To Kill a Mockingbird (1962) User Reviews (640)

Wonderful Social Classic That Echoes Issues of Its Day...

[Don-102 · 9/10 · 30 March 1999]

TO KILL A MOCKINGBIRD is presented like a play in three acts. It is also from the children's perspective. Through the kids, we find that racism is a learned attitude or feeling. We also see a delightful coming of age drama as the young kids realize that there is no Boogeyman down the street and their father is capable of doing a lot more than they think. The great Gregory Peck plays Atticus Finch, a pillar of nobility, social conscience, and, rare for 1930's Americana, a single parent. Peck is such a strong presence, you believe everything about him. It is something you can compare to America's trust in TV anchorman Walter Cronkite. We always took his word for it.

Act one puts Atticus in the background and allows the kids to flourish. Director Robert Mulligan was able to get such realistic performances from non-professional kids. They are amusing and fun to watch. The big mystery lies in the house down the street in this small Georgia town. Who is the monstrous, "6 and a half feet big" legend living in the end house? Some light suspense ensues, while the buildup to a stirring act two is happening. Atticus must defend an African-American man for the alleged rape of a white woman.

After threats galore, an unshaken Peck takes to the courtroom jungle in, without a doubt, one of the top 5 court scenes in motion picture history. Brock Peters lends the film its best moments as the accused "negro" on trial. This man has a face chiseled with suffering and deep, deep sorrow. We know Atticus is a good man, a decent human being with a soul. He sees this in his client as well, and in a closing argument that must have roused the civil rights movement, implores the jury to vote justice. An all-male, all-white jury in the 1930's were tough listeners. Peters' breakdown on the stand is one of the most realistic, emotionally saddening moments you'll ever see, especially in Hollywood films of the 1960's. The scene when Peck leaves the courtroom is now legendary as well.

Act three produces a tragic death, an unlikely hero, and the bringing together of a family. The filmmakers have such a passion for the material, they seem to handle it with gentleness. Racism is a hard-boiled subject and it is depicted and dealt with through grace and patience. TO KILL A MOCKINGBIRD poses the injustice of race relations in the 1930's as a front for the events happening in the 1960's. The film came out during turbulent times and was also an adaption of a literary classic. I am one to judge a film solely by film only. The book is a separate art form and should not be compared to the film, an art form itself. It is important, it is enlightening, and it has not aged. Watch it.

RATING: 9 of 10

Perpetually Outstanding...

[Xstal · 9/10 · 5 September 2022]

It's a story that's riven with themes, of prejudice, hate, broken dreams, there's courage and caring, there's taunting and daring, growing up, finding out what life means. At its heart you'll find Atticus Finch, defends a man most town folk want to lynch, no evidence in play, to support what they say, but they're adamant and won't move an inch. Scout and Jem watch these awful events, through child's eyes losing their innocence, in a world that's gone mad, it makes you so sad, but there's hope that leaves some recompense. Plus there's Boo, who defies more perceptions, all shrouded in cloaked misconceptions, hidden from view, most people eschew, but a saviour, and a child's revelation.

As good as it gets.

It does the book justice.

[HenryHextonEsq · 9/10 · 15 December 1998]

After studying the outstanding book of To Kill A Mockingbird at school, I viewed this film, and was on the whole very impressed. Scout and Jem are portrayed brilliantly, considering the ages of the children who played them, and they, as with everything else in the production, are true to the book's spirit. Gregory Peck is perfect as the unflappable Atticus Finch, and deserved his Oscar. The music is worthy of praise, especially for the climatic scene, and the raw emotion and feeling of the book is amply conveyed. All of the cast are well cast, and it's interesting to ponder how much this film, at the time, would've shocked. That the book explores racism and outsiders in a southern town, through the eyes of a child is genius and works very nicely here. The only problems are minor- much of the book's counter-balancing humour was left out, certain characters are omitted (Dolphus Raymond and Aunt Alexandra), and some of the book's early characterisation is missed. Aside from these gripes, this is a magical film and a "must-see," as a companion piece to the classic novel. 9/10

