East of Eden (1955)

East of Eden is based on the John Steinbeck novel of the same name. It takes place in the California cities of Monterey and Salinas which are both about 100 miles north of where I live. The film, a period piece, takes place during the start of the first World War. In the film, Cal (James Dean) does not feel like his father cares about him. When his father loses almost all his money in a failed business attempt he decides that he will earn the money himself through war profiteering in order to win his father's love. It doesn't really seem like much of anything happens in this film so that's clearly a drawback. I haven't read Steinbeck's novel so I can't say how representative of it this film is.

The film stars the likes of James Dean, Julie Harris, and Raymond Massey. Andrews probably delivers the best performance and the rest are all decent. Dean's performance is great at times but at other times it feels awkward and forced. Jo Van Fleet received an Oscar for best supporting actress for playing the role of James Dean's mother but again, I'm confused by this selection as she only really appeared in one scene in the entire film. While her character is critical to the plot, the critical aspects do not require her to be on screen at all. The backstory told about her early on is part of what drives the plot so I'm baffled as to how she won this Oscar.

This film was decent, but I was hoping for something better. Quite often it felt like Rebel Without a Cause set forty years earlier. I probably should have watched those in the reverse order as it would probably be more correct to say Rebel Without a Cause often feels like East of Eden set forty years later. James Dean plays almost the same character and plays him in much the same way. The film addresses some major themes although they're probably addressed in much better detail in the novel which Steinbeck called his greatest ever. I think the The New York Times said it best describing this film as having "energy and intensity but little clarity and emotion". It's worth watching for a James Dean fan but not something I'd recommend for someone looking for a great film.

71/100
C-

UP NEXT: A lesser-known Hitchcock film, Foreign Correspondent.

catbox_9 wrote:

This film was decent, but I was hoping for something better. Quite often it felt like Rebel Without a Cause set forty years earlier.

That reminds me of another complaint that I had while watching the film. While Dean's acting and character feels the same as in Rebel Without a Cause this film actually felt a lot like Gone With the Wind set during the wrong war. You've got families living on plantations/farms, a war breaking out in the middle of the film that turns out to be a lot less great than people were hoping for, everyone's lives falling apart, etc. The problem is Gone with the Wind is vastly superior and even though it's twice as long (and that's not an exaggeration) it seems to flow a lot better and the story is far more interesting.