In rural Oklahoma, Tom Joad (Henry Fonda) is walking and hitchhiking home from prison, after a stay of four years. After taking a knife at a dance, Tom hit the attacker with a pan, killing him. Nevermind that it was self-defense, Tom still gets sent to prison. He hasn't heard from his parents, Ma (Jane Darwell) or Pa because they aren't the "writing types". A fierce dust storm makes Tom's final few steps treacherous. Arriving back at their small cabin, where his family are sharecroppers, Tom and his passing friend, Casy (John Carradine) are startled to find no one at home. A shell-shocked neighbor informs the other two that the family has been kicked off their land in foreclosure. They are nearby at Uncle John's house, where his family is about to suffer the same fate. Its the Depression and the Dust Bowl has ruined the land, taking off the top soil; no one can grow crops. When Tom catches up with his Ma and company, they are overjoyed to see him, for their plans are to pack a truck and move to California, where handbills show pickers are needed. Grandpa doesn't want to leave the only home he has ever known, so they drug him with medicine and haul him along. Now on the Mother Road, route 66, the journey is difficult; the truck breaks down frequently, no one wants them to stay long anywhere they rest, and Grandpa dies of a stroke. Will California really be the Golden, Promised Land? NOT ON YOUR LIFE! This heartbreaking adaptation of Steinbeck's classic is a must-see for the whole wide world. This family of hard-working folks has one calamity after another, just trying to earn an honest and living wage. Those who lived in the Dust Bowl part of the country were hit especially hard, as the soil had been overworked and winds took the topsoil off, creating damaging storms to crops, humans, and animals. No better were the "lies" of the handbills, advertisements that migrants were needed in California, where over 300,000 poor helpless folks showed up for very few jobs. The cast, with Fonda at the helm, is wonderful as is the scenery, costumes, and careful direction to show the truth of a desperate situation. Wanna get down on your knees and thank the Lord for what you have, Americans? You will when you view this amazing film!

This remarkable movie is among the best ever done for emotional content and in spite of its old age, it confirms me 3 facts:1) I have always heard John ford about open fields, distant horizons and that's true here: the unlikely journey of the family offers us stunning visuals about the wild, dangerous and yet beautiful american landscape and yes, it's maybe even more gripping in black and white!2) This old movie is an eye opener about exploitation of men by men and it's much more essential than the today cries about skin, gender, sex or arms. The last prejudices are just like toys for babies, bones for dogs, something easy and inoffensive to focus the attention while the main, big attack is left untouched and unchallenged! In a way, those old american movies were thus more intelligent, assertive and free back then than today because i can't name a single recent movie about the poor, the exploited and the left-over of the American Dream while crisis and inequalities have never been so strong! 3) This old movie is like Missisipi Burning a precious proof for the case prosecuting America! So this country genocides natives, crushed workers rights, corrupts its politicians, makes war all over the globe, practiced slavery and segragation but ends up considered like the worldwide light of freedoom! Just unbelievable (and excellent propaganda)! Here the case is clear: money is the only value, reference to deal with people life, law is made for the rich and powerful and that's all! Thus destroying farms is lawful, mourning relatives and memories is a waste of time... In the same period, Soviets were into collective farming and they are the only bad guys! Honestly, in America, lands is owned by a few tycoons so i don't see a fundamental difference. In Germany, labor camps were built and those that we watched in sunny free California seems to be like them: workers behind barb wire, in barracks with the minimum of comfort and exploited to their death!And for sure, Ma Joad is an exceptional angel, a unforgettable ray of light in this world of terrible darkness: a must see if you have human feelings!

The Grapes of Wrath is a novel that I read and enjoyed in school, and this movie is a classic in its own right. The story is well-known at this point, and the movie powerfully tells the story of the Joad clan as they journey to California. There are some changes from the novel, frequently for the better. Some of the elements of the story in California were re-arranged and ends on a more optimistic note than the novel. The difficulty in expressing the more abstract chapters of the novel is clear, but I think they are well-done. The movie is more vaguely optimistically technocratic, but that agrees more with my politics, so I hardly mind!(I saw this movie on June 22, 2017.)