Not just film, but film history

[clydestuff · 10/10 · 1 April 2004]

The first time I saw To Kill A Mockingbird was at a drive-in theater. I was probably about ten or eleven at the time. Even at a young age I was captivated by this seemingly simple story told through the eyes of children that I could easily relate to. Perhaps also it was the fact that the part of the story that dealt with Boo Radley, held a kind of mystery and an eeriness for me, much in the way a ghost story would. I'm not about to make the pretense that I understood the social significance of To Kill A Mockingbird at the age of ten, or even the greatness of the film. That would come later in life, after having viewed it in one of it's first network television broadcasts.

One of the things that makes To Kill A Mockingbird a truly great film is the love and respect everyone involved in bringing Harper Lee's novel to the screen had for the original source material. It shows up on screen in every single frame. Each performance in this film is beyond reproach. Gregory Peck had many fine performances over his storied career, but none every approached the perfection he brought to his portrayal of Atticus Finch. As Atticus, Peck brings us the depth of understanding as to how his love for Jem and Scout enables him to treat his children with respect and honesty. He never talks down to them, but approaches them on a level in which children of their age can comprehend and learn from his own wisdom. Yet, he is still able to retain the same no nonsense approach as other parents. Atticus is also a man who believes in the integrity of justice, yet recognizes the failings of our justice system. When called upon to do his duty, he does so, despite the hatred and venom brought to bear upon him and his children by the citizens of the town in which he lives.

In casting Jem, Scout and Dill, Producer Alan J. Pakula and Director Robert Mulligan faced a daunting task. So much of the success of To Kill A Mockingbird depended on the pivotal role these characters would play in the film. For Jem he chose Philip Alford, for Scout, Mary Badham, and for Dill, John Megna. Alford and Badham were both southern natives who had never been in films before. Megna was a New York native but was also inexperienced. It is this inexperience and lack of polish that enables all three to shine on the screen. Mulligan began filming by letting them act as if making a film was like recess, allowing them to play on the set, and only moving the camera gradually as they became accustomed to their surroundings. It paid off in every way imaginable. None of the three ever appear as if they are actors acting, and bring a childlike wonder and presence to their roles that I had never seen before, and will unlikely witness again.

Brock Peters as Tom Robinson, the black man falsely accused of raping a white girl, also gives a performance which he would never again surpass. You will not find anywhere a more memorable scene in any court room than when he testifies on the witness stand. Because he dared to care about a white girl, he now faces almost certain death if convicted, and perhaps even if not convicted. It is the first time I was able to begin to understand the effects of man's prejudice and hatred of a man simply because of the color of his skin. Just as Jem and Scout came of age, and realized the significance of the injustices of racial hatred, so did I.

Equally significant, is Collin Wilcox as Mayella Ewell. She makes it easy for many to hate her, but like Atticus, we see in her a person to be more pitied than hated. She is a product of not only the times in which she lives, but even more so of her wretched upbringing. Mayella is what she is, but only because of the deep cutting prejudices of those around her. To Mayella, being caught enticing a black man into your house for relations, is the ultimate crime and the penalty for doing so is unthinkable to her.

In his screen debut as Boo Radley, Robert Duvall also brings to life the mysterious neighbor that once frightened Jem, Dill, and Scout so much. Though on the screen for a short length of time, without uttering a word, Duvall shows us a man tortured by years of cruelty, mistreatment, and the gossip and whispers of neighbors. He is a man who wants only to live in his own way, yet the bond that links him to Jem and Scout is significant. They are the childhood he had never really known. Just as Tom Robinson, he has never brought harm to anyone, yet suffers significantly just for the right to be able to exist.

