Customer Reviews

All the King's Men [Blu-ray]

5 star:		(10)
4 star:		(21)
3 star:		(27)
2 star:		(14)
1 star:		(9)

 

 

Judgment is frequently tainted by expectation, and clearly, high expectations caused many viewers to mug this splendid movie, or simply miss what makes it great. The problem, of course, is the iconic nature of the source material. The life of Huey "Kingfish" Long, Governor of Louisiana and radical populist, (to say nothing of power-mad, corrupt manipulator), provides its foundation. Long was real Americana, a self-described "hick" that rose to power by speaking for the disenfranchised. The Robert Penn Warren novel, source of the story itself, is a classic, and easily one of the best political sagas in American literature. Unoccupied mansions, bald cypress swamps, and sweltering Louisiana summer nights evoke a prototypical sense of decadence and corruption; beautifully mirroring this tale of moral decay. Add an all-star cast and it's easy to see why audiences arrived at the theatre expecting The Bicycle Thief, or La Strada.

Sean Penn, as Stark - based on Long - is a difficult individual. Like many actors, thinking is his enemy. One has only to watch the appalling Into The Wild, which he directed, to understand this. When Penn thinks, he immediately jumps on a soapbox and grabs a bullhorn, so he can share his half-baked ideology with the masses. This was my greatest fear about ATKM, that Penn would use it as a "tutorial." Happily, he resists this impulse and simply disappears into the part, making it thoroughly believable. And boy does he have help! The amazing cast includes Jude Law, Anthony Hopkins, Kate Winslet, Mark Ruffalo, Particia Clarkson, James Gandolfini, and Kathy Baker - Baker is exceptional. The film does what films do best; it takes you to another place and time, depositing you in front of Town Hall to fend for yourself. Wonderful.

The story is told from the perspective of the Jude Law character, Jack Burden. Jack is an observer, one foot in, one foot out. His conflict, his torture, is the heart of this film. Alcoholism and despair make it possible for him to pretend he hasn't made a choice; that he is simply sitting on a fence. But everyone in this film is somewhere on the moral spectrum, even Stark is not entirely bad and Judge Irwin is not entirely good. It is the moral complexity of living in a gray world that sets these people adrift, and they are drawn into painful places. Law, a consistently underrated actor, is excellent throughout, as is Mark Ruffalo who wears his moral oblivion like an overcoat. "If you don't vote, you don't matter," says Stark, and he's right. Haunting words when one considers that even today very few Americans go to the trouble of picking their leaders.

An exceptionally well-made film with themes that never go out of style. Highly recommended.

This film had something very special going for it with its central casting of Sean Penn as Huey Long, the Kingfisher, the everyman governor of depression-era Louisiana (Willie Stark in the film). If ever there was a role designed for Penn's heated and emotive style of acting, this was it. True to that promise, Penn delivers a few (too few) wonderful scenes with Willie Stark delivering fire and brimstone from the campaign stump.

Other than these scenes, the film is an unformed washout. Willie Stark's transformation from righteous, wife loving common man to manipulative, self-serving adulterous political schemer is . . . . well there really is no transformation. It simply happens between scenes off camera, rendering a potentially fascinating character, rich with comment about the fallibility of human nature, into a black and white, boring nothing.

The film sort of meanders around with the character of reporter Jack Burden (played by the desperately miscast Jude Law)and his exceptionally average family story, which somehow includes lover Anne Stanton (played by the desperately miscast Kate Winslet) and her brother Adam Stanton, played by Mark Ruffalo (who was at least well cast but left hanging in limbo by some very lazy scriptwriting). On board also is the very talanted James Gandolfini, who must have owed someone a very big favor. I challenge anyone to explain to me what he was doing in this bumbling, mumbling role, so far beneath his station. All in all, I was left wondering how any of the principals managed to convince themselves the product was release-ready when watching the final edit.

Final note to Hollywood: let's strike a deal with England: From this day forth, no cross-accenting. Americans shall not play Brits; Brits shall not play Americans (particularly southerners). I think this simple piece of legislation would do wonders in maintaining good relations with that isle across the pond. Lord have mercy it was painful watching Mr. Law and Ms. Winslet giving it their best. All British actors use the exact same accent for anyone "southern"; a kind of a generic mish mash of drawl: all at once from everywhere and nowhere.

