The Grapes of Wrath (1940)

Written By Nunnally Johnson

Directed by John Ford

1998 List Ranking: 21

2007 List Ranking: 23

I don’t know if this is common, but I remember that my high school, in tiny podunk Menifee California, had all the athletic coaches teaching other academic subjects, even if they didn’t necessarily seem qualified (my teacher for Spanish II was the cheerleading coach, and she had a habit of being pregnant, like clockwork, every two years, my year being one of them. Between her and the substitute we had for over half the year, I learned absolutely nothing and barely scraped by). I bring this up because this seemed to happen most often in history classes, so that my history classes were full of reading textbooks, taking tests, and watching movies (that is, to say, with very little actual instruction). In my Junior year U.S. History class, I recall that we watched this film, The Grapes of Wrath, but I honestly could not tell you the context, other than it was related to the Great Depression.

Having now watched it again, I actually enjoyed it more than I expected I would, although as the film doesn’t really give a lot of historical context (probably because the film was released at the tail-end of the Great Depression, so people didn’t really need context), I did find myself somewhat confused by certain things, but not enough to get lost along the way.

The Joad family

The Grapes of Wrath follows Tom Joad, played by Henry Fonda, who returns home to Oklahoma after being in prison for a few years to discover his family preparing to set off for California to look for work (this after the government (or land owners? THANKS HISTORY CLASS) kicked them off their farm). The film traces the family’s journey across the nation, detailing their meager triumphs and awful tragedies.

Henry Fonda and Jane Darwell

The primary highpoint of this film are the performances, anchored by Fonda. Despite him basically having only one facial expression throughout the entire film, he is able to convey quite a bit (although it’s usually apprehension or fear). I don’t think I’ve seen any of his other work, so I would enjoy seeing a bit more range, because he was still visually magnetic even with as little as he does here. The true standout, however, is Jane Darwell as the matriarch of the Joad family. She gives an intensely quiet performance, and she was just such a joy to watch; I could watch her recite the phone book and be entranced. This role earned her an Academy Award for Best Supporting Actress (one of only two Academy Awards the film won) and, for all you Disney fans out there, Darwell’s final role before her death was the Bird Woman in Mary Poppins, a role apparently specifically given to her by Walt Disney.

The Joad family (or, at least, what’s left of them) get’s their first sight of California

As I mentioned, the film doesn’t really give any context for the bigger social issues happening. For 1940 this is fine, because everyone watching the film has lived through the circumstances of the Great Depression. 80 years later, however, that context is sorely needed. I know the basics of the Great Depression (at least, I think I do, but WHO KNOWS THANKS PALOMA VALLEY HIGH), but there was still a missed opportunity to take a moment to explain things a little more in-depth.

As good of an actor as he is, this is literally the only face that Henry Fonda makes throughout the film

On its surface, I’d say the film is ploddingly slow, but every time I started to feel like checking the time, the film was able to move along to some new development. The film really is a great character study, at least for its few leads. The rest of the cast does admittedly get the short end of the stick, each getting one to two scenes to establish them and then never really focusing on them again. A great example is Rose of Sharon, played by Dorris Bowdon (a side note: what the HELL kind of name is Rose of Sharon? The characters pronounce it as “Roseashurn”, which also is strange, but ROSE OF SHARON?); We’re introduced to her, we find out she’s pregnant, her husband eventually ditches them, and then she just spends the rest of the film…sitting there with zero expression. I get that she’s sad, but…you could have had a mannequin sit there and saved the money from hiring an actress.

Anyway, back to the pacing. The film is a nice, slow burn of a rollercoaster, expertly showing how this one family (and, by extension, thousands of others) just cannot catch a break. Every minor gain they achieve is almost instantly negated by something as bad or worse. The film plays this very well, never letting the audience get too…anything. Just as the onslaught of despair becomes too much, there’s a victory. Just when things start looking up, there’s a setback. On paper, it seems like these would all cancel each other out, but it’s done just well enough to keep the audience invested in hoping for a happy ending.

I would be curious, at some point, to rewatch this movie after doing some more research to understand the bigger context this movie fits into. The 1930’s and 1940’s is a rough time for history (the 30’s for the Depression, the 40’s for the war), so understanding world history might be something that helps present these films in a clearer circumstance. Even without it, however, The Grapes of Wrath is an excellent movie for showcasing a couple of fine performances and dramatic tension. It’s not perfect, but it’s still enjoyable.

FINAL GRADE: B+