The care with which To Kill A Mockingbird was brought to the screen can also be seen in the Art Direction by Henry Bumstead and Set Decoration by Oliver Emert. They indeed bring to life what a small Southern Town would have been like in the early thirties. Cinematographer Russel Harlan's black and white photography brings it all vividly to the screen, especially in the way he captures the foreboding of the Radley house, the moments when Bob Ewell approaches Jem when he is left in a car alone, and even more noteworthy near the end of the film when Jem and Scout are walking home from a school play. Elmer Bernstein's score is never boisterous, but yet is as important to setting the mood of many of the scenes played out before us.

There have been many eloquent words written in many of the comments on this board about To Kill A Mockingbird. Many of the words are far better than those that I have written. Then again, maybe a few simple paragraphs cannot truly describe the significant achievement in film making that To Kill A Mockingbird is. It will be forever remembered, long after you and I have departed from this world. It is at this point that I usually grade a film. I will skip that here, simply because there is no grade that I can give that could possibly do justice for To Kill A Mockingbird.

One of the most important films of all time

[FilmOtaku · 10/10 · 9 November 2003]

To Kill a Mockingbird is the movie based on the Harper Lee novel of the same name about Scout, Jem and their father, Atticus Finch who is an attorney in a small southern town. It is both a coming of age story about the children as well as a hard-hitting drama, as Atticus defends a black man who is on trial for the rape of a white woman.

This review is not an easy one to write, despite the fact that I have seen this film at least 10 times. The reason it does not come easily is that this is one of the most personally important films I have ever seen and is in my personal `Top Five of All Time'. I'm certain there is nothing that can be said about the film that has not already been repeated a multitude of times, so I guess the best thing to do is explain why the film is so important to me.

I first saw this film several years ago and was so profoundly affected by it that I immediately watched it again. Of course, the defense of a man wrongly accused of a crime is a common story line, but To Kill a Mockingbird stands out as an exceptional example for several reasons. Among them, the date that the film was released: 1962, on the cusp of the civil rights movement in America, and the fact that it takes place in the south in the 1930's. It is also far from the first film to explore the experiences of children and their own personal growth, but To Kill a Mockingbird stands out because of its sheer honesty and natural performances by the child actors portraying these rich characters.

But most of all, this film is special because of Gregory Peck's portrayal of Atticus Finch, a true hero. At the risk of sounding histrionic, my heart aches when I watch him on screen because he is such an incredible man, and is so inherently good. No matter how many times I have seen this film, I smile when I see his interaction with his children, and I well with tears when I see his incredible strength of character. (No easy feat to break through the armor of this cynical film geek who, if given the chance would remake at least a few dozen films with tragic endings.) I was sitting in my car listening to National Public Radio recently the day Gregory Peck died, and I'm not ashamed to admit that I sat and cried hearing the retrospective they offered – mainly because the man who portrayed my own personal cinematic hero was gone, but also because Peck lived his life with the same conviction as his best known role; a fact that makes Atticus Finch all the more tangible. The American Film Institute recently named Atticus Finch the number one hero of all time, a choice I consider both brave and insightful in an age where our heroes generally either wield weapons or have super human physical strength. Atticus Finch fights evil as well, but with his strong moral fiber and his mind.

To Kill a Mockingbird is generally required reading during the course of one's education. If you have not read it, do so. If you have not seen the film, do so; and share it with others. It is an exceptional film that stands the test of time and will remain an important addition to film history for as long as the genre exists.

--Shelly

Amazing film

[TBJCSKCNRRQTreviews · 10/10 · 4 September 2004]

