Dalton Trumbo

All movie fans should recognize the name of Dalton Trumbo. Even if his heyday was a good half-century ago, his actions during one of Hollywood's very darkest periods still have tremendous impact even today. Especially today, for that matter.

Some quick background. You may recall that in World War II, the US and the Soviets were allies but that after the war we became distrustful adversaries. This time was known as the Cold War – since the two countries didn't fight one another – and really ended only in the late 1980s. Prior to the end of WW II, many Americans joined the Communist Party as a way to fight the rise of Fascism in Europe. After the war, current and former members of the Party were looked upon as pariahs of the highest order. Screenwriter Dalton Trumbo (Bryan Cranston) was one of these pariahs. It didn't help that he actively tried to rally technical workers on film sets (grips, lighting and sound technicians) to strike for higher pay. Unionizing was seen as a bad thing, despite the gains it had achieved for American workers earlier in the century.

Trumbo's membership in the Party wasn't a big deal at first, but then gossip columnist Hedda Hopper (Helen Mirren), who wielded an enormous amount of power in Hollywood, took it as a personal affront and used her column (and weekly appearance in newsreels) to denounce Communism in general and Trumbo in particular. Kicking the whole scandal into high gear was a little-known congressional group – the House Un-American Activities Committee. These guys tried to rout out Commies from Hollywood (which it saw as holding a lot of sway over Americans, much more so than today) by calling a group of known or suspected Communists to Washington for sworn testimony. These men were known as the Hollywood Ten. Trumbo was one of them, and he refused to tell the committee the names of anyone else who was or who could be a Communist. He, like his fellow Ten members, was found in contempt. Later, someone not in the group did name Trumbo, and he was put in prison for a full year.

When he got out, no one would hire him (or any of the others in the Ten). Except for King Brothers Studio, which couldn't pay him much. But Trumbo worked fast as both a writer of original stuff and a fixer of existing scripts. The Kings loved him. So much so that the others in the Ten were offered jobs (for no credit, same as Trumbo) working as script doctors. During this time, Trumbo also got work from some friendly sorts in the business by selling them a script but not taking on-screen credit; the credit typically went to a fictitious person, or to a willing accomplice – known as a front. Through this method, Trumbo won two writing Oscars – although no one knew it at the time.

Dalton Trumbo fought for himself, his fellow writers, and for anyone for whom the Bill of Rights holds any meaning. He reasoned that if people could be silenced for political beliefs, then anyone could be silenced for any reason. This is, unfortunately, still true today. And although he didn't receive credit at the time, Trumbo was awarded his Oscars eventually (one posthumously). He's recognized as being one of the very greatest screenwriters the world has ever known. The movie does a terrific job describing Trumbo's struggles – and that of his family: his wife Cleo (Diane Lane) and his three doting children. The toll that his stance took on them was noticeable to everyone except for Trumbo himself.

Cranston turns in what was an Oscar-nominated performance, but his was not the only one of note. Lane is superb as his suffering, strong better half. Elle Fanning, as his eldest daughter, is also a standout, as are John Goodman (as Frank King) and Alan Tudyk (as writer Ian McLellan Hunter). Spellbinding from start to finish, and all screenwriters owe Trumbo a huge debt of gratitude for his long struggle on their behalf.

I have seen so many documentaries about this era. The Hollywood blacklist, McCarthyism.

However, this takes a fresh, personal look at what happened. It shows how folks actually handled this, rather than just the circumstances of the time and newsreels of Congress hearings. How did they do it? This shows the how and when, the risks. Of course, Trumbo captures the full story of the persecution.

Stay to the very end of the film, stay for the credits as some of the clips they show are so meaningful.

I don't know if Trumbo was the person shown in the film, but if he was, he was an American hero. I think films like this represent the spirit, the best or worst of the spirit of what happened.

Trumbo wasn't just a hero from the look of it, he was also a survivor who made his way through the worst of it and came out on the other side.

I've seen some mixed reviews of Trumbo, and in a way I can understand why it wouldn't impress some film critics. It is a movie where the movie business, and especially movie personalities, are given over to actors to play. It's not unlike a few years ago with the Anthony Hopkins Hitchcock: you got a big cast and they all have roles to play from people who, if you're a big movie buff (or even someone who just knows who Kirk Douglas or John Wayne were, and that's probably a lot, whether or not you know who Dalton Trumbo was entirely), there's an aspect of 'Oh, he's or she is playing HIM or HER!' But I think with a sharp enough script that sort of thing goes by the way-side, especially if it gives the right actors some good stuff to play. There's nothing about Trumbo that is especially complex, as it has the message that most of us in 2015 would agree with: the Hollywood Blacklist, not just what happened to the Hollywood 10 but many others, was a horrible thing, and the thesis comes down to the idea that there were good and bad people in it but it also came down to the nature of it all making people victims... well, except for Hedda Hopper.

