Frank Capra is a filmmaker who I’ve been desperate to see more of after loving ‘Arsenic and Old Lace’ and ‘It’s a Wonderful Life,’ the latter of which being one of my favorite films ever made. I think Capra has a good emphasis on character and snappy dialogue that make his films approachable to modern audiences even with how old they are. ‘Mr. Smith Goes to Washington’ is no exception; this film is filled with quippy, well-written lines from start to finish and with a subject material about corruption in congress, this film feels more relevant now than ever.The film’s plot concerns the titular Mr. Smith, played by perhaps my favorite actor, Jimmy Stewart. When a state’s senator passes away, the leader of the Boy Rangers, Jefferson Smith, is hand picked to be a replacement senator. While in Congress, the idealistic, naive Mr. Smith has his morals tested and his character besmirched. ‘Mr. Smith Goes to Washington’ aims to answer the following question: does idealism belong in an adult’s world? Is America really the land of the free where there’s justice for all, or is that just a lie the rich conjured up to better control those below them?Despite these weighty themes, Mr. Smith Goes to Washington isn’t afraid to embrace humor, with lots of hilarious moments and lines that come as a result of this ‘fish out of water’ premise (the montage of Mr. Smith going around punching people for laughing at him might be the greatest montage in movie history). Mr. Smith is a great character: likable in his cheerfulness, relatable in his clumsiness, and ultimately admirable in his resilience. Similar to Henry Fonda's character from 12 Angry Men, Mr. Smith seems to represent the ideal american: someone who has a belief in the goodness of the nation and its people, while also standing up for himself and his values when he sees them undervalued.At first, it’s clear Mr. Smith is out of his element in Washington with his shaky voice and nervous twitching, which just makes his eventual change to being more stern and confident all the more satisfying to watch. This really feels like a movie where the whole world is trying to tear down its protagonist, and some scenes, sporting an unexpected amount of tension, really make you worry that the idealistic Mr. Smith might be broken.Although Mr. Smith has his flaws, Stewart’s spectacular performance makes it impossible not to root for him. By the end you become elated that your sympathy with the character has paid off in one of the funniest and powerful 3rd acts in history, where Mr. Smith gives a long, passionate speech about his ideals. It’s shocking how much tension amasses in the last quarter of the film, as Mr. Smith not only has to defend himself in a court that’s itching to throw him out, but he also has the Boy Rangers in his hometown attempting to combat the slanderous newspaper articles being written by Mr. Smith. It’s a hectic 3rd act with a lot being thrown at you, but it never feels messy. The editing is just frantic enough to convey the maddening excitement of the situation without feeling obtrusive as it cuts back from Congress to Mr. Smith’s hometown. It’s a conclusion that elevates the film from something good to something spectacular.As I mentioned, Frank Capra’s emphasis on character is really what makes me love his films and luckily, this film has so many colorful, layered characters that all contrast Mr. Smith beautifully. Jean Arthur as Clarissa is a marvelous character, cynical and hesitant to embrace the same idealism that Mr. Smith sports. Edward Arnold’s character of Jim Taylor is great in representing the dangers of money in politics, being a corrupt businessman who has control of seemingly everything: newspapers, congressmen, businesses.Taylor seems to be indicative of someone taking advantage of the American Dream and warping it into something insidious. One of Taylor’s victims is Senator Paine, played by the incredibly talented Claude Rains, who is one of the most interesting characters I’ve seen in a film recently. Senator Paine is corrupt, but he doesn’t want to be. He’s a very sympathetic character whose erratic actions in the story always seem to come from a place of reason. Like so many characters in the film, he changes a lot by the time the credits roll. Other characters shine through too no matter how small their role is, making this film feel like a living, breathing world.As much as I loved this film, I do wish it had a more thorough resolution. Although the ending is a great place to end, I would’ve loved to have seen more of Smith and Saunders’ relationship. As one can guess, Smith and Saunders eventually form a powerful amount of respect for one another, but the film never makes it blatantly clear that they have a romance. I read that there were lots of deleted scenes that take place after the filibuster scene, with Mr. Smith going back to his hometown, taking part in a parade, accepting the apology of Senator Paine, and Mr. Smith’s mother accepting Saunders as her daughter-in-law.Honestly... all that stuff sounds great and it REALLY makes me wish it was in the movie. Apparently, test audiences didn’t like that stuff. Screw test audiences. They’re the reason my favorite movie King Kong has a deleted scene I’ll never be able to see, because back then deleted scenes, from what I can understand, were quite literally deleted, which sucks.After looking into this film, it apparently received lots of backlash during its release for portraying US Senators as folks capable of being corrupted through money. Maybe that was unrealistic for the 1930’s, but in 2020, this film is practically a documentary.Money is everywhere in politics. Money impacts the way senators vote, the way they talk. Senators and representatives will bend over backwards to defend certain people, certain organizations, for no other reason than it would be advantageous to themselves and their interests to do so.While I’m sure this film’s suggestion that money can influence people may have been ‘too much’ for some people, especially at the time, it’s pretty clear to me that this is a serious issue that runs rampant today. When Jim Taylor calls the newspapers of his state and ask them to smear Mr. Smith’s name, it makes me think about the biases certain large news organizations can take, how they too are influenced by the power of the rich and may not have the public’s best interests in mind.Perhaps Mr. Smith Goes to Washington is a film people need to watch now more than ever, to be reminded of the importance of being true to yourself. Mr. Smith never seeks to take advantage of others or to be controlled through money; he acts only to help others. It goes without saying that more politicians in this country need to take his example. via /r/movies https://ift.tt/33tCQL1
No comments:
Post a Comment