So what do we think of it nowadays?
Obviously, when "The Defiant Ones" first came out, it was probably a
revolutionary idea: a white man and a black man chained to each other escape from a chain gang and have to put aside their differences to survive. I guess that nowadays, we look at it and feel that they were trying to look good by portraying social issues. No matter, it is a pretty good movie, and Tony Curtis and Sidney Poitier do an intense job as John "Joker" Jackson and Noah Cullen, respectively. Not to sound wimpy or anything, but the movie does have a good point in affirming that if we want to accomplish our goals, we do have to accept each other. Stanley Kramer did always have some good ideas for movies, with this one, as well as "Inherit the Wind", "It's a Mad, Mad, Mad, Mad World" and "Guess Who's Coming to Dinner".. 
Brave but over-earnest allegory
A film very much of its time, which I don't think personally has aged
too well, although it still makes for some interesting and occasionally viewing. The writing of the movie is very much in the shadow of Steinbeck and Tennessee Williams, against the background of the burgeoning Civil Rights movement in America at the time, but for me, buckles under the weight of its own over-earnest good intentions, despite the considerable efforts of both cast and crew. I was surprised to learn that the screenplay wasn't adapted originally from a play, given the amount of static movement in the film coupled with a lot of speechifying. I also just couldn't get my head round the premise of two racially different felons just happening to be chained together and finding themselves on the run together in the Southern States, all the film's gritty realism scuppered for the sake of allegory. There's still a lot to savour, the cinematography is excellent in its near-documentary realism, while the two leads throw themselves unstintingly into very exacting physical parts. I like both Curtis and Poitier but wasn't completely convinced by their respective performances, Curtis's accent comes and goes and you can see him straining to act seriously in the first half of the film - however he improves as the film progresses and ultimately convinces by the ending. Poitier is again forced to adopt a degree of racial stereotyping, notably his crooning of the plantation-type song, but his acting is more consistent that Curtis and for me more enjoyable. However as stated above the idea that these two, the racially prejudiced Curtis and the proud Negro Poitier could get along for more than five minutes, never mind pour out their collective hearts along the way as the get all philosophical and universal on us, is too much to swallow. In support, Cara Williams is fine as the abandoned country wife, desperate for love and a future with Curtis (there's an excellent dissolve shot as their relationship is consummated) but what a difference it would have made to the dynamics of the film if she had fallen for Poitier instead - not, of course that such a storyline film could ever have been green-lighted at the time, while Theodore Bikel is excellent as the pursuing sheriff who retains his humanity, refusing to bow to the pressure of his posse to bring the wanted duo back more dead than alive. The petty squabbling of the pursuing pack, together with the lynch-mob mentality of a small outpost where the convicts seek food are obviously thrown up as contrast to the developing get-along relationship between the escapees, but as I indicated it was shown in too sharp relief. Certainly a worthy and well-meaning film but too unbelievable and portentous to really hit home, at least with me.. |
Trailers: |
