Related articles and links |  1 of 4

Movie critics have condemned quite a few films in recent weeks, and their reviews came as no surprise. No one expected, for example, the Tim Allen sci-fi comedy Zoom to be anything but disposable entertainment. And the formulaic basketball flick Crossover was a failure—plain and simple.

But what has happened here? How could it be that All the King's Men is receiving almost unanimous rejections from film critics?

It could have been a contender. All the King's Men is based on Robert Penn Warren's fantastic, Pulitzer Prize-winning novel. It was directed by Oscar winner Steve Zallian. It boasts a brilliant cast that includes Sean Penn, Kate Winslet, Anthony Hopkins, Mark Ruffalo, Patricia Clarkson, and Jude Law.

And yet, even though this story about the rise and fall of a crowd-pleasing Southern politician paints a profound picture of ambition, greed, and corruption, the film just isn't working for critics.

That goes for most of the Christian press critics too.

Peter T. Chattaway (Christianity Today Movies) writes, "Watching All the King's Men, it is hard to believe that … Zaillian is an Oscar-winning screenwriter (for Schindler's List). For that matter, it is hard to believe that this film was made by the same guy who previously directed Searching for Bobby Fischer and A Civil Action, two very fine films about, respectively, a young chess prodigy and a personal injury lawyer whose greed is thwarted by pride, obsessiveness and, ultimately, a sort of moral self-reflection."

Chattaway concludes: "All the King's Men is just murky and muddled throughout. This film was originally going to come out one year ago, but it was held back because those who saw it found it confusing and hard to follow. Zaillian spent months re-editing the film, but apparently to no avail; all the king's horses and all the king's men can't put this movie back together again."

Greg Wright (Looking Closer) says, "For a film that is about shameful manipulation, both personal and political, Zaillian disingenuously and shamelessly pulls the audience's strings."

David DiCerto (Catholic News Service) is similarly bothered. "Like its demagogue protagonist, [the film] aspires to greatness. Yet, while achieving it to some measure, both movie and man fall short."

Frederica Matthewes-Green (Frederica.com, originally published in The National Review) files a complaint about certain cast members. "Penn is a terrific actor … but the accent suits him like a bad toupee. … I say this as a native southerner. I have heard a lot of accents across the south. I grew up in Charleston. I have lived in New Orleans. I never encountered anything like Mr. Penn's accent outside of movies like this." And she adds that Jude Law "does no better …."

Marcus Yoars (Plugged In) acknowledges the insights about corruption offered by this tale, but he concludes with some disappointment that the film is so unrelentingly bleak. "All the King's Men isn't trying to score any religious points. It's certainly not trying to tell us who has the ability to turn our darkness into light, our bad into good, our soil into flesh. It won't even acknowledge that such supernatural hope exists. It's dedicated to preaching, as Time's Richard Schickel notes, unrelenting and unavoidable blackness and bleakness.

Christian Hamaker (Crosswalk) stands up for the film. "[All the King's Men] vividly illustrates the adage that power corrupts and absolute power corrupts absolutely. … [T]he film sneaks up on us and delivers a vivid, powerful conclusion, ending with a final image that reveals the wages of sin. Whatever its drawbacks … All the King's Men is, in the end, a memorable story that sticks to your soul."

next page... |  1 of 4

share this page

September (Web-only) 2006, Vol. 50