Date: January 21st, 2000
Cast:Marc Blitzstein - Hank Azaria
Diego Rivera - Ruben
Blades
Gray Mathers - Phillip Baker-Hall
Nelson Rockefeller - John Cusack
Hazel Huffman - Joan
Cusack
Hallie Flanagan - Cherry Jones
John Houseman- Cary
Elwes
Orson Welles- Angus
Mcfadyen
Olive Stanton - Rachel Watson
Tommy Crickshaw- Bill
Murray
Countess LaGrange - Vanessa Redgrave
Aldo Silvano - John Turturro
Director: Jeremy Blackman
I guess I was one of those rare children who really did not mind having homework in school (whether I did it or not is another story). I have always loved, and cherished learning, about things I don’t know, or even more about the things that I do. Hence, I have always had a weakness for historical based movies. I feel that they are an opportunity to bring history to life, and give life and another dimension to those words. However, I do not feel it should be necessary to have an in-depth knowledge, i.e., do homework, before seeing a movie, in order to understand it. This is where Cradle Will Rock fails in my opinion.
The movie attempts to show the effects of communism paranoia on society in the late 30s and early 40s. Robbins attempts this by using some mostly unrelated, and sometimes perplexing, story lines, The government tries to shut down theaters, believing they are run, or populated by communists. Others cavort with the "reds" either knowingly, or unknowingly, because of their financial stature and want for more. A desperate writer, with an overactive imagination, writes a play to show the sign of the times around him. Without knowing any more about the situation, this is what I could gather and learn from the movie. I will give it credit, it did make me want to learn more, but not for the usual good reasons that a movie does. While my curiosity was piqued, it was never sated. No background information was given as to what was happening, why it was happening and who, no matter how recognizable the names, these people are. I would have even been happy with an opening montage, or monologue, giving even a brief synapses, instead of just throwing me into the mix, and hoping that I would catch on at some point. The story is an interesting on, showing the obvious class divisions, between rich and poor, accusers and the accused, oppressors, and the oppressed. Robbins tries to tell us this by juggling the different story lines. Somehow they just never really seem to come together sensibly with exception of the ever noticeable "red" presence looming over them. The scene transitions are choppy, and shoddily done, like a first-time director who has a great cast, a good idea, and a dream, but does not have the talent or vision to execute it. Robbins, though has proven with Dead Man Walking, that he can tell a story, I’m not sure what happened here. Maybe he tried to do and tell too much, assuming the audience knew things we did not, and wanted to know other things that come across as just boring and uninteresting. Matters are not helped by a mostly wasted monster cast. Both Cusacks, John and Joan, Bill Murray, Cary Elwes and Phillip Baker Hall all seem so lost and out of place. Parts of the movie look like they got to play dress up in old clothes, and pretend like they are back in olden times. Some glimmers of brilliance are shown by Cherry Jones, whom I haven’t seen before, but is very powerful and emotional while fighting for the survival of the theaters. Also John Turturro, an underrated actor, Angus Mcfayden, who goes over the top as an egotistical boozing Orson Welles, and Emily Watson, who is impassioned, as a homeless waif with dreams of fame. The climax of the movie is indeed an energetic, and inspiring one, but the fact remains, who will be awake, or patient enough to stick around to see it.
Ultimately, Cradle Will Rock comes across as a badly produced stage play. It tries to tell too much, too quickly, without completely developing any characters, or letting us care. Like Talented Mr. Ripley, the transitions are choppy, Robbins never lets me know, or care about the people, and worst of all it is just a downright boring production of a great idea. Good directors can seemingly take any subject matter, and make it good. How many war movies have been made? Yet Oliver Stone, and Steven Spielberg can continue to take over done topics and make them good. Here, Robbins shows that he is nowhere near that league of directors, but he could be. He shows potential in some of the scenes that he pulls off. However he seems to have a little bit more to learn about the art of character development, keeping the audience interested, and not assuming that they know everything about a certain situation. I get insulted when a filmmaker feels the need to hit me over the head, and tell me certain things, that I obviously know, or can grasp. However, when it comes to historical movies, never assume anything. Even recent history films like Three Kings, and The Insider, gave us background information, or used the characters to let us know things that were not obvious to us. I cannot recommend this movie, unless you were alive and remember all of this, or are a history buff with a working knowledge of these events. Otherwise, do some research, go to a library, and wait for the Cradle to fall into your local video store. ($1/2 out of $$$$)
Agree? Disagree, Questions? Comments?
