It's too bad this film is always being compared with John Ford's production of "The Grapes of Wrath." While they both cover general ground, they are quite different structurally. "The Southerner" is almost plot less, relying on slices of early American life as homesteaders struggle to keep their farms intact.
Apparently the critics are divided on this one, many calling it one of Jean Renior's greatest achievements, while others feel it only slightly above average. Admittedly, attention to innovative stark realism is paired with some rather predictable stock situations. All in all though for me, it's an engrossing film, and an honest one.
A great point of interest is Zachary Scott, in his second screen role. Minus his characteristic mustache and playing a simple "tiller of the soil," he seemed strangely cast. We're so used to his ultra-slick, amoral roles, that seeing him in this film is rather startling. Not to say he wasn't good at it. There's just something about his angular face and sharp, thin nose, that suggests he ought to be more in a tailored tux than wrinkly overalls.
Reading Scott's bio was informative: not a particularly happy life and career, despite his impressive seventy total credits. I got the feeling that Warner Bros. simply didn't know what to do with him, following "Mildred Pierce" and "Flamingo Road." Maybe they felt he was so convincing in these sinister roles that the public wouldn't buy him as other types. Whatever the case, his private life seemed rather glum and lacking vitality. (Could also be his first name may have been a downer in the long run.) The supporting cast of "The Southerner" is fine, and the film remains a strong depiction of early rural life in America.
Apparently the critics are divided on this one, many calling it one of Jean Renior's greatest achievements, while others feel it only slightly above average. Admittedly, attention to innovative stark realism is paired with some rather predictable stock situations. All in all though for me, it's an engrossing film, and an honest one.
A great point of interest is Zachary Scott, in his second screen role. Minus his characteristic mustache and playing a simple "tiller of the soil," he seemed strangely cast. We're so used to his ultra-slick, amoral roles, that seeing him in this film is rather startling. Not to say he wasn't good at it. There's just something about his angular face and sharp, thin nose, that suggests he ought to be more in a tailored tux than wrinkly overalls.
Reading Scott's bio was informative: not a particularly happy life and career, despite his impressive seventy total credits. I got the feeling that Warner Bros. simply didn't know what to do with him, following "Mildred Pierce" and "Flamingo Road." Maybe they felt he was so convincing in these sinister roles that the public wouldn't buy him as other types. Whatever the case, his private life seemed rather glum and lacking vitality. (Could also be his first name may have been a downer in the long run.) The supporting cast of "The Southerner" is fine, and the film remains a strong depiction of early rural life in America.