Inherit the Wind Review

girl by locker says: In the first movie of our new decade, we watched Stanley Kramer’s Inherit the Wind. It is a riveting courtroom drama based on the 1925 Scopes Monkey Trial and argues the sides of Darwinism vs. Creationism. One of the main points I walked away with is how the argument about evolution has evolved little over the past 87 years. Meaning, living in Georgia this debate comes up frequently though now Darwinism is the incumbent ideology and people want Creationism included in the school curriculum.

The main characters of the movie are Spencer Tracy (who portrays the real Clarence Darrow and argues in defense of Darwinism) and Matthew Harrison, portraying William Jennings Bryan (a 3-time presidential candidate arguing on behalf of Creationism). They are a dynamic duo and scenes between the two of them are electrifying. They make the movie. There are many monologues sharing ideas and points of view which was likely risky in 1960 and would be even riskier today. Audiences don’t have the attention span to listen to such rhetoric. However, the acting was so well done and eloquently delivered that it works.

My one complaint with the movie is that Stanley Kramer had an obvious agenda and set out to portray the Creationist side as a group of frothy, ignorant and rabid people while the Darwinist side is a group of calm intellectuals. While I support Darwinist ideas, it is my experience that reality is a bit more nuanced and it would have been nice to see it portrayed that way. That being said, I still give the movie 4 out of 5 stars on Netflix. The movie remains relevant and the acting is superb.

Juror #3 says: Over fifty years have passed since the movie Inherit the Wind was filmed. Based on the 1925 Scopes Monkey Trial over the teaching of Darwinism in public schools, the topic is as relevant today as it was in 1960, although I believe the conversation has “evolved” over time – please excuse the pun.

There is one indisputable fact in Inherit the Wind, and that is concerning Spencer Tracy’s performance as the defense attorney Henry Drummond, which is understatedly brilliant. Fredric March plays the prosecuting attorney Matthew Harrison Brady. He does a solid job creating a caricature but next to Spencer Tracy’s performance it leans into the absurd. In my opinion Gene Kelly gives the second-best performance as the biting newspaperman.

The story is as you would expect, with the small-town religious people fearful of evolution dismissing religion, verse the big-city men wanting to open the masses' minds. There is a nice twist at the end, which I thought tied things up nicely without hammering the audience over the head with any further points.

A negative was the directing, which I found uninspired. I actually found myself a bit bored during some of the courtroom scenes, which I’ll blame on the Director seeing as though the script was solid for the most part.

I think watching this movie in 1960 would have probably blown me away, but, again, as I think the conversation on the topic is a bit different today, it lacked the impact I was expecting. I would love to see Spencer Tracy and Fredric March debate scientific fact verse theory verse religious faith verse psychology of human understanding. Hmmm, will that last sentence remain valid in forty years? If history can be used as a guide the answer is yes.

I give Inherit the Wind 3/5 stars, although Spencer Tracy almost forced it into a 4 based on his performance alone.