After hearing nothing but critical acclaim for this film, and the book it was based on, I finally got to see it. I am quite amazed at how well done this film is, and how timeless the theme is. I haven't read the book, but I'm considering it, just to see if there are any details that were left out. The story is amazing and exceptionally told. As far as I know, the film is as close to the book as it could possibly be; some call it the most accurate book-to-film conversion ever. The plot is very good, it takes a timeless problem and presents it to us, through the innocent eyes of a naive child. The pace is very good; apart from The Godfather(the first one) and one or two other exceptions, this is the only drama where there was truly not one single moment that I found dull, boring or unimportant. Nothing seemed trivial in the film. The perspective that is forced upon us is that of a young child, naive and innocent. This is a brilliant idea, as the eyes of a child is without a doubt one of the most impressionable things in the world, and the film handles this perfectly. What really makes the film, apart from the brilliant and possibly unique perspective, is the fact that the children are likable, credible and charming. You couldn't help but like them; believe me, normally I really dislike children. I find them annoying, loud and egotistical. But with this film, I couldn't, for one second, muster up any tiny amount of aggression, or even annoyance. They come off as so likable, charming, and, most importantly, *real*. Almost every kid in any Hollywood movie is either a completely ridiculous stereotype/cliché of a brat, who does nothing but destroy things around him, or the exact opposite, a little angel. Everyone knows that no child is the latter all the time, and even I will admit that there probably doesn't exist too many children who are the first, either. In this film, the children are completely real. They are naive, innocent, they disobey what their father tells them, but ultimately, they obviously love and respect their father, and they never do anything, anything at all, with the intent to hurt or harm someone or something. That is what a child is; innocent. They do what they do because they do not know better. This film provides a perfect view into their world, or, rather, their perspective of it. The acting is excellent. The child actors exceed all expectations. I was amazed at how professional and convincing they were. The other actors all give great performances as well. The cinematography is excellent; once again, it gives a perfect perspective on what your surroundings look like when you're a child. The characters are well-written, credible and well-casted. The dialog was well-written. The script was excellent. A very memorable and beautiful film, should be viewed by almost anyone. I recommend this to anyone who likes dramas, and just about anyone who for one reason or another might enjoy this. Don't be scared off by it being over forty years old, or it being black and white; it's an excellent film, and just about anyone would enjoy it. Don't miss this perfect film. 10/10

An Unforgettable Drama

[dweck · 9 December 1998]

Hoo boy, am I a sucker for courtroom dramas. The wrangling of legal points and the investigation into the truth just gets my cinematic blood pumping (I s'pose it's in response to my own dashed hopes of becoming an attorney).

"To Kill a Mockingbird" rises to the top of the pile easily.

Yes, the courtroom proceedings are nail-bitingly engaging. But played out against the tapestry of bigotry and hate make the legal goings-on even more compelling.

The writing here is so beautiful, so lyric, so poetic. The Harper Lee-based screenplay captures wonderfully a time and a place that are absolutely real--where big brothers could solve the universe's problems in an instant and all the treasures of the world could be contained in a cigar box.

"To Kill a Mockingbird" also contains three of the most impressive child performances I have ever witnessed--there's not a false or affected moment in any one of them. Until seeing "Ponette," a movie I would highly recommend, the kids in "Mockingbird" received my best child performance ever awards. "Ponette" has ratcheted them down one notch, but that doesn't diminish the achievement here. The scene in which Scout dispels the mob simply by identifying its individual members is one of the most powerful moments in filmdom.

Peck more than deserved his best actor nod. His quiet dignity is a definite asset. Brock Peters, too, is terrific in what could have been a cliched role.

If you are a moviegoer who has a bias against black and white movies and who has therefore never seen "Mockingbird," I pity you. You've passed on one of Hollywood's most unforgettable experiences.

enough can't be said

[jam5219 · 10/10 · 11 April 2002]

Enough good things can't be said about this movie. It is undoubtedly one of the best and most moving films ever made. No other racial injustice or discriminatory based movie can even compare with "To Kill a Mockingbird". This movie not only makes you sympathize with those who were being discriminated against, but also those who fought for those people. One of the most moving parts of the movie is when Atticus Finch is leaving the court room and Reverend Sykes tells Scout to "stand up your father is passing".