The Grapes of Wrath directed by John Ford from a screenplay by Nunnally Johnson was the film adaptation of the very well known and renowned book of the same name by John Steinbeck. The film like the book is set during the era of the Great Depression in the 1930s and follows the Joad family from Oklahoma as they deal with poverty on their way to the 'promised land' of California after being thrown out of their own land and property.The themes of the film revolve around the concept of the loss of home. After the Joads get uprooted from their home like many other farmer families, they head out for California in their truck. This truck becomes their mobile home. They become wanderers in search of a real home. It is unreal how the issue of migrants that enrich Steinbeck's novel and Ford's film is still extremely relevant to this very day. We see the local officials mistreat, mislead and exploit them and all the poor migrants like the Joads go along with it with the hope that there might be a light at the end of the tunnel. The Darwinian concept of the 'survival of the fittest' also comes very much into the equation. Once the Joads leave their land, some members of the family lose their grit, hope and conviction like Grandpa, Grandma and Pa, while on the other hand, the misery and sorry plight of the circumstances emboldens Ma and makes her the source of strength for everyone including Tom. Tom Joad is a very interesting character. He starts out as the angry loner. He then comes into contact and becomes a part of the family unit. But the misery and struggles force him in an ironic sense to re-embrace the identity of the outlaw loner to bring about a change. The purity and sweetness of the mother-son relationship between Tom and Ma is given a lot of attention by Ford and Johnson, even more so than Steinbeck did in the novel.Ford's direction in the film is understated and not very flashy. There are moments of great artistic imagery, eg: the 3 shadows trampled by the tractor marks, Gregg Toland's brilliant cinematography under Ford's direction involving shadows specially in the scene where Tom and Casy meet Muley, the brilliant shot where the Joad family leaves on their truck bidding adieu to their home and Ford decides to hold the shot a few seconds longer after they have left to show the wind, dust and garbage blowing towards the house,etc. Ford's direction in the scenes in the Transient Camps is absolutely brilliant. He uses the moving camera from the perspective of the Joads to introduce them and the viewers to all the other migrants. The other aspects of those scenes involving the hungry kids are very touching.But the film I thought is flawed. First of all, clearly due to all the restrictions that films of that era were plagued by, there are a lot of crucial aspects of the original novel that get watered down a bit. I am certainly not someone who gets annoyed when the film is very different to the original source material because I have the maturity to understand that cinema and literature are two completely different fields. But I do think if the political aspect of the novel was explored more boldly in the film, it would have worked to its benefit. Another aspect of the film that put me off a bit is some of the hokey nature of the written lines. Nunnally Johnson's writing at times gets too cheesy and overt. The overt nature of some of the lines spoken by the characters might work on the page of a book, but on screen, it does stick out in an ugly way. The acting by the ensemble cast is also a bit too theatrical at times which made it difficult for me to maintain a constant emotional attachment with the characters. Although the quality of acting is not consistent from everyone, but Henry Fonda as Tom Joad, Jane Darwell as Ma Joad and John Qualen as Muley are the ones who stand out. Fonda accurately conveys the repressed anger and frustration that makes up Tom's character with moments of touching emotions. Darwell is as likable as ever as Ma. She exudes a caring and loving quality that is impossible to avoid. She also plays the character with some strength as Ma does in a way become the backbone of the family after they leave their home. Although John Qualen has a peculiar appearance, but the power of his performance forced me to really empathise with Muley's pains and struggles.'The Grapes of Wrath' is not flawless. In my view it has its fair share of issues much of which was down to rigid restrictions that were imposed upon the films of that era. But even with its flaws, it still is a very solid John Ford film which made me feel for the characters. Just like the novel, it forces the viewer to put themselves in the shoes of the central characters and live the struggle with them.