Like many stage adaptations, this film is a collection of set pieces without a tight overarching narrative. Not only is it adapted from the stage, but from the middle of a three-act play, which serves to remove some of the context; the viewer is just plopped into the middle of this one. I thought the performances were good overall, but the production was somewhat lacking. Perhaps the streaming version I saw was a bad transfer, but the cinematography was nothing to write home about, the contrast was way too high in many of the daylight scenes, and the colors looked as if the film was shot on old, faded film stock. A bit of a strange soundtrack too, but I liked it and I thought it was fitting. I would recommend it if you like Foote, Faulkner, or Duvall.

This movie was awful. The ending was absolutely horrible. There was no plot to the movie whatsoever. The only thing that was decent about the movie was the acting done by Robert DuVall and James Earl Jones. Their performances were excellent! The only problem was that the movie did not do their acting performances any justice. If the script would have come close to capturing a halfway decent story, it would be worth watching. Instead, Robert DuVall's and James Earl Jones' performances are completely wasted on a god awful storyline...or lack thereof. Not only was I left waiting throughout the movie for something to happen to make the movie....well an actual movie...not just utterless dialog between characters for what ended up being absolutely no reason. It was nothing more than common dialog that would have taken place back in that period of time. There was nothing special about any of the characters. The only thing special was how Robert DuVall portrayed a rambling, senile, drunk, old man. Nothing worthy happens during the entire movie including the end. When the movie ended, I sat amazed...amazed that I sat through the entire movie waiting for something of interest to happen to make watching the movie worth while. It never happened! The cast of characters suddenly started rolling making it apparent that the movie really was over and I realized that I had just wasted 2 hours of my life watching a movie with absolutely no plot and no meaning. It wasn't even a story. The entire movie takes place in a day's worth of time. That's it. It was one day in the life (and death) of some Southerners on a plantation. How much of a story can take place in a single day (other than the movie Training Day)? The acting performances by the entire cast were excellent, but they were grossly wasted on such a disappointment of a movie...if you can even call it a movie.

In today's world of digital fabrication, there is no computer than can replace the actor and writer. Alas, this type of "character driven" film is far too rare these days. Duvall's performance as well as James Earl Jones are faithful to their audience's high expectations. I wonder if this movie was made for TV? It has a "close-up" personal quality to the narrative. It is an understatement to say that the performances are all Outstanding. The only thing that keeps it from being a cinema Masterpiece is the lack of a great Cinematographer, but pretty pictures are not everything. How can talent the likes of Jones and Duvall continue to produce such fine work in an age where actors pose for the digitizing?

Robert Duvall is one of America's treasures. He should be given a Lifetime Achievement Award annually at the Academy Award ceremonies, and this film allows him to demonstrate, once again, how it's done. If you agree, by all means run, don't walk, to your nearest video store and rent "Rambling Rose", another of Duvall's gems...which, incidentally, also co-stars Lukas Haas, another underrated and terrific actor, as he shows in "Convicts". Most of Lukas' contribution is in the form of reaction to Duvall's ramblings, but the two of them, along with everyone else in the film, create a marvelous since of realism. Duvall is a mentally addled old drunk who can't remember that he said the same thing to you a few minutes ago, or what you told him, and it's to Duvall's credit that he manages to avoid being boring, as this sort of character so easily could have been. Duvall's character is also disreputable and mistreats the convict labor he has contracted for to work on his farm, but still you empathize with him. Lukas is, as always, wide-eyed (no one had larger eyes, or used them better) and innocent but not stupid. Horton Foote provided realistic dialog and a sure sense of place. This is a film not only to enjoy, but to study.