The Sun Shines Bright ***

In my mind, John Ford is arguably America’s greatest mythologist. My reasoning being that Ford is the greatest director of westerns in the history of film, and the Old West would be the great American mythology.

With that said, I am watching Jack’s personal favorite, The Sun Shines Bright, and there is Stephen Fetchit. Now what do I say?

For those who do not recognize the name, Stephen Fetchit was the character played by Lincoln Perry in the early days of talking pictures. Fetchit was basically every stereotype of the black man back then that you could think of; lazy, shiftless, slurring speech, so on and so forth.

Perry was actually a talented actor in his own right and very literate, but the only part that would pay him any money back then was variations of this Stephen Fetchit role. I love Ford’s movies, but here I am trying to figure out what deep purpose Jack could have in casting Perry to do his Stephen Fetchit bit here.

This is not the first time one of Ford’s movies has been criticized for relying on stereotypes. The depiction of Native Americans in Stagecoach probably isn’t what Sitting Bull had in mind.

This is a theme I look at a lot because I do believe it is important, but how far do you let stereotypes and ignorance negatively influence your opinion of what is othewise a great film? I’ve address this often before in regards to Birth of a Nation, but in that case, the movie was such a landmark and so influential that it was an easy call. What about The Sun Shines Bright? It’s a very good movie with a phenomenal performance by Charles Winniger as the good natured judge who is filled with contradictions. The themes of this film all mean well with Judge Priest putting his community ahead of himself and helping all members of that community, even those who can’t vote (African Americans).

Before I get too far ahead of myself, I should give a little plot synopsis. The Sun Shines Bright was made in 1953 and was a compilation of three Irvin S. Cobb short stories. Cobb’s famous character was Judge Priest, a mostly liberal, open-minded man, who proudly served the Confederate army and loves Southern traditions. I told you he was filled with contradiction, and, as always, contradiction done well lead to an interesting character and Winniger does him well.

The film is a character study of Priest and a look at how he deals with certain problems. The movie takes place at the turn of the century in Kentucky and Priest is up for re-election against a conservative, law-and-order, opponent. During the election, Priest confronts a lynch mob that is about to hang a black teenager who is accused of raping a white woman. Priest forces the mob to disperse at gun point. The judge also attends a funeral procession for a woman he knows that is known around town for having a questionable background. These actions throw the popular judge’s almost certain re-election into doubt.

From that description, the movie appears to be quite progressive in its views, but then you see the parts for the black actors and how those actors are treated. Even Judge Priest’s treatment of these characters can at best be called paternal – very paternal. I've put much thought into that word. I don't like it, but I can't come up with another. In this movie, Priest (and I mean who the character is written) does not treat the black people of the down badly, but there is a certain unintentional condensation to his tone. It's hard to describe, but unmistakable.

On the other hand, this movie does take place in Kentucky during the turn of the century. People like Priest not only remember the Civil War, but fought in it. Would it be intellectually dishonest to expect anything more even from an open-minded character like Judge Priest? Would it be historically laughable to place a Bobby Kennedy-type person in that time and place?

Here’s my problem. I was born in Tennessee in 1909. I was poor and I moved to Massachusetts at a relatively young age, so I didn’t get a chance to soak up too much Southern atmosphere. Ford was born in Maine, so he’s not exactly a son of the Confederacy either. What I do know is that for some odd reason whether it’s ignorance or laziness, Jack Ford uses stereotypes of African Americans in this movie for no reason that I can see to drive the story. Now is Priest acting the way he is because that is all you could get away with back then, or is he a bigot as well?

The bottom line is that because Ford was ignorant or lazy in his characterization of the African Americans here, it throws into doubt how much good will I feel like granting Judge Priest. I’ve always said I like to think during movies, but not this much.

This movie is worth watching because of Winniger's performance, the overall quality of the film and maybe as an educational tool on how even smart men like Ford could be warped by ignorance. The movie is also physically beautiful in it’s depiction of a small Kentucky town circa 1900. It’s frustrating because this should have been a great movie, but I can’t say that and it’s Ford’s fault.