Inherit the Wind (1960)

• Year: 1960
• Released: 30 Aug 1960
• Country: United States
• Adwords: Nominated for 4 Oscars. 3 wins & 11 nominations total
• IMDb: https://www.imdb.com/title/tt0053946/
• Rotten Tomatoes: https://www.rottentomatoes.com/m/Inherit_the_Wind
• Metacritics: https://www.metacritic.com/movie/inherit-the-wind
• Available in: 720p, 1080p,
• Language: English
• MPA Rating: Passed
• Genre: Biography, Drama, History
• Runtime: 128 min
• Writer: Nedrick Young, Harold Jacob Smith, Jerome Lawrence
• Director: Stanley Kramer
• Cast: Spencer Tracy, Fredric March, Gene Kelly
• Keywords: lawyer, teacher, trial, courtroom, politician,

	8.1/10
	75/100
	93% – Critics
	91% – Audience

Inherit the Wind Storyline

Teacher B.T. Cates is arrested for teaching Darwin’s theories. Famous lawyer Henry Drummond defends him; fundamentalist politician Matthew Brady prosecutes. This is a very thinly disguised rendition of the 1925 “Scopes monkey trial” with debates between Clarence Darrow and William Jennings Bryan taken largely from the transcripts.

Inherit the Wind Play trailer

Inherit the Wind Photos

Inherit the Wind Torrents Download

Inherit the Wind Subtitles Download

Inherit the Wind Movie Reviews

a film (sadly) very relevant in current times, but also watchable for its towering stars

Sometimes a film becomes dated over time, that it lacks relevancy due to the way its filmed and its content. But in the case of Inherit the Wind, Stanley Kramer’s production in terms of acting and staging is dated, but the themes are sadly still painfully relevant. Evolution vs. Creationism is still a hot button topic, though of course it shouldn’t be (and the Supreme Court has ruled against Creationism as unconstitutional), but maybe even more shocking is to see the town of Hillsboro and how it could be like some small towns in America, mostly the South and the Midwest. One wonders if the mob could be as large and howling and fervent today as it was in Hillsboro (or how it was during the actual Scopes-Monkey trial in the 1920’s).

But what stays most passionate about the film, and also at its most flawed, is its conviction about the issue. Kramer is a right director for this material, if not the best. It’s full of passionate speeches- it could also be said ‘preachy’ not too ironically enough in some scenes- and blazing courtroom scenes that are not very realistic (the way the lawyers speak and speechify to the jury and the people in the courtroom and, of course, the audience in the theater), but somehow they’re highly enjoyable. This doesn’t mean the writing in the film is always great, or all of the characters. But the film is compulsively watchable ‘issue’ film-making, self-important but full of poignant touches.

The wisest choice that Kramer made, akin to what he did with The Defiant Ones, is put BIG actors in these BIG roles. Chiefly these are for Henry Drummond, the defense attorney played by Spencer Tracy, and the prosecutor Matt Brady played by Federic March (or rather, devoured by March). Like Frost/Nixon, the film becomes really as much about these two men, two old characters who have known each other over the years and have a real respect/hate relationship with one another (see the scene where they’re on the rocking chairs to see their connection). So throughout the film, while the issue of evolution vs creationism is brought simmering to a boil, Tracy, a sensational actor, has to try to keep up with March who is so over the top that he cracks the ceiling with a sledgehammer.

Best of all is to see their showdown when Drummond puts Brady on the stand, a theatrical gesture but in keeping with the fact of the case (William Jennings Bryant really was called to stand during his own trial), and in having these two actors yell and stare and make big gestures at each other. If nothing else, it’s worth it to watch the film for these two, though I might consider Tracy the winner overall, while March gets points in individual scenes, like when he grandstands towards the end when the case is dismissed (also when he stands up for the girl Rachel Brown when she is “damned” by her father, but as a calculating move to get her on the stand).

Which brings me to some of the flaws in the film. Kramer has a lot that he wants to say as a filmmaker, but he doesn’t know how to tweak anything down past it being super theatrical. It would’ve helped, for example, to cut just a little of the dialog, some of the pompous exchanges between characters (albeit some of the dialog is actually pretty funny, mostly when Gene Kelly’s reporter disses Brady). Another problem was Rachel Brown, who firstly is concocted as a contrivance (hey, let’s make the daughter of the evangelical reverend also the fiancé of the science teacher), but more-so that she’s just a lame character, poorly written like many characters end up being in Kramer films, if not anywhere near as bad as the daughter in Guess Who’s Coming to Dinner. And the last little moment of the film, when Drummond puts together two specific books together, is a completely tasteless gesture, meant to appease both the believer and non-believer sect after what was a satisfactory ending between Tracy and Kelly where the former tells off the latter.

But faults aside, the film does carry some legitimate power, and if nothing else I would watch it again just for the scenes between the two big stars. It’s an actor’s picture as much as a “message” picture, and as the themes carry some strong weight for discussion, not to mention the impressive semi-frightening sight of the Hillsboro religious mobs, it’s really the actors who make it a (near) must-see.

Well done but historical accuracy gives way to theatrics

This film is a reworking and dramatization of the so-called ‘Scopes Monkey Trial’ which was held in Dayton, Tennessee in 1925. It’s about a teacher who was prosecuted for teaching evolution–even though the state legislature prohibited this at the time.

“Inherit the Wind” is a very good film. I liked the acting of Spencer Tracy and most of the characters (though Frederic March did seem to overact a tad). However, as I watched, it became obvious that it was based on a play and the historical accuracy wasn’t that important. Again and again, the film stresses big moments and soliloquies over the actual story. This isn’t so much a complaint– more about the style of the film as well as its being seen as a history lesson when it really isn’t. After all, if it’s supposed to be a history lesson, why not use the real names of the characters?! Why not say that the lawyers are William Jennings Bryan and Clarence Darrow and that the defendant is Mr. Scopes?

Relevant today, and elevated by two powerhouse performances

Inherit the Wind is a very good film. The story does start off very well, with a great and ambitious subject matter and concept that is relevant today, but in the second half or so it meanders in drags in the pace, consequently one or two of the later scenes lack conviction.

That said, it does look marvellous with striking cinematography, and Ernest Gold’s music is also quite good. Stanley Kramer’s direction proves he was the right man for the man, and the screenplay engrosses and makes you think.

It is the acting though of Spencer Tracy and Fredric March that makes Inherit the Wind so worth watching. Powerhouse doesn’t come close to describe how good the performances of these two actors are, and their chemistry is a real treat.

All in all, a very good film, relevant and worth watching for Tracy and March. 8/10 Bethany Cox