It takes a long time sometimes: Fifty years of To Kill a Mockingbird

NCM Fathom Events, Turner Classic Movies, and Universal bring Robert Mulligan’s TO KILL A MOCKINGBIRD (1962) back to select cinemas on Thursday, November 15th, in celebration of 100 years of Universal Pictures and this landmark film’s 50th anniversary.

When TO KILL A MOCKINGBIRD was released to cinemas at Christmastime 1962, the Civil Rights movement was still young enough that Medgar Evers, Malcom X, and Martin Luther King, Jr. were all still alive. Also still living were such future martyrs to the American Civil Rights Movement as Addie Mae Collins, Cynthia Wesley, Carole Robertson, and Denise McNair (young parishioners of Birmingham, Alabama’s 16th Street Baptist Church, killed by a bomb blast on September 15, 1963) and James Chaney, Andrew Goodman, and Michael Schwermer (civil rights workers murdered in Philadelphia, Mississippi on June 21, 1965 by members of the Mississippi White Knights of the Ku Klux Klan). I wonder now, as I have in years past, if any of these people saw TO KILL A MOCKINGBIRD before they fell victim to bigotry, intolerance, and a paradoxically church-nurtured inclination towards evil. I guess I’d like to think they did. I’d like to think the film gave them hope. I can’t say with any certainty that these people had hope in their hearts at the time of their deaths but I know that all of them were where they were and doing what they were doing when they were so cruelly cut down because they were hopeful and because they wanted to inspire hope in others.

Assassinated slightly less than a year after the general release of TO KILL A MOCKINGBIRD, US President John F. Kennedy had championed legislation that would survive him as the Civil Rights Act of 1964, signed into law by his successor, Lyndon B. Johnson. The Civil Rights Act of 1964 was put forward to strengthen the 14th Amendment to the Constitution, which assured in the aftermath of the Civil War equal rights to all Americans, even to former slaves who had been denied that status by the Dred Scott Decision. (An earlier civil rights act, signed into law in 1875 by President Ulysses S. Grant, proved largely unenforceable during the Reconstruction and was overturned by the Supreme Court in 1883 as unconstitutional.) Obviously, given the horrific acts of violence and domestic terrorism that followed in the wake of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, this historic piece of legislation was slow to change popular opinion. Nearly a half century later and we’re still stepping on hot spots of racial intolerance (note the “Put the White back in the White House” and “Don’t Re-Nig” tee shirts that appeared during this year’s Presidential election) — which only proves what a forward-looking and gutsy piece of filmmaking was TO KILL A MOCKINGBIRD fifty years ago. Bracingly frank, the film centers on the trial of black man in Maycomb, Alabama, in 1932 for allegedly raping the daughter of a white sharecropper, as well as on the the homelife of his court-appointed defense attorney, a widowed lawyer raising two young children alone. Based on the 1960 Pulitzer Prize-winning novel by Harper Lee, the film is not about race relations, per se, but race relations do sit at the back of the story throughout and step forward for a commanding courtroom scene that occupies much of the film’s second act, pointing an often bittersweet recollection of arguably simpler times towards the categorization of genuine, unendurable, almost operatic tragedy. And yet, if TO KILL A MOCKINGBIRD were only about race relations in America, were only about that court trial and its terrible resolution, only about intolerance and ignorance, only about wrong and right, then we likely would not be celebrating the film’s golden anniversary in such a major way. It would instead sit alongside GENTLEMAN’S AGREEMENT (1947) and A PATCH OF BLUE (1965) and other well-meaning, humane, and correct films that nonetheless feel obligatory rather than essential.

Pitched as a memory piece, the recollections of a woman (the voice of Kim Stanley) who grew up poor in the Deep South during the Depression, TO KILL A MOCKING BIRD is bracketed by expressions devotion — at the beginning, for a time and a place that no longer exist, and at the end with the remembrance of acts of kindness that endeavored to scratch some measure of right out of a terrible injustice. The brilliance of TO KILL A MOCKINGBIRD is that it does not foreground love, does not make of it a fetish as do so many sentimental films, but instead locates it within a constellation of associated emotions — and none more crucial to the narrative than shame… the shame of a broken farmer (Crahan Denton) who must pay off an entailment for services rendered by lawyer Atticus Finch (Gregory Peck) with produce from his fields rather than the cash he does not have, the shame of the summer visitor (John Megna) who must invent an imaginary father of great wealth and accomplishment to replace the one he never knew, the shame of angry old Nathan Radley (Richard Hale) over the existence of his “maniac” son Arthur (Robert Duvall, in his film debut), the shame of decent Tom Robinson (Brock Peters) for being accused falsely of a sex crime by the daughter (Collin Wilcox Paxton) of a white sharecropper (James Anderson) and made to stand trial in front of his fellow citizens and the congregation of his own church, the shame of Maycomb sheriff Heck Tate (Frank Overton) at being unable to protect innocent people… and ultimately the shame of Atticus Finch who, for all his intelligence, courage, and dedication to fairness, realizes in one awful moment that the values of respect and decency that he has instilled in his young son (Phillip Alford) and daughter (Mary Badham) are too often not recognized, valued, or repaid by the real world.