One finally final note: is it just me or does Jude Law seem a little less like the real thing with each role?

Not even slightly recommended. -Mykal Banta

I think the responsibility for this failure lies with mainly 3 people.
First of all, Sean Penn, whom I respect as a great actor (e.g. Mystic River, 21 Grams), but not in this terrible performance. His portrait of a populist demagogue is just too much over the top towards a caricature of Chaplin's great dictator.
Second, the script writer. It can not be that easy to foul up an essentially good story so badly. There is no narrative drive.
Third, this must be Jude Law's worst film ever. He is not an obvious miscast, one can initially believe his character, the young man from an elite background and his mutual attraction with the vulgar politician. But in the course of the plot, the motivation of his character loses ground, and Law is at a loss for adequate facial expressions. He makes a mess of it.
Hopkins and Winslet are doing fine, but why are 3 English actors needed for a Louisiana story?

"All the King's Men" is based on the Pulitzer Prize winning novel written by Robert Penn Warren. Warren, who shifted from poetry to prose to write this novel, got his inspiration from the Populist Louisiana politician, Huey Long.

The film, based on a screenplay by Steve Zaillian, is also based in Louisiana. The politician, Willie Stark (Penn), runs a parallel course to Long's illustrious career. He started out meaning well and his interest was always in the common man, 'hicks' like him. The story is narrated by newspaper reporter, Jack Burden (Law) who works for Sparks.

There's a lot of strong messages in "All the King's Men." You can watch it from the perspective of a soap opera, a parallel to contemporary politics (the discussion of the oil companies' influence, for example) or an Ivory Tower comparison to Machiavelli.

This film could have been great, had they decided a few aspects differently. To quote the film itself: "You only get a couple of moments that determine your life. Sometimes only one. And then it's gone. Forever." Probably the worst decision the directors made was changing the timeframe the film is set in. If you ignore that the film's set twenty years past Long's time, it works a lot better. I don't agree with the decision that the 50's are interchangeable historically with the 30's.

If you read the magnificent novel upon which this film is based, then you see that the movie does a pretty good job of bringing the story to the screen. Also, I am familiar with hicks in Louisiana, and a lot of them DO have the same accent Sean Penn assumed in his role.

The only improvement I could suggest would have been more frequent use of Robert Penn Warren's own dialogue. For instance, when Burden criticized Stark for boring his listeners, for showing them pie graphs and talking statistics and finances, he was brief and low-key. In the book, Burden railed at Stark -- "Make 'em laugh, make 'em cry, pinch them in a soft spot, but for God's sake don't try to improve their minds." Several other instances occurred where the author's exact wording would have worked better.

Also, two interesting book story points were omitted: Stark's boy, the football player, toward the end was injured during a play and paralyzed from the neck down; Lucy resigned the rest of her life to caring for him. Also, in the end, Jack Burden and Anne Stanton finally married, fulfilling their destiny from youth. It made a good wrap-up.

I thought this movie much too dark
too shallow and too slow
Most characters don't come to life
they just go with the flow

It starts off well with Willie Stark
the hick who would be king
He turned the tables on the folk
who'd yanked him on a string

He gave 'em heck, this simple man
but power soon corrupts
He gets his fingers dirty
and a scandal then erupts

He's no more crooked than the rest
as we will soon discover
And asks his spin practitioner
some secrets to uncover

Jack Burden is his right hand man
Polite and politic
Backgrounds more like chalk and cheese
Yet something makes it stick

A tangled web they weave and spin
But much is left unsaid
Desires, dreams and ambitions
left hanging by a thread

Sean Penn fits neatly in the role
Law mostly looks pretty
Winslet never gets a chance
to show her nitty gritty

The others just weave in and out
without a strong foundation
If this one's showing on TV
I think I'd change the station





Amanda Richards, April 23, 2007

What do Sean Penn,Jude Law and James Gandolfini have in common? Answer:they are all decent actors who to a man could not effect a Southern accent to save their lives (or this film).

ATKM is based on the much better, much older film of the same name that told a fictionalized account of a Louisiana politician based on Governor and later U.S Senator Huey Long. Long was an interesting figure, and while many still disagree on whether his poliices were salvation or destruction, his short career was undeniably very interesting. Long's corrruption is not disputed however, and ATKM follows Long ("Willie Stark" here) as he rises to power, abuses power and ultimately falls.

