"When a mob takes it upon itself to identify, try, condemn, and punish, it is a destroyer of a government that patriots have died to establish and defend."
A couple of blowhards without moral compasses whip a crowd up into a frenzy of hate, leading to an institution of government being stormed and destroyed. The mob is more willing to believe an unsubstantiated rumor than let the facts play out in a court of law. Thank god there was video evidence that could be used to help identify the culprits. It's trite to ask whether that sounds familiar, but it's impossible not to see the similarity to the real-life events of 1/6/21.
The script for this film was based on the 1933 lynching of two suspects being held in a San Jose jail for the kidnapping and murder of Brooke Hart. What was horrifying about it was that California Governor James Rolph actually endorsed the lynching, saying he would pardon anyone who was convicted. It's particularly onerous when those in positions of power subvert the rule of law so blatantly - and we see a representation of Rolph in a character who stops the National Guard from being sent out to protect the jail. (Again, ringing any bells?) It's a little unfortunate that this wasn't an African-American lynching case given the statistics spouted in the courtroom scene had to be stilted in that direction, but I don't fault the film for that because it was 1936, and the case selected was itself compelling.
Warning, spoilers from here on.
It's all very riveting, but I think where the film missteps is when it has the victim of this violence (Spencer Tracy) secretly survive, and then attempt to get mob members tried for murder anyway. The intention was likely to show his own lust for revenge getting the better of dispassionate rule of law, but it defies belief, and undercuts the power of the film. It would have been far more artistically truthful had he died, and his fiancée (Sylvia Sidney) used to carry on the prosecution of the thugs responsible. It doesn't ring true at all when she points out to him how the members of the mob probably regret their actions of that day. Ha! The film seems to want to take a little left turn into happy-land, with Tracy and Sidney ending up smooching, the townsfolk all having learned some lesson (you know, rather than being tried for attempted murder), and our faith in humanity restored because Tracy didn't let these people get convicted. It's all ridiculous.
A couple of blowhards without moral compasses whip a crowd up into a frenzy of hate, leading to an institution of government being stormed and destroyed. The mob is more willing to believe an unsubstantiated rumor than let the facts play out in a court of law. Thank god there was video evidence that could be used to help identify the culprits. It's trite to ask whether that sounds familiar, but it's impossible not to see the similarity to the real-life events of 1/6/21.
The script for this film was based on the 1933 lynching of two suspects being held in a San Jose jail for the kidnapping and murder of Brooke Hart. What was horrifying about it was that California Governor James Rolph actually endorsed the lynching, saying he would pardon anyone who was convicted. It's particularly onerous when those in positions of power subvert the rule of law so blatantly - and we see a representation of Rolph in a character who stops the National Guard from being sent out to protect the jail. (Again, ringing any bells?) It's a little unfortunate that this wasn't an African-American lynching case given the statistics spouted in the courtroom scene had to be stilted in that direction, but I don't fault the film for that because it was 1936, and the case selected was itself compelling.
Warning, spoilers from here on.
It's all very riveting, but I think where the film missteps is when it has the victim of this violence (Spencer Tracy) secretly survive, and then attempt to get mob members tried for murder anyway. The intention was likely to show his own lust for revenge getting the better of dispassionate rule of law, but it defies belief, and undercuts the power of the film. It would have been far more artistically truthful had he died, and his fiancée (Sylvia Sidney) used to carry on the prosecution of the thugs responsible. It doesn't ring true at all when she points out to him how the members of the mob probably regret their actions of that day. Ha! The film seems to want to take a little left turn into happy-land, with Tracy and Sidney ending up smooching, the townsfolk all having learned some lesson (you know, rather than being tried for attempted murder), and our faith in humanity restored because Tracy didn't let these people get convicted. It's all ridiculous.