TO KILL A MOCKINGBIRD unreels as a series of revelations — some big, some small — that culminate in a devastatingly acute understanding of people, their dreams, their frustrations, failures, and motivations — a sensitivity that goes much deeper toward addressing the root of prejudice than finger-pointing or grand statements about the way things should be. Much of the credit goes, of course, to source novelist Harper Lee, as well as to writer Horton S. Foote, who adapted the material. One walks away from TO KILL A MOCKINGBIRD with a feeling of intense gratitude, not only to the authors and to director Robert Mulligan and producer Alan J. Pakula for taking a chance on material that had no particular guarantee of being big box office (which it was) but to the cast as well. It’s easy to be thankful to Gregory Peck, Phillip Alford, John Megna, Brock Peters, Robert Duvall, and the wonderful Mary Badham because the characters they play are so rich, so nuanced, so real and so good for this world but one even feels a debt of thanks to the actors who had to play the bad guys — James Anderson (compare this role to his turn as a white supremacist in Arch Oboler’s FIVE), William Windom (as a detestable prosecuting attorney), and Collin Wilcox Paxton (whose deeply injured Mayella Violet Ewell is more to be pitied than despised) — their presence gives the fictional Maycomb County depth and shadow. A number of utility players are also indispensable, among them veteran character actor Paul Fix who communicates his disgust with the injustice heaped upon Tom Robinson with body language and stoic silence (but, oh, the way he slams the door on his way out of the courtroom!) and Frank Overton, whose speech to Peck at the end of the film has become, in my old age, TO KILL A MOCKINGBIRD‘s defining scene.

“Neighbors bring food with death and flowers with sickness and little things in between.”

In its final frames, TO KILL A MOCKINGBIRD reminds us that we take away from this life what is left us, what others impart onto us (be those things material or inspirational) and what we are able to salvage for ourselves from what we have lost. Elmer Bernstein’s lyrical score — one of the most knee-bucklingly wistful and haunting compositions ever run behind a motion picture — comes close to being a character in and of itself (how fitting it is entirely absent from the 40 minute courtroom scene), walking with us as these events unfold and leaving us bereft at parting. (Hand on heart, I’m all but crying into my own mouth just thinking about it.) Made in the 60s, set in the 30s, but just as relevant in the 21st Century as it was 50 years ago, TO KILL A MOCKINGBIRD is an uncommonly wise motion picture that never mistakes topicality for personality, and a time capsule reflecting days gone by that, upon opening in the present day, hits you with an unexpected breath of fresh air.

Later this week I’ll be writing about TO KILL A MOCKINGBIRD‘s unintentional endowments to the horror genre. Stay tuned!

24 Responses It takes a long time sometimes: Fifty years of To Kill a Mockingbird
Posted By David Kalat : November 11, 2012 5:43 pm

RHS–that completely rocked. Thank you for such an eloquent celebration of one if my favorite films. Beautifully put and right on.

Posted By David Kalat : November 11, 2012 5:43 pm

RHS–that completely rocked. Thank you for such an eloquent celebration of one if my favorite films. Beautifully put and right on.

Posted By Robert : November 11, 2012 7:11 pm

A truly fine essay Richard. Curious to know if you’ve yet to see Clarence Brown’s 1949 film INTRUDER IN THE DUST, a compelling adaptation of the William Faulkner novel that was shot in Mississippi. It would serve as a fine companion for MOCKINGBIRD. Both feature a youthful protagonist (with INTRUDER it’s Claude Jarman Jr. as Chick Mallison)cast into the middle of a racially charged criminal trial. Elements of this earlier film still remain unsettling to watch, and there is one brilliantly achieved sequence – a nocturnal journey by a boy to find the resting place of a dead man – that would have been drooled over had it been found in a Val Lewton thriller.