James Carville, who is a decent speaker, co-produced this mess. He would have been so better suited himself for the title role, because to listen to Sean Penn painfully abuse the Southern dialect, or Gandolfini who most of us still relate to as a Soprano lean forward and confide in an Amos and Andy patois, it's absolutely unwatchable. I don't know why it'd be so hard to recruit say Billy Bob Thornton, Tommy Lee Jones or any other player who could have been natural in this role instead of so obviously out of place as the cast of ATKM.The casting here is comparable to putting Jackie Chan in the Don Corleone role of "The Godfather".

Huey Long was, absent his faults, a great orator and a very charismatic personality. Even with the help of a bombastic soundtrack, Sean Penn sounds like- well an actor. Like DeNiro and many other great performers, Penn cannot in deliver a speech effectively in public out of role and brings no inspiration here. Penns speeches lack charm and radiate nothing but anger as if he has projected his own beliefs of what the working class wants into his role.

THis film really deserves 1 star because of how bad it fails, and I'd send anyone looking into the story toward the original. It's a great tale that could use repeating in this time of "promise-the-world" phony populists like Hugo Chavez (curiously a Penn ally) as well as a few presidential candidates stateside I won't name here. Though we are certainly not in the Great Depression, the notion of politician as "man-of-the-people" who is an economic saviour is still a popular theme that consistently leads to more gov't and as always with more gov't- more corruption and LESS FREEDOM.

Find a youtube video of Huey Long or see the original.

Considering that half the dialogue is unintelligible use the English subtitles option and view this as a foreign film (I'm not joking). Southern accents aren't usually too difficult to understand if you are from elsewhere however the actors are either from England or Brooklyn and I'll bet even Southerners can't understand them. Give it a try and you'll see that the movie becomes a lot more enjoyable.

Ehh!....that's how I feel about "All the King's Men"....ehh! Based on the exploits of the real-life Gov. Huey Long of Louisiana in the person of Willie Stark as "interpreted" by Sean Penn and written AND directed by Steve Zaillian (and that is where I see the problem in this film; Zaillian who wrote Schindler's List (Widescreen Edition), Awakenings and Gangs of New York (Two-Disc Collector's Edition) maybe should have stepped away!!!)

A great cast of actors, very miscast, a wandering screenplay, uneven direction, a film badly in need of a dialogue coach...what else? This film seemed as if it aspired to greatness, but alas I was left ultimately flat after 128 minutes. Sean Penn was overbaked and Winslet and Ruffalo undercooked. Clarkson-spot-on as she always is, but not much of a part! Hopkins as a Louisiana Judge????????

Set designer, Patrizia Brandenstein (Amadeus - Director's Cut (Two-Disc Special Edition)), does expert work, only to have it choked out by ton's of closeups. What a waste!

Even the extras on the DVD did nothing to really spark my enthusiasm any more than the film tried to do. Filmed on location? Big deal when you hardly see any of it! Truly, a film with lots of rhetoric with no real punch. Hmmm....just like politicians!

James Horner soundtrack was better than this film was.

I'm a big fan of the original version starring Broderick Crawford. Like any remake, if you could combine the best of both versions together you would have the perfect movie. That said, I thought Sean Penn did a good job portraying Willie Stark. But I think he suffers from a script that is mess. I think it was a mistake first of all to move it to the 1950s. Huey Long, who Stark is based on, came to power in the grips of the Great Depression which explains why he built all those roads and bridges and the University and new capital. I think Steven Zaillian tried to be faithful to the book. He included scenes explaining the relationship between Jack Burden and the others at Burden's Landing, but they were choppy. He also doesn't do as good a job explaining Willie Stark before be became the power thirsty man that he turned in to. Patricia Clakrson's character is also wasted in this version. I'm glad the producers included the deleted scenes on the dvd release. They fill in a lot of the gaps and I just can't understand why they were ever left out in the first place. For example, the scenes explain what drove the doctor to shoot Stark. You find out that Tiny planted the seeds. Why was this scene deleted from the theatrial version? One other criticism is that it is difficult at times to understand Penn and some of the dialogue. I almost needed subtitles. Overall, it was a well intentioned effort that just falls a bit short.