Gregory Peck has always been one of my favorite actors. This is definitely one of my favorite roles that he has ever played, and he does an excellent job at it. Mary Badham and Philip Alford are excellent as Jem and Scout. Mary Badham became the youngest girl to receive an Academy Award nomination for best supporting actress for her role as Scout. Although it had a short time on screen, Robert Duvall's portrayal of "Boo" Radley was one of his very first roles on screen and what better movie than "To Kill a Mockingbird" to kick off your acting career.

A great movie of all times.

Wonderful

[acmilan03c1 · 10/10 · 3 February 2006]

This is why I watch movies. Every once in a while I stumble upon such a masterpiece which moves me to tears, because it reminds me that, all bad things aside, there is good in all of us - we just have to help each other search for it and bring it to light.

This is definitely one of the best films I've ever seen. Mary Badham is absolutely wonderful as 'Scout', and I think she deserves just as much credit as Gregory Peck for this picture.

The rest of the cast are great as well, and a special mention goes to Elmer Bernstein for his delicate and so appropriate score.

I love this movie and recommend it to anyone. 10/10

Our Greatest Film Hero

[bkoganbing · 10/10 · 27 January 2006]

When the American Film Institute polled its members and they selected Gregory Peck as Atticus Finch as the greatest hero on film ever, the selection was met with very few dissenters. I'm sure not going to argue the merits of the choice. But I do have a theory as to why.

Gregory Peck for the most part played decent honorable thinking men in his films. A few films like Duel in the Sun and The Boys from Brazil have him as a villain, but the public never accepted him really in those parts.

Few of us in our lives can be Horatio Hornblower or spike the Guns of Navarone or command a submarine as in On the Beach. But Atticus Finch in To Kill a Mockingbird is well within our grasp. He's a small town lawyer, raising his children as a single parent and most of all trying to lead them by example. The performances of Mary Badham and Philip Alford show the kids have learned it very well as does the uncredited narration of Kim Stanley as the grown-up Scout.

Atticus Finch is a very attainable ideal. It is I believe the secret of the popularity of both the book and the film.

To Kill a Mockingbird is the story of Atticus Finch and his family during the Thirties in rural Alabama. The action takes place over several months of a given year. The most important part of the film deals with Finch defending a black man for allegedly raping a white woman.

It's a thankless task and Finch knows it, because he knows the attitudes of the people there, those who would make up an all white jury. Still he proceeds with courage and determination. His summation to the jury is a film classic and Peck's innate decency is nicely counterbalanced by William Windom's prosecutor who smirks through out the trial knowing he just has to play the race card to win.

Other outstanding performances are Brock Peters as the man Peck is defending, James Anderson as the father of the girl he's accused of violating, and Frank Overton as the county sheriff.

This film was the debut of Robert Duvall in the part of Boo Radley who plays the autistic neighbor of the Finches. No dialog at all for Duvall who conveys great and pained emotion with a series of expressions that are unforgettable. Duvall played a similar role in another Peck film, Captain Newman, MD.

Gregory Peck got the Best Actor Award for 1962. He was up against some very stiff competition that year. Peck beat out Jack Lemmon for Days of Wine and Roses, Burt Lancaster for Birdman of Alcatraz, Peter O'Toole for Lawrence of Arabia and Marcello Mastroianni for Divorce Italian style.

No doubt sentiment did play a part in the final award. Lemmon and Lancaster had already gotten Oscars and O'Toole and Mastroianni were relative newcomers. But I sure think the Academy selection that year has stood the test of time.

This film has sure stood the same test.

Recommended

[EthanBJones_03 · 7/10 · 25 October 2017]

​'TO KILL A MOCKINGBIRD' - 1962

Directed by Robert Mulligan

Starring Gregory Peck, Mary Badham and Phillip Alford

Plot Overview: ​Scout Finch (Mary Badham), 6,and her older brother, Jem (Phillip Alford), live in sleepy Maycomb, Ala., spending much of their time with their friend Dill (John Megna) and spying on their reclusive and mysterious neighbour, Boo Radley (Robert Duvall). When Atticus (Gregory Peck), their widowed father and a respected lawyer, defends a black man named Tom Robinson (Brock Peters) against fabricated rape charges, the trial and tangent events expose the children to evils of racism and stereotyping.