Posted By Robert : November 11, 2012 7:11 pm

A truly fine essay Richard. Curious to know if you’ve yet to see Clarence Brown’s 1949 film INTRUDER IN THE DUST, a compelling adaptation of the William Faulkner novel that was shot in Mississippi. It would serve as a fine companion for MOCKINGBIRD. Both feature a youthful protagonist (with INTRUDER it’s Claude Jarman Jr. as Chick Mallison)cast into the middle of a racially charged criminal trial. Elements of this earlier film still remain unsettling to watch, and there is one brilliantly achieved sequence – a nocturnal journey by a boy to find the resting place of a dead man – that would have been drooled over had it been found in a Val Lewton thriller.

Posted By Richard Harland Smith : November 11, 2012 11:15 pm

I sense a taste of Val Lewton in Mockingbird as well, from Boo Radley’s introduction via shadow to the walk through the woods that serves as the film’s conclusion. I’ll talk about these touches and more later this week. Thank you both for your very kind words.

Posted By Richard Harland Smith : November 11, 2012 11:15 pm

I sense a taste of Val Lewton in Mockingbird as well, from Boo Radley’s introduction via shadow to the walk through the woods that serves as the film’s conclusion. I’ll talk about these touches and more later this week. Thank you both for your very kind words.

Posted By John Maddox Roberts : November 12, 2012 12:13 am

Small correction: In the text you wrote Arthur and his father’s family name as Riley, not Radley. Otherwise, an exemplary reading of the film. I still remember its impact after 50 years. A few months after seeing it, I saw Brock Peters on stage as Joe in “Showboat.” He had a marvellous singing voice, but I don’t think I ever heard him sing on film.

Posted By John Maddox Roberts : November 12, 2012 12:13 am

Small correction: In the text you wrote Arthur and his father’s family name as Riley, not Radley. Otherwise, an exemplary reading of the film. I still remember its impact after 50 years. A few months after seeing it, I saw Brock Peters on stage as Joe in “Showboat.” He had a marvellous singing voice, but I don’t think I ever heard him sing on film.

Posted By Richard Harland Smith : November 12, 2012 12:19 am

Thanks for the correction, John… I was obviously thinking of the movie Boo Riley’s Back in Town!

Posted By Richard Harland Smith : November 12, 2012 12:19 am

Thanks for the correction, John… I was obviously thinking of the movie Boo Riley’s Back in Town!

Posted By Pamela Porter : November 12, 2012 3:39 pm

I am seeing this Thursday night on the big screen in Stroudsburg, PA.

I. cannot. wait.

I know as soon as Kim Stanley’s narration starts, I am going to bust out crying, and I don’t care.

<3

Pamela

Posted By Pamela Porter : November 12, 2012 3:39 pm

I am seeing this Thursday night on the big screen in Stroudsburg, PA.

I. cannot. wait.

I know as soon as Kim Stanley’s narration starts, I am going to bust out crying, and I don’t care.

<3

Pamela

Posted By Kingrat : November 12, 2012 6:54 pm

Thank you very much for this article. I’ll stick up for A PATCH OF BLUE, however, as another film which holds up well. It’s much better than I expected it to be. Sidney Poitier and Elizabeth Hartman are playing complex characters, not stereotypes, and the ending is both hopeful and subdued. After she goes to school, the two characters will probably never meet again, though we can think otherwise if we like.

Posted By Kingrat : November 12, 2012 6:54 pm

Thank you very much for this article. I’ll stick up for A PATCH OF BLUE, however, as another film which holds up well. It’s much better than I expected it to be. Sidney Poitier and Elizabeth Hartman are playing complex characters, not stereotypes, and the ending is both hopeful and subdued. After she goes to school, the two characters will probably never meet again, though we can think otherwise if we like.

Posted By Qalice : November 12, 2012 10:21 pm

I don’t have to hear a word; the score over the opening credits makes me cry every time. And you’re right — gratitude is the appropriate response. I saw this movie as a young child and I think it helped to shape me. If I’m right, it was surely an improvement.

Posted By Qalice : November 12, 2012 10:21 pm

I don’t have to hear a word; the score over the opening credits makes me cry every time. And you’re right — gratitude is the appropriate response. I saw this movie as a young child and I think it helped to shape me. If I’m right, it was surely an improvement.

