coverage fuels public interest as their crimes grow bolder. When a hostage situation goes wrong, arrested suspects face danger from angry mobs. Police struggle to maintain order.
- Nominato ai 2 BAFTA Award
- 1 vittoria e 2 candidature totali
- Tommy Tyler
- (as Donald Smelick)
- Boy in Miller Car
- (non citato nei titoli originali)
- Man Exiting Optometrist
- (non citato nei titoli originali)
- Man in Crowd
- (non citato nei titoli originali)
- Barbara Colson
- (non citato nei titoli originali)
- Man on Street
- (non citato nei titoli originali)
- Vi Clendenning
- (non citato nei titoli originali)
Recensioni in evidenza
Family man and returning vet Howard Tyler (played by the always low-key Frank Lovejoy) is recruited into a life of crime by no more than ordinary desires for the American Dream. Desperate and unemployed, he falls into the clutches of a swaggering stickup man superbly played by a preening Lloyd Bridges. (Notice how subtly Bridges bends Tyler to his will on their first meeting at the bowling alley.) Joining Bridges, Tyler finally gets the standing he desires, but the spiral he has entered dooms him and his family's share of America's promise. (Note that conspicuous among the lynch mob's vanguard are fraternity boys, true to the actual event on which the movie is based.)
Throughout, the lighting and photography effectively undermine the facile voice of reason that the producers probably felt obligated to include. Endfield may have wanted an anti- violence film, but the resulting visual landscape implies a world of endemic violence. A sense of powerlessness pervades the film, one that mere admonishments cannot overcome. As a result, the characters appear caught in some terrible metaphysical web from which there is no escape. Events march relentlessly on to a conclusion that remains one of the most harrowing in Hollywood history. This is film noir at its darkest and most frightening.
Something should be noted in passing about the compellingly exotic performance of Katherine Locke as Hazel the manicurist. Watch her facial expressions as this highly repressed plain-faced woman experiences yet one more rejection in what a paste-on smile shows to be a lifetime of rejections. Never has a blossom perched so precariously on a cheap hairdo conveyed as much lower-class longing as hers, while the car ride with a guilt-ridden Tyler could serve as tawdry inspiration for a dozen feminist tracts. What ever became of this unusual actress, I wonder.
Without doubt, however, the film's dramatic high point is the lynch mob. It's one of the most coldly unnerving 20 minutes in movie annals, far surpassing (in my view) the better-known Fury (1936) in its depiction of mass violence. The fact that the mob is made up of ordinary citizens brought to fever pitch is especially telling. Unthinking violence is thus shown as potentially present in us all.
At the same time, the screenplay refuses to take the easy way out. In fact, Howard and Jerry are guilty, unlike, say, the three unfortunate cowboys in The Oxbow Incident (1943). Thus, what repels us is not the fact that innocent men are killed for a crime they didn't commit. That would be too easy. Instead, I think we're unnerved by how the crowd appears to celebrate the brutality of vigilante justice. Endfield succeeds in making this aspect especially ugly. Yes, in a very general sense, justice is served—murderers are in fact punished for their crime—but if so, justice is served in a particularly barbaric way even if the act does have popular support. In my little book, Endfield has fashioned the most effective of all anti- lynching movies, in part because it doesn't take the easy way out.
That Endfield exiled himself to England and a conventional career with Stanley Baker, shows how much was lost among those purge victims whose disappearance, unlike many others, went generally unnoticed. Just a couple of years after the remarkable "Try and Get Me" (and Endfield's also provocative "Underworld Story"), Hollywood began sanitizing the screen with the escapism of period spectacles, Technicolor westerns, and full-cleavage sex goddesses. Indeed times had changed. As Endfield already knew, the studios had to fight the Cold War too. There would be no more thought-provoking Try and Get Me's.
"The Sound of Fury" is a film with a simple storyline and an impressive conclusion. The manipulation of the masses by the "brown press" (tabloid) to sell newspapers is impressive and the consequence is scary. The reaction of the uncontrollable violent mob is the best part of this movie and shows the power of the free press, for the good or for the bad. My vote is seven.
Title (Brazil): "Justiça Injusta ("Justice Unjust")
Anyway, I recall seeing Sound of Fury when I was around ten, on a Saturday afternoon matinee at the local cinema.
I recall being quite upset when I watched it; I recall also the two main actors, the reserved worker, Frank Lovejoy (Howard) and the flamboyant, arrogant conman, Lloyd Bridges (Jerry) - such a brilliant contrast of characters, even then at ten. Thereafter, I followed both actors in subsequent movies.
Of course, I did not follow this story very well at that age, but the final fifteen minutes or so riveted me to my seat, never to be forgotten. Hence, when I saw it recently again, I felt an odd mix of the same emotions from over seventy years ago.
Briefly, Howard (Lovejoy) is reluctantly enticed by Jerry (Bridges) to embark on a life crime because he has no job. Eventually, Jerry commits a truly heinous murder of a young man and forces Howard to help dispose of the body. When they are arrested for the murder, they are held at the central police station under heavy guard, awaiting trial.
Soon, though, the local media whips up citizen anger about the murder and eventually a mob begins to congregate at the cop shop, demanding justice. Without doubt, this story and production still ranks with me as a superb exposition and critique of how the media (and authority) gave the base aspects of American culture an opportunity to overwhelm due legal process.
The pacing and dialog are appropriate, the acting is superb, and the finale is a tour de force in editing and directing.
I think Sound of Fury should have won awards. Maybe the topic revealed much more than the producers were expecting in those times? Simply because it viscerally displayed a hard truth that many preferred to keep in the background, out of sight, even then.
Eight out of ten for this excellent production.
Recommended for adults, young and old.
Resume:
First watch: 2017 / How many: 1 / Source: DVD / Rating: 8
Lo sapevi?
- QuizMartin Scorsese owned the only remaining 35mm print and authorized its use for the film's upgraded new print in 2013.
- BlooperDuring the opening credits, a shadow of a stage light and other equipment is visible on the first truck as it pulls out of the gas station.
- Citazioni
Blind Preacher: You've got to look in your hearts and ask yourself, if you can answer one thing, how much is each of you guilty for all the evil in the world? Why do you do the things you do? Why?
- ConnessioniFeatured in Red Hollywood (1996)
I più visti
- How long is The Sound of Fury?Powered by Alexa
Dettagli
- Tempo di esecuzione1 ora 31 minuti
- Colore
- Proporzioni
- 1.37 : 1