This might be a movie that I am just not understanding in the slightest. It may genuinely be a testament of cinematic perfection. But, as it stands, I was immensely disappointed by this movie. Is it a poor movie? No. Not at all. In fact, there is a portion of this movie that could stand as one of the greatest 'Acts' in Film history. But the meat surrounding this Act was very lacklustre and poor for me. I am very sad to say that 'To Kill A Mockingbird' disappointed me.

But what do I actually like about it? The portion between the first half and last 20 minutes was cinematic perfection. I am serious. I won't specifically say what happens but I will say that it is literally perfect. As for the film surrounding that part, that is a different story for me, but that does not detract from the masterful film making shown my the actors and Mulligan during that sweet, sweet 40 or so minutes.

I also loved Gregory Peck in this film. He delivers a heartfelt, slow and meaningful performance as Articus. You can really see a passion and intelligence lurking beneath his calm, steady and articulate demeanour. Peck well and truly deserved his Oscar for this outstanding performance.

Brock Peters was also incredible in his, unfortunately, minute role as Tom Robinson. Peters and the writers do excellent jobs in creating sympathy for this character and truly showing the injustice of the situation he finds himself in. I was very disappointed that he did not at least receive an Oscar nomination for this role; it was truly excellent.

Phillip Aldford was good as Jem. The character wasn't exactly likable or interesting but I do admire their attempt at giving him an arc. Unfortunately, the same cannot be said about Mary Badham's Scout for me. It baffles me as to how she earned an Oscar Nomination because I found her performance to be bland and very poor. And Scout as a character was also very disappointing. I mean, she wasn't likable, interesting and I fail to see a true arc for her.

Another flaw that I have with this film is the very mediocre beginning and end. The middle is, as stated prior, true cinematic gold. The remainder of the film is a dull, bland, uninteresting, monotonous mess. I fail to see the brilliance in it and, while the message of the film is strong and prosperous, the execution of it was not.

Then there is the very annoying ending. Maybe I am an idiot but I did not understand what was happening in the ending of this film. It was very confusing. I understand WHAT happened but I cannot fathom as to why. Perhaps my attention merely lapsed for those precious couple of seconds for the grand reveal but that doesn't change my distaste for it. That, and that man was absurdly creepy.

In conclusion, I was unfortunately disappointed by 'To Kill A Mockingbird'. It's not a bad movie by any means, and when it gets it right, it gets it right. But the overall package did not live up to the expectations I had. It was a little over average and the middle on its own would achieve an easy 10/10. Despite that claim, the middle was the middle, and it had the beginning and end bogging it down. Do see this film, though. The message is very important and it features an impeccable middle and performance from Gregory Peck. Aside from that though, it was not that great. I'll rate 'To Kill A Mockingbird' 7 'Creepy Men in the Corner' out of 10.

An utterly moving film, made perfect by the outstanding performance of Gregory Peck. Must see

[elliexphant · 10/10 · 11 May 2005]

'To Kill a Mockingbird' is one of the best books ever written but this film does it justice. The performances throughout are stunning, especially that of Gregory Peck (Harper Lee was so impressed she gave him her late father's pocket watch, a prop he uses in the film, to keep). This film will make anyone think hard about how they treat others and it is really heartwarming without being soppy. It isn't necessary to have read the book before seeing this film but it might be advisable. This is one of the classic films of its generation and very few films of nowadays come close to matching it either. A real must-see.

