Origins
• The film is actually a remake of
Josef von Sternberg's downbeat
1931 film An American Tragedy,
starring Sylvia Sidney, Phillips
Holmes, and Frances Dee.
• Both films are adaptations of
Theodore Dreiser's best-selling
1925 novel, An American Tragedy.
• Dreiser based his story on the
sensational Chester Gillette and
Grace Brown 1906 murder case in
the state of New York.
Cinematic Technique
•
•
•
•
•
•
Director George Stevens uses montage, close-ups, and
very slow scenes to create an almost dream like
atmosphere. The plot moves along slowly but with great
fluidity.
Similarly the use of steady slow drums as George
contemplates murder creates a hot, dark, and menacing
atmosphere. The viewer knows that something awful is
going to occur.
Montgomery Clift’s performance as George Eastman is
considered a master class in “method” acting, which was
at that time a new paradigmatic challenge to the
classical style of acting.
In classical acting, everything from speech, emotion, and
movement is overly dramatized giving it an unreal
quality. The audience could tell that the characters were
“acting.” The method, by contrast, was an attempt to try
not to “act” through actually becoming the character,
making it real, and believable. Along with Clift, Marlon
Brando and James Dean embodied this approach.
Clift uses his eyes, facial expressions, and deliberately
understates his actions, words, and emotions. This is a
strong counterpoint to the classical style displayed in all
films up to this period—a now outdated style that is gone
from acting entirely. Indeed, we laugh if we see anyone
attempt to “act” today!
Filmmaker Steven Soderbergh attempted to make a
classical-style film recently with The Good German
(2006) starring George Clooney, Cate Blanchett, and
Toby Maguire. The film cost $32 million to make and as
of April 2007 had grossed $1.3 million.
George Eastman
•
•
•
•
Who is George Eastman?
Hailing from the disreputable side of the
family, he is poor, uneducated, and has
“run away from home” – abandoning his
saintly mother and her missionary work.
Is George Eastman is sympathetic
character? Do we like him? Do we root for
him?
Isn’t he nothing more than an outright
villain?
–
–
–
–
•
•
He craves status, material gain, and
excitement.
He disobeys company policy by dating,
sleeping with, and impregnating a coworker.
He constantly lies to Alice and every other
honest person he comes into contact with.
He contemplates if not commits premeditated, cold-blooded murder.
If George is the villain, why do we love
him so?
Because director George Stevens makes
us love him by casting the gorgeous, kind,
boyish Montgomery Clift and making him
polite and eager to please.
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
Author Theory: How do you think the director,
George Stevens, wanted us to feel about Angela
Vickers? How did audiences react to her?
Isn’t Angela nothing more than a superficial, spoiled,
debutant whose only concern is the who, when, and
where of the next social engagement.
If this is so, why does George Eastman fall in love
with her?
Certainly she is beautiful, but she represents the
vehicle by which he can achieve all of his desires in
terms of economic and social success – something
he could never achieve had he stayed at home with
his mother.
Once again we see a variation on the classic theme:
seduction of the father by the daughter and the
corresponding destruction of the mother. How so?
Angela’s brief phone conversation with George’s
mother speaks volumes about this dynamic.
Angela sees George at once as both the
embodiment of everything that is her father (George
is an Eastman after all, is accepted into the family
business and will some day run it yet at the same
time he appears to be modest, shy, and kind – the
exact opposite of her father and the men she
normally dates. In this sense she immediately
recognizes George as a most familiar/safe person
and also the person who can heal the wounds of her
inner child. Of course this will never happen as
George’s ambition destroys them in the end and she
is wounded all over again – this time far worse than
before when she was a child.
Angela Vickers
Elizabeth Taylor was 18 when she played Angela Vickers –
her first “adult” role.
Alice Tripp:
Don’t Rock
the Boat
•
•
•
•
•
What was your reaction to Alice Tripp?
Did you hate her?
Stevens deliberately cast Shelley Winters in this role, rather that say Elizabeth
Taylor. Why?
