MovieChat Forums > Odds Against Tomorrow Discussion > Tell me I'm wrong

Tell me I'm wrong

posted 20 years ago by film-29
17 replies | jump to latest

First of all I do like this movie. But, isn't it a tad racist since at the very end it equals a vile an despicable character like Robert Ryan's to Johnny played by Belafonte? I'd love to be mistaken because, I insist, I liked this movie very much.

If you think that this movie was made by the same man who made The Sound of Music... a very rare animal Mr. Robert Wise.

Does anybody know whether or not he's a healthy man?

I wanted to be the first kid on my block to get a confirmed kill.

[–] 20 years ago

[deleted]

[–] film-29 20 years ago

Harry Belafonte's character (being a crook and having somekind of inferiority complex) wasn't exactly a racist whereas Robert Ryan's was a despicable bigot.

I don't think these two could have ended better. Especially Robert Ryan's character who is evil at heart.

I wanted to be the first kid on my block to get a confirmed kill.

[–] misspaddylee 19 years ago

Johnny's bigotry ruined his relationship with his wife, and that is as sad as Earle's prejudice. When you put into perspective that Harry Belafonte was a co-producer of Odds Against Tomorrow I think you will see the ending in a different light.

[–] film-29 19 years ago

You might have a point about Johnny's marriage, but Belafonte’s character is not a bloody racist like Earle–who is a violent character–he has some kind of inferiority complex instead. Regarding Belafonte as a producer, he could have produced the film for many reasons (financial reasons among others.) That fact does not count as an argument. Anyway, Belafonte’s character is depicted under a more benign light than Earle, that’s clear. I don’t like the moral lecture delivered at the very ending I find it redundant, at the very least.

I wanted to be the first kid on my block to get a confirmed kill.

[–] misspaddylee 19 years ago

Harry Belafonte is not only an artist, he is an activist. That he would purchase the rights to the novel, and hire Abraham Polansky, a blacklisted writer, to do the screenplay speaks to me that Odds Against Tomorrow was a very personal project.

The Golden Globes nominated this film for Motion Picture Promoting International Understanding in the year of its release. The award was presented to The Diary of Anne Frank. It's a shame they discontinued that category.

I think Mr. Belafonte would be dismayed at your reaction and I would hope with this information you would rethink your attitude toward Odds Against Tomorrow.

You can lead a horse to water, but a pencil must be lead.

[–] film-29 19 years ago

I'm not talking about the people involved in the project (nor about their intentions) I am talking about the movie itself.

If I'm proved right Mr. Belafonte should be dismayed

I wanted to be the first kid on my block to get a confirmed kill.

[–] RichardHarlandSmith 19 years ago

I think Robert Ryan (who was in life a Liberal) and Harry Belafonte play two points on the same continuum in ODDS AGAINST TOMORROW. While the Ryan character would seem the more overt racist, baiting Belafonte's character and resenting his equal status in the gang, he is clearly the product of his upbringing; disenfranchised and displaced by the Dust Bowl during the Depression, he has been marginalized and alienated to the point where he needs ANY kind of Other to blame for his misfortunes (he's equally dismissive of his old Polish foreman as he is of the black man in the gang). Belafonte's character is easier-going, more integrated... but he's also disenfranchised and alienated and he resents his ex-wife's embracing of the (so coded) white Parent Teachers Association; he hates that she is able to integrate and he can't. Give Belafonte's character enough time and enough bad luck and he'd probably be as bad as Ryan's. In the end, neither man is able to let go his hatred of the other, even to the point of saving his own life and after they are both dead, no one lives to even know they hated one another. I like that lesson.

[–] 19 years ago

[deleted]

[–] wgawriter 17 years ago

Not exactly a racist? Is that like "a little bit pregnant?" Despicable bigot? Is there any other kind?

[–] JohnnyStaccato 16 years ago

Robert Wise's Odds Against Tomorrow (1959) is one of those films that bears the distinction of being the last noir ever (of the classic cycle, c. 1940-1959), a title sometimes contended or shared with Orson Welles' A Touch of Evil (1958). I don't think its any coincidence that these two films deal with race relations in the U.S.--the burgeoning civil rights movement and the like--which the political constructs of film noir's generic conventions could only perhaps inadequately address. Racial themes, though highly prevalent/relevant in that era in American history, are noticeably absent from the noir aside from a few exceptions, like the aforementioned films and No Way Out. Moreover, this apparent inadequacy may have accounted for the genre's demise altogether. (By the way, I use the term genre loosely.)

