A Grande Ilusão

The critics slammed this movie and I loved it. Shame on the critics.

I love movies that transport me to an exotic place and a distant time. "All the King's Men" lushly recreates mid-century Louisiana. There's a lot of money up on the screen, beautifully lit and photographed: vintage, boat-like automobiles, forties and fifties fashions and fabrics, Spanish moss, ante-bellum mansions, a bronze bas relief map of Louisiana, set in a floor, that is put to amazing use.

There's a scene where a young woman returns from an illicit tryst in dim light. Her hair ripples to her shoulders in honey blonde waves. Her plump lips are painted, matte, in the color of dried blood. Her jilted lover, his fedora slung low on his forehead, stands in silhouette, watching her every move. Neither speaks.

In another scene, a backlit woman enters a bar and places her white cotton gloves over her hand.

Just, lovely scenes that capture another era.

I'm a political junkie, so I went to see this movie in spite of the bad reviews. It didn't let me down. It's a political soap opera from the first frame to the last.

Deals cut in smoke filled rooms, double crosses, fiery speeches to enthralled crowds. I ate it up.

The stars! Sean Penn, Jude Law, Kate Winslet, Kathy Baker, James Gandolfini...Jackie Earle Haley, someone I'd never heard of before, was memorable as a gun toting body guard.

Sean Penn's performance has been panned - too much arm waving. I loved the arm waving. Penn's arm waving doesn't come across as forced or inorganic. This is a man who can barely contain himself -- he's a human tornado. The historical figure with whom Penn's character, Willy Stark, is associated, Huey Long, was a powerhouse builder of bridges, hospitals, and roads. Penn conveys that kinetic energy and passion.

And the script! Thank God someone was willing to write a script in which people take some risks with language, communicate complex ideas, employ figures of speech! Heavens! In a movie in which nothing explodes and no cartoon superhero saves the world! I loved having to listen to what people were saying to know what was going on. I loved the flowery language. This is the South, after all, from several decades ago, and, yeah, those folks did love their language skills.

Another reviewer denounced the film's score as bombastic. It is bombastic, wonderfully so. It suits the subject matter perfectly. This isn't a movie about a shrinking violet who sits at home and writes poetry; it's a movie about a sweaty man who takes power and makes his mark.

Okay, so why didn't I give the movie ten stars? Sean Penn's character is fully realized, but the other characters are not. "All the King's Men" is a big, fat soap opera. There's a lot of sex, threats, lust, longing, suicide, and betrayal to fit into two hours. The film should have been longer so that characters other than Willy could have been fleshed out.

Patricia Clarkson is a case in point. Her character sets some key events in motion, but she's barely there -- either the character or the actress.

Anthony Hopkins comes across as just that -- Anthony Hopkins -- not the character he is playing. While everyone else does their best to produce a Southern accent, Hopkins insists on speaking with a British accent, and this sticks out like a sore thumb.

Kate Winslet and Mark Ruffalo are meant to be, like Blanche Dubois, representatives of degenerate Southern aristocracy, but they both seem entirely too robust to be degenerating.

Jude Law is better in a similar role as a member of the fading aristocratic class. Law always seems to do well in roles where he is punished by, rather than enjoys, his beauty. Just so here. Too bad that, in key scenes, Hopkins doesn't create any chemistry with him.

The lack of development of secondary characters -- and everyone, compared to Willie Stark, is secondary here -- made the film oddly emotionally unmoving to me. Again, there are scenes that contain the kind of elements that might have packed an emotional wallop that left me dry eyed.

Willy Stark's rise to power is built on the poverty of the citizens of Louisiana. The movie didn't convey that poverty to me. According to one website devoted to Huey Long, Lousiana had three hundred miles of paved road, two bridges, and high illiteracy rates when Long took office. If true, those stats are startling.

Finally, something else was missing, for me. Whenever one observes a charismatic politician, there is always the question: Does he really care about the people? Or is he just addicted to the adulation? I never had that question about Sean Penn's Willy Stark, as I do about, say, Bill Clinton. Willy Stark, here, is imperfect, but sincere. He wants to help his people.