Isn’t Alice the most honest, genuine, good person in the film. Isn’t she someone
to be respected and admired? She is single, has a job, lives alone is a nice
place, and has innocently fallen in love with someone just like her: a shy,
basically good kid from a modest background.
How did young female audiences react to Alice? Did they want to grow up to be
just like her? Did they want to be just like Angela Vickers? What about young
men, are they looking to marry the Alice Tripps of the world or the Angela
Vickers’?
Abortion in a
pre-Roe World
•
•
•
•
•
•
Is the word “abortion” ever used?
No, as it was forbidden by the censors.
How was the topic of abortion handled?
What was the doctor’s reaction?
How is single-motherhood portrayed?
Would the topic be handled differently if this film
had been made post-Roe v. Wade (1972)?
The Prosecutor
•
•
What do we learn about prosecuting
attorneys from Raymond Burr’s portrayal
of District Attorney Marlowe?
How is his demeanor throughout?
– He is overly dramatic and blatantly violates
courtroom procedure in order to “play to the
jury.”
•
What techniques does he use at the trial to
win the case?
– Circumstantial evidence: the couple
quarreled before they got to the lake,
George rented the canoe under a false
name, the coroner concluded Alice had
been struck by a blunt instrument before
she drowned.
– Using the canoe and oar to physically
illustrate the crime.
– What about the rope? Was this the
prosecutor’s great mistake?
•
•
Why does he prosecute this case when he
only has circumstantial evidence (why not
plea bargain, which is what happens in 9
out of 10 cases anyway)?
Because the DA is going to ride the
coattails of this case into the Governor’s
Mansion and then on to the White House.
Raymond Burr was so good at his role and audiences
loved him so much in this genre that he went on to
play another criminal attorney in “Perry Mason” every
week on CBS from 1957-66. He then played a wheelchair bound detective each week in “Ironside” from
1967-1975. He returned to his role as “Perry Mason” in
over two dozen TV movies from 1985 until his death in
1993.
Morality
• The smallest indiscretions can
grow into big problems.
• A weak-minded individual can
succumb at a crucial moment
and have the rest of society
turn its back on him.
• Desire v. Deed: If you have
decided to do something evil,
then change your mind before
you do it, are you as guilty as if
you had? If not, why? If so,
where is the line drawn
between deciding upon an evil
action and entertaining the
idea?
Class:
Keeping up with the Eastman’s and Vickers’
•
•
•
•
•
How are class differences portrayed in the film?
The film is set in idyllic 1950s upstate New York. Is it a coincidence that
Rochester, NY is where Eastman-Kodak is headquartered?
George Eastman embodies the American myth of rugged individualism as
he works his way from his Midwestern, lower-class, religious
fundamentalism up the elite, east-coast, corporate ladder despite his lack of
education and training. Of course he knows someone to get in the door,
which is another powerful yet somewhat contradictory American myth.
Angela is protected from the trial and press because of the bargain struck
by the rich and powerful: the DA and George’s Uncle. She is not required to
testify and her name is never mentioned in any way: only “another woman”
is referred to.
Is the theme of class difference (economic/social status) outdated as this
film was made over 40 years ago?
Conclusion
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
Did George kill Alice?
It’s just a bunch of circumstantial evidence.
The director, George Stevens, deliberately chooses
NOT to show us the alleged murder (just as
Hitchcock never showed us the murder in Rebecca).
Why?
By selectively disclosing bits of circumstantial
evidence, the filmmaker can lure the audience into
the wrong conclusion about what actually happened;
and then the filmmaker springs the trap!
In terms of author theory, the circumstantialevidence filmmaking technique is meant to be an
argument about the imperfections of formal legal
structures.
If “innocent” persons are convicted on the basis of
circumstantial evidence, is justice served?
Well, we don’t really care do we as long as it’s the
disadvantaged – in this case a poor, uneducated,
boy – who are caught up in that system.
So although we may never know whether George
killed Alice, it doesn’t bother us very much because
he is expendable.
Do you think audiences got this point? Do you think
that they believed George was innocent and should
be set free so that he can live happily ever after with
Angela Vickers? Would they live happily ever after?