The "apocalyptic" ending of this film doesn't just signal the end of the noir era, but would also ideally signal the end of the old ways of thinking--finally moving beyond post-war cynicism and bitterness towards perhaps a more enlightened humanism. Johnny Ingram and Ernie Slater are seemingly exorcised from society because they're so inclined to reactionary hatred.

[–] aghillery 16 years ago

I just watched this movie on Turner Classic Movies, and I enjoyed it. I'd seen parts of it before, but not the ending.

I, for one, don't really see how you can equate Harry Belafonte's character, Johnny Ingram, to Robert Ryan's character, Ernie Slater, in terms of racism, as though they were equally or even similarly racist characters.

From the point that the two characters are first introduced, the Ernie Slater character begins to insult and otherwise slight the Johnny Ingram character in explicitly racist terms, for which he is immediately upbraided by Ed Begley's character.

It seems to me that Johnny Ingram's "racism" is nothing but a reaction (and an understandable one, at that) to the pretty explicit racism that he's subjected to by the Slater character. So, honestly, I don't see the Johnny Ingram character as a racist at all.

Perhaps I'm missing something. If so, please inform me.

[–] freezephyr 19 years ago

This film is about as anti-racist as one could get in 1959. If you know anything of Robert Wise and Harry Belafonte you could not think otherwise. The at ODDS Johnny and Earl fulcrumed by the stable eye on the ball Dave is the total point of tension for the story. They are against the future tomorrow of the social acceptance that is soon to be played out in the real world. Sorry for the puns but racism comes in many colors. Earl’s blatant bigotry is never less than honest whereas Johnny is always in the grips of his feelings of inferiority of the social acceptance of his wife and daughter (to the PTA); he thrashes at everything he holds dear because he cannot deal with his hatred of whittie. He may have different motivations but in that sense he is just as much a racist as Earl.

It is the climax that tells all. After the death of Dave, all stability is lost. Johnny and Earl become hell bent on destroying each other no matter the cost. In the end we discover that they are exactly the same burnt to unrecognizable crispy critters.

Why this film is not considered Film Noir is a mystery to me. Its only misgiving is that it came in a year later than the proclaimed coop de gras Touch of Evil. I can only suppose that the purists couldn’t bear not having Wells be the book ends (Alpha Citizen Kane, Omega Touch of Evil) of the greatest cinematic era in movie history.

As to Wise, one of the most diverse directors I know of, sadly died of heart failure last September.

[–] hq-3 17 years ago

Great analyses, freeze & smith!

See also the biography of Polonsky, "A Very Dangerous Citizen," by Buhle and Wagner, and "Blacklisted: The Film Lover's Guide to the Hollywood Blacklist" by the same authors.

Belafonte had the novel and approached the blacklisted Polonsky, asking him to "fix it." (Polonsky's name was not originally on the film; his front was John Killens.) According to these sources, Polonsky and Belafonte were to do more projects together dealing with race in the same raw realistic style, but were ahead of their time (Buhle and Wagner compare Belafonte in this film with Poitier's safer characterizations), and the projects didn't pan out.

Incidentally, the blow-up ending was Wise's idea, Polonsky thought it grandiose for the characters. My husband sees it as a metaphor of nuclear holocaust brought on by mistrust, also very topical for the time.

[–] teejay6682 16 years ago

you're wrong. the film is a caper film first and foremost. a message picture second. the caper and the characters are more important. and i like how harry belafonte's character isn't a completely perfect person like sidney poitier was in his "message" pictures. less preachy which makes it age better then something like "guess who's coming to dinner". the anti-racist themes of the film are pretty obvious though (to me at least).

[–] layton59 16 years ago

Spoiler Alert***********************************

I liked the ending.

The law officers looked at the 2 bodies after the giant explosion and could not tell them apart. I did not find it heavy-handed.

A poetic end to a racist.

***********************************************
Ye Olde Sig Line:

Liberals kill with ABORTION.
Conservatives kill with the DEATH PENALTY.
I kill with THOSE and WORDS.

[–] Bob_Zerunkel 12 years ago

The movie is about two guys who hate for no other reason than the color of their skin.

Whether you shout the N word or whisper "peckerwood," you are racist.

[–] soulcombinetics 8 years ago

The book came first. I read it after seiing this brilliant film. In the book, Belafonte's character is portrayed like a cooning coward, tolerating all of Slaters hate… it was hard to keep reading it. Just wanted to share how they changed film up.. thank god for that.