1937--The Life of Emile Zola, William Dieterle

 

1937--The Life of Emile Zola, William Dieterle

Nominated: The Awful Truth, Captain Courageous, Dead End, The Good Earth, In Old Chicago, Lost Horizon, One Hundred Men and a Girl, Stage Door, A Star is Born

Should have won: The Life of Emile Zola

Be sure to see: A Day at the Races, Snow White and the Seven Dwarfs

“What matter is the individual if the idea survives?”--Emile Zola

     The first best picture winner from Warner Brothers Studios, The Life of Emile Zola is a courtroom drama targeting two innocent people. Set in 1862 Paris (though nobody has accents), local author Emile Zola writes “smut” books with mixed reviews. After his latest book stirs controversy, he is ordered to stop, but says he will write what he pleases.

 

     Meanwhile, Alfred Dreyfus, Captain of the 14^th Regiment of Artillery, is unjustly charged with treason. Dreyfus insists he is innocent but is charged, stripped of his rank, and is given an opportunity to commit suicide in lieu of prison. I was intrigued at two things. One, they snap Dreyfus' sword in half while stripping him of his rank. I wonder if snapping a sword was a common practice then, or even possible. What good is such a flimsy sword? And two, if being given suicide as an alternative to prison was fictitious. Who would choose such a fate over prison?

    Dreyfus professes his innocence from prison and Zola campaigns to free him. Even after gathering evidence proving Dreyfus' innocence, Zola faces charges for supporting Dreyfus' alleged treason. This is where the story takes off as Zola must defend himself in court.  There are so many plot points that kept me interested. Dreyfus' fate; Zola's courtroom scene; townspeople burning dummies depicting Zola and Dreyfus; and many others.

      Because of courtroom loopholes, every time Zola mentions Dreyfus he is told that case is irrelevant. But how can it be irrelevant if the article about Dreyfus is the reason Zola is being tried in the first place? It reminded me of A Time To Kill how the rape was irrelevant to Carl Lee's trial. Of course it was relevant. If it weren't then he would be found guilty in a snap. Why is motive irrelevant? I started cursing Zola's judge.

      In possibly the best courtroom scene of all time, Zola defends his newspaper article about Dreyfus. That is a bold statement, I am aware, considering how many solid courtroom dramas have been made. If it isn't the best, it is among the top. As for the movie as a whole compared to other courtroom dramas, I might rank it second behind 12 Angry Men. And, yes, I have seen To Kill A Mockingbird.

 

     The movie is essentially about first amendment rights because a journalist stands trial for what he writes. Of course this is France, not the United States. Admittedly, I'm unsure whether France has a similar law protecting freedom of the press like we have. But regardless of whether there is or not, the theme remains. I got so wrapped up in Dreyfus and Zola's stories the thought of the identity of the real man guilty of treason slipped my mind. Whether or not this person gets caught, I'll let you see for yourself. Also, what becomes of Zola is a bit of a surprise. We find out his fate in an emotional and powerful ending.

 

     Though the movie feels slightly dated, The Life of Emile Zola is still one of the best Oscar winners I have seen. I especially recommend anyone interested in journalism or rights of the media to take a look. It has become buried in history and forgotten for some reason.