Being from Louisiana I really enjoyed this movie. The acting was great and the story was entertaining. As others have stated, the accents are not done well. In fact there are more than a few characters who don't even try to imitate a southern accent, for which I am very grateful. I am quite sick of actors trying to portraying a southerner by speaking as if all the teeth were removed and the brain has been lobotomized. Others have complained about a boring script to which I completely disagree. This is not a fast-paced movie but it keeps the story moving and the dialogue is fresh. The slow periods give you time to pause and let the previous scene sink in, while also giving the viewer the opportunity to absorb the ambiance of the scenes. The people in this movie are portrayed as they really were in the 1940's and 50's. There is no surprise hidden here. Although this movie is based on the book of the same name, neither are factual of Huey Long and his legacy. These stories are loosely based on a person, with a few facts thrown in for recognition, but not for historical purposes. I applaud the entire cast and crew for their great efforts in bringing this movie to fruition. This is what entertainment is all about and it shows a little of the corruption that existed (and some would say still exists) in Louisiana politics of the past.

Go into this movie with an open mind and you will find yourself entertained and pleased with the whole experience.

Zaillian's 'All The King's Men' is a well shot film. I liked how he created the feel of the 50's Lousiana with dark washed-out colours, the costumes, cars, money, interior architecture and the simplistic settings. Some of the visuals are very impressive as they brilliantly highlight the darkness of that era. However, the script seems a little contrived. In spite of having a wonderful stellar cast that includes talents like Sean Penn, Jude Law, Mark Ruffalo, James Gandolfini, Kathy Baker, Mark Ruffalo, Patricia Clarkson, Anthony Hopkins and Kate Winslet (could anyone ask for a better cast?), none of the characters, (with the exception of Penn's Willie Stark and Law's Jack Burden) are fleshed out enough and none of them, with the exception of Ruffalo's Adam Stanton, are particularly likable. Not every actor masters the Southern diction but I'm glad that they spoke with an accent their more comfortable with than a forced Southern-I'm-chewing-glue-while-talking accent. Yet at the same time it was too obvious especially when Anthony Hopkins spoke with a British accent. All the actors do a fairly good job. The dialogues are a stand-out. I particularly liked how the characters played around with words, mostly the double-entendre. At some points the film moves at an extremely slow pace. We don't see much of the poverty, which Willie Stark claimed to demolish. We do see him build hospitals but a glimpse of the hardship of the poor people would have given us a better understanding of the depth of their difficulties. Instead all we see of them is when they're cheering Stark. In addition to that, the ending is very predictable. In a nutshell, 'All the King's Men' is an interesting but contrived film that could have been a lot better had the aforementioned flaws, especially the sketchy characters, been taken into account for reconsideration.

I may be in the minority but I found this to be a very good picture, was it as great as the casting implies it should be, probably not, but it was extremely well written. Sean Penn made a great Willie Stark, not what you would expect if you had seen the earlier versions, but he brought his usual passion and emotion to the role. Jude Law did a very good job, torn between two worlds with his reserved demeanor, you could almost see him cry out from the torture. All of the other characters were simply props and support for the two main characters of Willie Stark and Jack Burden. Even though the movie is not fact based it captures the time it represents very well. Huey Long (whom Willie Stark) is based on, was what some called a madman and some called a great leader of the common man. It is now out on video and worth watching

I loved the book and have taught it every year to my AP students. We've been excited to see the film and have had big hopes for it. I find the 1949 film nearly impossible to watch, because they made so many changes to really critical parts of the book.

I think this movie will be a great addition to my DVD collection to help establish setting and so on for future AP English classes.

The script keeps lots of the dialogue, images, and the looping storytelling from the text I understand the compressions they needed to do--and they generally worked.

The acting was powerful: lots of nuances from Jude Law, Sean Penn, Kate Winslet, Anthony Hopkins, and the rest. I saw reviews busting on Law for being so beautiful--a tragedy we share, of course--but honestly, I thought he did well at getting to the heart of Jack.

It really helped me to see the locations where they filmed: the statehouse, Burden's Landing, Mason City, and more.

My one quibble is the ending-- I love the book because it tells a tale of redemption, of making things right, of reconciliation--I think the film hints at it, but doesn't quite get there.