A solid adaptation of a classic

[andrewroy-04316 · 7/10 · 5 October 2020]

To Kill a Mockingbird is a tricky adaptation, because as with many great books, it delves deeply into several different topics and themes. Condensing the plot and themes into the shorter timeframe of a movie is always challenging, and while they definitely pull it off successfully here, I do think we see a bit more breadth than depth. They did cut several plot points and scenes which were less essential, which was necessary. Even so, we don't get to know the characters and the nuances of their relationships as much as I would like here. The movie is less about the nuanced characters and themes that the book focuses on and simply tells the compelling story of a murder trial of an innocent black man in old money Alabama. It's still well done and I enjoyed it, but one of my favorite elements of the book was seeing the world from Scout's point of view and understanding her perspective as a precocious young woman in that society. We still get a general sense of her character, but don't see as much about her relationship with Jim and how it evolves, or see much development from her across the film. We do spend plenty of time in the courtroom to understand fully what is happening in the case. It's hard to fault the writers too much, and the safe call is definitely prioritizing storytelling as they did, but as a result no other elements stood out or grabbed me. I did also find that the writing suffered a bit from a problem I also had with the novel: that the story feels a bit segmented, with a few sections that don't flow naturally into each other. Still, these are fairly minor qualms and it is a rock solid adaptation of a good story.

Good movie, but really bland and overrated.

[gpeelaaron · 5/10 · 2 December 2013]

Okay i think this was a pretty good movie. I also think it was a good book as well. But seriously this book and movie gets way too much credit. I hate to say this but i didn't like Scout's character in the movie. She was great in the book, but in the movie not so much. The movie seems rushed and kind of boring. Kind of a generic story. The characters were good and accurate to the book (especially Atticus)but Scout was terrible. She was annoying, very hard to understand, and had no emotion at all. This was a good movie but people treat it like it's the best movie ever made. COME ON! Im not saying it was bad, but if i were the director i would have done a better job.

The Best

[Pickwick12 · 5 April 2004]

Generally, I prefer to review movies I dislike, because I am better able to quantify negative opinions than positive ones, but "To Kill a Mockingbird" deserves a review as few other movies I have ever seen. I probably cannot make any statement about this film that has not already been made many times, but it really is one of the most beautiful and moving films I have ever seen.

I first read Harper Lee's lovely novel when I was a young teen, and it was one of those books that gave me an experience that changed the way I perceived the world and my own family. The movie stays true to the wonderful, innocent prose.

Every time I watch, I see my father in Atticus Finch. He, too, is a southerner who respects people and defends his beliefs. He also has always respected his children and treated us the way Atticus treats Scout and Jem. I also see other family and friends in various characters in the film, because we have such strong southern roots. Even the negative aspects of racial antipathy and loss of childish innocence bring certain memories to mind.

Those who did not grow up in the south or with southern families might not see parallels the way I do, but the movie would be a gem to anyone. Gregory Peck put in the performance of his career, and the children acted in the least forced manner I have ever seen. The cinematography is also beautiful, and the script is perfectly balanced-not too sparse, but also not dialogue heavy.

The best thing about "To Kill a Mockingbird" is that it preserves the spirit of the novel that resounds with so many people. This film stands as one of the best ever arguments for tolerance, loving families, and the beauty of life through a child's eyes. Everyone who watches movies ought to see it.

A Remarkably Simple and Simply Remarkable Masterpiece!

[shan_seehar-1 · 10/10 · 7 March 2005]

Very rarely, it happens that movies are made that are very simple in expression but possess monumental appeals and significant life lessons in a style only of the kind of their own that, we can't expect even. This fact is truthfully exemplified in this movie. It's not just a movie or even just a promising story in general, but all it portray's is "Innocence". A girl's recollection of her childhood days which are still at their full bloom in her mind, depicting the innocence of juvenile as well as as adult minds, a period where mostly immature minds become curious to the racial bigotry and sometimes mature minds become its prey and a time when harsh realities of life like intolerance, hatreds, prejudice and adversities of society gradually dawn upon them.