The movie is fun though whether or not you know a lot about the history because of who is in the cast and especially Bryan Cranston as Trumbo. He's a man who makes a lot of money in the 40's in Hollywood writing scripts and yet is an avowed Communist (he makes the case to his daughter in such a way early on in the film that some might question but most of us would go 'huh, that's it then'). A lot of the conflict comes because of what the history had right there: HUAC went after people in Hollywood who were suspected 'traitors', but in reality were just writers and (some) actors and directors who had affiliations with the party, and thanks to pressure by columnist Hedda Hopper (played here by Helen Mirren in a role that's deliciously evil) and John Wayne (actor I can't remember but does a good impression without being caricature-ish), a group got pressured. They didn't name names, were held in contempt of court, found guilty and did time. Well, unless if you were Edward G. Robinson (though he's shown in a somewhat sympathetic light, maybe just by Michael Stuhlbarg being in the role).

The bulk of the story is about the 'front' that Trumbo led for himself and other blacklisted writers such as stubborn/cancer-ridden Arlen Hird (Louis CK, always a pleasure to watch, but especially in scenes with Cranston). They used fake names to get their scripts made, even as they had no choice for a while but to team up with filmmakers who were out to just make "crap" (an echo in a way for me of Burton's Ed Wood with the John Goodman character). There's some predictable drama that unfolds - the all-business-all-writing part of Dalton that conflicts with being a father and family-man and clashing with his daughter and wife (very good Elle Fanning and Diane Lane respectively) - but what helps it along all the way is just a sharp script and direction that keeps things thematically strong.

This is serious stuff what happened to these people in Hollywood, and director Jay Roach and writer John McNamara know that, all the way up to a final speech from Trumbo upon winning a WGA award that puts things into a perspective that (almost) makes Trumbo too fair to those who really wronged him and his friends. But it's just full of wit an clever lines; if you're a sucker for that, as I can be sometimes, then Trumbo makes for a balance of the light and dark stuff. Again if nothing else, Cranston makes someone who can easily be seen as a CHARACTER in bold letters (and by many accounts that is who Trumbo was) and gives him three dimensions and perspective on the situations that unfold. He does things that may be wrong and provocative, in both bad and good ways, and is told off enough that any of his short-comings become kind of charming. I could've spent more time with his Trumbo and been happy, especially in light of the history that unfolds here (i.e. Roman Holiday, Spatacus, Exodus, other productions like The Brave One).

Okay. I'll admit that I gave this film a ten because it should have a higher score altogether than the 7.3 it has, and I wanted to up it. But a solid 8 at least or even a 9, for sure. There are at least two reasons why this fine film is not getting a higher rating, I believe. One is that there are many people (including critics) who look only at it from a political standpoint, both left and right. And those on the right are not going to like it no matter what, fine acting, writing or whatever. The same in the left but conversely (and a smaller number). Secondly, this is a slow and thoughtful film that will not go over with many young viewers who are used to fast paced action and CGI content. they will find neither in Trumbo.

But, for students of history and for people who like a good story, without the fluff, it is all here. Classic good vs evil dynamics coupled with the inherent contradictions. The struggle of lost faith and eventual redemption. And perhaps mostly, excellent social dynamics especially centered around family loyalty and the struggle of holding to ones personal values.

As for the history, there is much here. As stated above more than any film ever having dealt with the subject. Films like "the Front" and "Guilty by Suspicion" are indeed good films that, especially at the time where breaking ground for a more nuanced exploration of the subject. That Trumbo is a biography is advantageous. A real biography, not a overly fictionalized and caricatured profile of the era. This despite that fact that some of the characters are fictionalized, they nonetheless represent the experiences and attitudes of real people. Louis C.K.'s Arlen Hird character being one. Dalton Trumbo may have had a better time of it than most, such as Hird. It is thought by some that the rising star of John Garfield was killed (literally-a heart attack) by the effect of the HUAC on him. This was a time, as the film states when people were fighting for their professional and personal life against what could be called a creeping fascist tendency in the US political environment. The fear and reaction and self promotion of many (ie John Wayne, Hedda Hopper et al.) is evident here.

The writing is excellent. My hat goes off to John McNamara and Bruce Cook for their adherence to historical accuracy and verisimilitude. The dialog is remarkable and keep you involved. It keeps you thinking and hits at an emotional level that few films do at all anymore. But it all comes together with the excellent direction of Jay Roach. To bring together the historical and personal is such a way is no small feat. He deserves an Oscar (as do McNamara and Cook).

I could go on...but just see the movie. You won't regret it. You can still watch Star Wars at Xmas...

I happened only 70 years ago and so many young people have never even heard about it. How can it be? And, how dangerous. Not to know will always put you at a disadvantage, oh yes, sooner or later. Trumbo feels like a story set in a totalitarian Country and yet...The spread of fear is a powerful weapon used by self-aggrandizing sociopaths. Joe McCarthy's success is still a mystery to me and Trumbo proves, in the most riveting way, how easily we can fall in that trap. Bryan Cranston is simply, sensational portraying a true American in all its contradictions. I never really thought of the actual degradation Trumbo and the other blacklisted writers went through until I saw it in Bryan Cranston's face. David James Elliott portrayal of John Wayne is chilling and disturbing, specially because id true. I've heard from people who knew him, what a nice man Duke was and yet...Helen Mirren as Hedda Hopper was another chilling and unexpected portrait of utter ignorance. I've only recently found out that she was behind the forces that wanted Charles Chaplin out of the Country. Congratulations to director Jay Roach and to a spectacular cast. Let's hope everyone pays attention.