Overrated with flawed performances, but an overall effective adaptation of John Steinbeck's classic novel

Rating: 8/10 (9 June 2010)

John Steinbeck's novel, "The Grapes of Wrath", was originally published in 1939 and turned out to be both highly acclaimed and highly controversial. This film adaptation was released the year after the book and was also a success. Today, both the book and the movie are still hailed as classics. I recently finished reading the lengthy novel with the intention of watching this 1940 adaptation soon afterwards. Aware of its general reception, I was expecting a great film, better than both of the adaptations of Steinbeck's "Of Mice and Men" I had seen (the 1939 and 1992 versions). My expectations were definitely not exactly met. As much as I'm sure many would disagree, I don't think it lives up to the source material. I was still impressed, however.
In Depression-era Oklahoma, Tom Joad has just been released from prison. He was sentenced to seven years for killing a man in a drunken brawl, but has been let out on parole after four years. On his way back to his family's farm, he meets Casy, a former preacher he used to know, who has since lost his faith. Together, they go to the Joad farm to find that it has been abandoned. Muley, a former neighbour, comes along and tells the two of them about the dust storms and how they have led to the eviction of farming families from their land! The Joads are now at Uncle John's place, and will soon be leaving for California, just like so many other farming families in the Dust Bowl are doing, including Muley's, but he refuses to leave Oklahoma. The next day, Tom and Casy go to Uncle John's farm, so Tom is reunited with his family (his parents, grandparents, siblings, and uncle). The Joads then begin their journey to California to search for employment, and take the former preacher with them on their truck. However, their destination may not be what they are expecting.
Since I was expecting this to be a great film, I was expecting great acting, but unfortunately, I didn't see much of that. Henry Fonda's performance as Tom Joad is a memorable but flawed one, and this is clear from the scene where he first talks. Most of the other cast performances can probably be described the same way. Most of them aren't exactly bad, but Dorris Bowdon's performance as Rose of Sharon can be fairly poor, and the way Shirley Mills (Ruthie) says her lines can also be bad. Jane Darwell won an Oscar for the role of Ma Joad in this film, and her performance is probably better than most of the others here. There were times when I wasn't quite as moved as I felt I should have been, especially around the beginning, such as the part where Muley talks about losing his land. It just didn't seem convincing enough to me. However, I did find some parts more moving, especially later on, and found that maybe it got more intriguing after the Joads' arrival in California. For the most part, the film did hold my interest, with the story and the cinematography, though I also found that it ended too soon, leaving out too much of the novel, even though the movie is just over two hours long.
After reading John Steinbeck's 1939 novel, it seemed to me that an excellent movie certainly could have been made out of it, and was convinced that this widely watched adaptation was it, but while many definitely think it is, I think it's overrated. However, overall, it is a good drama. Obviously, there are some differences between the novel and this adaptation. For much of the film, it closely follows the book (though obviously not everything is included), but takes more liberties later on. Also, some parts of the book obviously couldn't have been done in Hollywood in 1940, including the ending. This was long before the fall of Hays Code. Still, despite the differences, I would say this adaptation of "The Grapes of Wrath" is worth watching if you like the book (or maybe if you haven't read the book but like movies from this era), though you obviously COULD find yourself somewhat disappointed, maybe even severely disappointed, even if most people who have seen it haven't been disappointed at all.