Who do we point the rifle at?

Rating: 9/10 (31 January 2012)

I got my orders, it ain't up to me, I didn't set the price, take it or leave it. We are confronted with an economic system that suppresses downwards; nobody is held responsible. It even seems that "nobody" doesn't even exist.
This is a story about how ordinary citizens, mainly farmers, gets affected by the big depression. We follow the Joad family who out of desperation tries to find a job in California. When they arrive at "the promised land" they quickly find out that life is hard to maintain. The jobs are difficult to find and when they find one the wages are an insult. Throughout the movie there is a constant battle to sustain the basic needs such as food and shelter. Despite this fight and the competition for the jobs the workers shows solidarity with each other but cannot use this to get proper organized even though a few tries (the story could be seen as a predecessor to "In Dubious battle" where the struggle to get the workers organized continuous).
The Joad family are very poor given the circumstances but nonetheless they are looked down upon and stigmatized; being poor equals being subhuman; An Okie. If they ask questions or making a statement in front of a policeman or guard they are threatened to loose their job or getting the label "agitator".
Only in one place do they find themselves at home; in the government camp. It is a society in its own that is a safe heaven. It is built on democratic principles and is looked upon as a threat by the big corporations who actively tries to destroy such. Democracy with it laws that regulates employer/employee relationship is a threat to maximum profit.
The movie is shot in Black and white, the men are lean and the dialogue is very direct and without polite manners. You sense that the farmers doesn't talk this way because of hostility but simply because it is part of their cultural identity. The dialogue is in many cases taken right out of the book. That doesn't make it a lesser movie; it is hard if not to say impossible to compete with Steinbecks sharp pen. It may be a challenge to sense the affection in the Joad family but is there although it is not expressed overtly.
In comparison the movie adaptation has a stronger focus than the more than 500 pages book had and therefore some of the characters didn't unfold enough to be understood properly. The ending is different but I think I understand the choice to let the movie finish off in a more bearable way.
The part of the story where the Joads arrive at a farm full of guards, to harvest peaches scared the hell out of me in the book but not so much in the movie. It felt like the Joads where held in a combined prison/zoo and the choice they had to leave wasn't a real choice; it was a choice between annihilation or accept gruesome and absurd life conditions.
The movie didn't dwell so much. It didn't stay so much with the important details that showed the reason to be desperate. How much can I get for a nickel? How much do I earn when I harvest a basket full of peaches? How much food can I buy for a day's work? Can I save money for the rainy days? Seems like boring details but to me these kind of never ceasing thoughts must have been a large part of being affected by the depression.
Steinbeck writes the story with anger. You sense that he is furious; this is a piece of fiction that was needed, that had to come and thank goodness Steinbeck took it upon himself to put into words what was going on during the depression.
The farmers are the 99% who tries to do what is expected of them. There is a growing sense of who the 1% are – and of course you can draw a parallel to the depression of today and the need to organize and criticize the financial system via the "occupy wall street" movement.
Regards Simon