Posted By Giselle : November 13, 2012 5:55 pm

Such a fantastic film and book. Will always be one of my favorites.

Posted By Giselle : November 13, 2012 5:55 pm

Such a fantastic film and book. Will always be one of my favorites.

Posted By Lucie Lew : December 6, 2012 5:23 pm

The core problem with this story is that it is fiction and it is put across as factual. The historic fact is that the opposite was often the truth. What this book and film is – is social propaganda at its best and most powerful.

Posted By Lucie Lew : December 6, 2012 5:23 pm

The core problem with this story is that it is fiction and it is put across as factual. The historic fact is that the opposite was often the truth. What this book and film is – is social propaganda at its best and most powerful.

Posted By Richard Harland Smith : December 6, 2012 6:11 pm

Lucie, I’m not sure I follow. First off, I don’t know anyone who ever mistook To Kill a Mockingbird, book or film, for a true biographical account and, secondly, the opposite of what was often the truth?

Posted By Richard Harland Smith : December 6, 2012 6:11 pm

Lucie, I’m not sure I follow. First off, I don’t know anyone who ever mistook To Kill a Mockingbird, book or film, for a true biographical account and, secondly, the opposite of what was often the truth?

Posted By Possible Movie RemAkes: Richard as Atticus Finch « the armitage effect : December 27, 2012 8:26 pm

[...] It takes a long time sometimes: Fifty years of To Kill a Mockingbird (moviemorlocks.com) [...]

Posted By Possible Movie RemAkes: Richard as Atticus Finch « the armitage effect : December 27, 2012 8:26 pm

[...] It takes a long time sometimes: Fifty years of To Kill a Mockingbird (moviemorlocks.com) [...]

Leave a Reply

Current ye@r *

MovieMorlocks.com is the official blog for TCM. No topic is too obscure or niche to be excluded from our film discussions. And we welcome your comments on our blogs and bloggers.
See more: facebook.com/tcmtv
See more: twitter.com/tcm
3-D  Action Films  Actors  Actors' Endorsements  Actresses  animal stars  Animation  Anime  Anthology Films  Art in Movies  Australian CInema  Autobiography  Avant-Garde  Aviation  Awards  B-movies  Beer in Film  Behind the Scenes  Best of the Year lists  Biography  Biopics  Blu-Ray  Books on Film  Boxing films  British Cinema  Canadian Cinema  Character Actors  Chicago Film History  Cinematography  Classic Films  College Life on Film  Comedy  Comic Book Movies  Crime  Czech Film  Dance on Film  Digital Cinema  Directors  Disaster Films  Documentary  Drama  DVD  Early Talkies  Editing  Educational Films  European Influence on American Cinema  Experimental  Exploitation  Fairy Tales on Film  Faith or Christian-based Films  Family Films  Film Composers  Film Criticism  film festivals  Film History in Florida  Film Noir  Film Scholars  Film titles  Filmmaking Techniques  Films of the 1960s  Films of the 1980s  Food in Film  Foreign Film  French Film  Gangster films  Genre  Genre spoofs  HD & Blu-Ray  Holiday Movies  Hollywood history  Hollywood lifestyles  Horror  Horror Movies  Icons  independent film  Italian Film  Japanese Film  Korean Film  Literary Adaptations  Martial Arts  Melodramas  Method Acting  Mexican Cinema  Moguls  Monster Movies  Movie Books  Movie Costumes  movie flops  Movie locations  Movie lovers  Movie Reviewers  Movie settings  Movie Stars  Movie titles  Movies about movies  Music in Film  Musicals  Outdoor Cinema  Paranoid Thrillers  Parenting on film  Pirate movies  Polish film industry  political thrillers  Politics in Film  Pornography  Pre-Code  Producers  Race in American Film  Remakes  Revenge  Road Movies  Romance  Romantic Comedies  Satire  Scandals  Science Fiction  Screenwriters  Semi-documentaries  Serials  Short Films  Silent Film  silent films  Social Problem Film  Sports  Sports on Film  Stereotypes  Straight-to-DVD  Studio Politics  Stunts and stuntmen  Suspense thriller  Swashbucklers  TCM Classic Film Festival  TCM Underground  Television  The British in Hollywood  The Germans in Hollywood  The Hungarians in Hollywood  The Irish in Hollywood  Theaters  Thriller  Trains in movies  Underground Cinema  VOD  War film  Westerns  Women in the Film Industry  Women's Weepies