‘All The King’s Men’
Screenplay written by: Steven Zaillian based upon Robert Penn
Warren’s Pulitzer Prize winning novel. (Also, writer of Schindler’s
List, The Interpreter, Hannibal, etc.)
Actors: Sean Penn, Jude Law, Sir Anthony Hopkins, Kate
Winslet
Directed by: Steven Zaillian
Rated: PG13 (Intense sequence of violence, sexual content and
partial nudity)
‘All The King’s Men’
Screenplay written by: Steven Zaillian based upon Robert Penn Warren’s Pulitzer Prize winning novel. (Also, writer of Schindler’s List, The Interpreter, Hannibal, etc.)
Actors: Sean Penn, Jude Law, Sir Anthony Hopkins, Kate Winslet
Directed by: Steven Zaillian
Rated: PG13 (Intense sequence of violence, sexual content and partial nudity)
Based upon the Pulitzer Prize winning novel, an honest and unassuming Louisiana town treasurer in the 1940s, Willie Stark (Sean Penn) is enticed by Tiny Duffy’s (James Gandolfini) proposition that he is the perfect candidate to run for office. Not knowing that Duffy secretly works for the opposing candidate with an aim to split the populous vote, Stark naively wants to make a difference and represent the common person.
Catching the attention of newspaper reporter Jack Burden (Jude Law), Stark is unwittingly catapulted into the political favor to overtake the existing politicians. That includes Judge Irwin (Anthony Hopkins), the father of Jack Burden’s childhood love (Kate Winslet). Though Willie Stark was once determined to provide a better quality of life for his constituents, he soon becomes a victim of the same corruption that he once opposed – with lethal ramifications.
He Said:
The laudable acting talent of Sean Penn, Kate Winslet, Jude Law, Sir Anthony Hopkins, et al, made “All the King’s Men” one of my most highly anticipated viewings this year. The first half had promise, but as the film continued I found myself hoping that the plotline or character development would grab me. It just didn’t happen. The film seemed to peak early in the first half, then droned on. When you see it, you’ll wonder if it was the writing, direction or editing that wasn’t worthy of the acting. Where the story should have lingered and reinforced critical elements, it did not. Where it should have made a compelling point, it didn’t pull it off, either. Unfortunately, all the anticipation for film turned out to be unwarranted, leaving the acting and cinematography the only noteworthy aspects.
On the R&R Scale (1-10):
6 for script: fragmented motivations, tie-ins at the end were unsatisfying.
6 for direction: great camera work vs. marginal story and character integration.
8 for acting: Law and Penn deserve loud applause – others mostly distracted from the film’s quality by their faulty accents.
6 for plot: another politician jaded by power.
7 for entertainment value
6.6 overall
She said:
Sean Penn was riveting when he shouted to the masses, “They fooled you 1,000 times, just like they fooled me! But this time, I’ll fool somebody! I’ll stay in this race. I’m on my own and out for blood!” This film should have been Oscar worthy from that moment on.
Despite Penn’s and Jude Law’s combined acting genius, the movie, somehow, did not resonate as it should have. Penn’s impassioned political jargon was unintelligible, with Hopkins and Gandolfini being the most unconvincing good ol’ boys I think I’ve ever encountered. It was clear early on that only Jude Law had the stellar performance as the facilitator of everyone’s political ambitions.
Then the film had Stark making a fast jump from being an earnest representative of the people to the kind of self-serving politician that he originally sought to displace. Lacking the motivation for Stark’s change, the character and the story did not have the essential ingredient of empathy. In the end, what resonated was only the adage that “absolute power corrupts absolutely.” All the rest was mostly a loosely woven detraction.
On the R&R Scale (1-10)
5 for script: a few great lines over timelines that didn’t instill empathy of either character or story.
7 for direction: Great cinematography and authentic settings vs. unrealized potential.
7 for acting: Penn and Law so good that you hardly noticed the others.
5 for plot: undoing a political moral compass – yet again.
5 for entertainment value.
5.8 overall
