Révolte à Dublin

Set in Ireland during the 1916 Easter Rebellion, Barbara Stanwyck stars as Nora Clitheroe, the wife of Jack (Preston Foster), a former ranking member in the Irish underground. He's itching to get back into the fight, but he's promised his wife that his fighting days are behind him. Naturally, the call to arms becomes too strong, and as Jack heads back into the fray, Nora rages at his decision and the heartbreak of war.

Director John Ford basically disowned the finished film, claiming RKO had edited it into garbage. I don't think it's quite that bad, but it really isn't very good, either. Stanwyck is fairly awful, strident and struggling with her accent. Foster, who can be a compelling presence, is dull here. Brothers Barry Fitzgerald and Arthur Shields, both making their first substantial appearances in an American movie, are what you'd expect. Fitzgerald's goofball character is meant to be the comic relief, but he's just irritating. The only performance that moved me at all was from Bonita Granville, as a young girl dreaming of a better life.

John Ford made most of his films for Twentieth Century Fox and perhaps much of it was because the studio let the director do what he wanted. After all, he was a proved commodity--an Oscar-winning director with a great track record. But with this film he did for RKO, apparently Ford was NOT thrilled and even walked off...forcing the studio to finish the film without him due to creative differences. Ford apparently hated the final product.

I am not sure why Ford was so disenchanted with the project, but I would hazard to guess that at least some of his disgust was the decision to cast Barbara Stanwyck in the lead. Now I do not have anything against her...she was a fine actress. But the film is about Ireland and she sounds absolutely nothing like an Irish woman...nothing. Heck, Hattie McDaniel would have been about as convincing in this role! She couldn't even approximate the accent...and in most of the film she didn't seem to try. Her character was also extremely whiny...too much so. As for the other co-star, Preston Foster, he was much more convincing and was well cast. So for me, this was a HUGE strike against the movie at the onset.

When the film begins, you learn that Nora (Stanwyck) has hidden a letter that arrived for her husband, Jack (Foster). The letter was appointing him a leader in the Irish militia...and soon they would be involved in the infamous Easter Uprising. Well, Nora is NOT the patriotic sort and is actually rather selfish--and she later begs him not to join in the fighting and to reject his appointment. Jack is not about to do this, as he's a loyal patriot.

Much of the rest of the film is made up of the rebellion as well as its aftermath--most of which time Nora whines and complains and seems to care not one bit about her native land...which is pretty weird and pretty despicable. In fact, her character and performance were pretty awful and the film left me wanting to see her get killed or at least horse whipped. And, even more oddly, the film ends this way...with Nora whining and having no care about the deaths of others or her Republic. I have no idea WHAT the point of the film was...and I could see how audiences left confused and unsatisfied. A rather terrible film, actually...

Sean O'Casey, Ireland's greatest playwright, probably was lucky to have his work about the Irish rebellion made by John Ford. The former Sean O'Fearna had a brother in the IRA back in the day so he knew quite a bit about it.

I saw this year's ago and could kick myself for not getting a VHS copy of this when it was out. What I remember best was Ford's good use of newsreel footage edited into the story of the Clitheroe family and how the Easter Rebellion is affecting their lives in Dublin.

Preston Foster and Barbara Stanwyck make fine leads. Foster had just come off a good part in John Ford's more well known Irish work, The Informer. And Stanwyck was a good enough actress to cover up the somewhat phony brogue she adopted. That was not the only time she used the brogue. You can hear her as Molly Monahan in Cecil B. DeMille's Union Pacific which is readily available and broadcast often.

Sean O'Casey had a bigger world view than just Irish independence. Very much like that greatest of Irish patriots Daniel O'Connell. He wanted a just society to emerge as well. I think it has in the Republic. I think Mr. O'Casey would be at home in Dublin now. He might want to see the six counties reunited, but wouldn't want blood spilled to do it.

The other performance you will remember is Arthur Shields as Padriac Pearse. By the way Shields and brother Barry Fitzgerald were in real life Ulster Protestants.

Ford concentrated on the nationalist part of the struggle and while The Plough and the Stars might be a bit too much like a photographed stage play it's still good drama. More Ford than O'Casey though.

THE PLOUGH AND THE STARS, represents the director's anti-imperialist stance against the ruling British in Ireland. Although political in tone, both films have been filtered through the classical Hollywood consciousness; they refer as much to American conflicts (e.g. the Civil War) as Irish conflicts, with a protagonist struggling for freedom against the colonial power, as well as against pro-colonial forces within his own people. THE PLOUGH AND THE STARS stars Barbara Stanwyck; much of the action has been rewritten from a woman's film perspective, showing her struggling to survive in a world dominated by rebellion, in which her husband (Preston Foster) is committed to the cause of freedom - so much so, in fact, that he neglects her. But Ford is too clever to make any judgment; although sympathizing with Stanwyck's character, he makes it clear that her husband has to fight on so as to preserve his own integrity, as well as that of his own country. THE INFORMER and THE PLOUGH AND THE STARS are both packed with Abbey Theatre actors, including Barry Fitzgerald, Arthur Shields (who were both Protestant, by the way, rather than Catholic as portrayed in the film) and more; they provide local color, as well as vivid illustration of how ordinary people coped with the experience of rebellion. Sometimes we wonder whether they have been cast to show off their Oirishness - in other words, conform to Hollywood stereotypes of the Irish character (garrulous, full of songs and fond of drinking). This is especially true of Fitzgerald's Fluther Good, who seems to have little involvement in the film's main plot, yet nonetheless has the chance to show off his (non-existent) pugilistic abilities. Nonetheless the film still packs a punch, despite its short running-time.

If you like Ireland, Irish history & literature, the traditions of the Irish people & the ambiguous creation of the Irish nation -- what's not to like about this movie? Sure, now, it's more John Ford than Sean O'Casey. But what would you be expectin from John Ford at the height of his creative spirit -- four years before he filmed "Grapes of Wrath"? Almost everyone in this movie plays their part with pungent efficiency. It's old-fashioned acting of the best sort. As movie, this is much more cinema of ideas, of belief & revolution, of theater, of language & gesture & non-verbal communication -- than our contemporary cinema of special effects and technicolor sensations. This movie is political entertainment of a very fine order; with as much said by the words as by what is shown. But how many people alive now can relate to it with the potency it must of had back in the 1930s?