Atticus Finch ( Gregory Peck ) is an absolutely Gentleman Lawyer whose wife has passed away and he has a son and a daughter. A Black man Tom Robinson is wrongly alleged of raping a poor white woman. In fact, he a victim of white woman's effort to hide her guilt by targeting his innocence and utilizing favors of racial attitude of unsocial society towards Negros. Finch decides to defend him on his principles realizing that the narrow minded society will turn against him and so it happened and townspeople started making his life agonizing. The whole story is masterfully out shined by the ingenuousness, purity and innocence of his children with with a unique inspirational interaction with their father.

Boo Readly who lives in the town is mentally retarded and is sidelined by the society. He is a mark of fear and curiosity for children because he is different from others. But he is the one who marks the ultimate climax of this emotionally crafted masterpiece.

It's a must see movie for all ages in all times because it gives many priceless emotional and touching lessons for those who are sincere and perceptive.

A Remarkably Simple and Simply Remarkanble Masterpiece!!!

One of the most memorable and wonderful movies of the 20th century.

[mmr820 · 10/10 · 3 February 2001]

"To Kill A Mockingbird" is truly a much loved and critically-acclaimed film. It is a perfect portrayal of childhood innocence, racial prejudice, moral tolerance and courage. No other words can describe this film except marvellous. The film is so wonderfully done that the audience actually feels as if they were in Alabama during the 1930s. This is a must see for anyone of any age.

Every bit as good as they say (B&W). Still POWERFUL. 10/10. Spoilers.

[lizziebeth-1 · 10/10 · 20 October 2002]

Horton Foote's Oscar-winning screenplay is so good, it really supplants the 1960 Harper Lee book. I've recently re-read the novel, and it seemed weighed down and paced with backwoods vernacular and situations right out of the 1930s, that are shockingly removed from the 21st century. My goodness. I hope it doesn't strike others so, because the book is a gem too. It's just in need of ...updating perhaps, which is what the 1962 movie excels at; it translates the Depression Era for us. The characters (played, eg by Gregory Peck and Brock Peters in their signature roles) seem so much better-depicted on screen than merely in my own imagination from having read the book!

Only Arthur/'Boo' Radley (a peroxided Robert Duvall) seems at first a jarring casting choice to me; but in the end all seem terrific.

Now THESE child actors, Mary Badham ('Scout'), Philip Alford ('Jem'), and John Megna (as 'Dill'), should've won Oscars. I'm sure they're all better than Haley Joel Osment, who strikes me as 'studied'. These kids are just natural, completely oblivious of the camera. Unbelievable. Actually, I wonder what genius DID do the casting, because the film gives no casting credit. I guess in 1962 the CSA didn't exist yet... That casting director deserves an Oscar too.

This is what great filmmaking is all about; when several areas of perfection are jointly present a film that reaches into your heart and yanks you up and down. Those were real acting jobs, not the cretinous drivel passing for 'work' these days. The reason we don't see too many better movies than Das Experiment is because post-modernism has long encamped in Hollywood (it set up a Starbuck's years ago).

The first scene instantly captures Scout's world. She's learning fast at the shoulder of her loving widower lawyer father that she shouldn't embarrass people who are even poorer than they are; and Jem is tantrumming up a tree because he can't brag about his dad's non-existent cool to his friends. Jem demands Atticus play football(!) for the Mets, or more uproariously as Scout tells it, for `the Methodists', hahahaha. (Can we picture Methodists in a sackrace? How many Methodists does it take to change a lightbulb?)

The Boo Radley story arc is much better paced in the movie than the book; but because I want to focus on the race-relations arc, I will only make passing comment on Boo: he is gently painted in both the book and movie as another previously dismissed but highly virtuous person, who deserves to be analogized with the fragile, hopeful beauty of the mockingbird.

The harrowing exploration of entrenched injustice through various acts of racist violence are adult themes that really couldn't be explored well in a book constrained by the first person narrative of a 7-yr-old little girl. The movie is able to show the Tom Robinson court case much more objectively. Robert Mulligan's direction quickly telegraphs Bob Ewell's shifty creepiness with the scene of his slovenly leering at Atticus' children in the car. Collin Wilcox is also heartrending as Mayella, the ignorant, uneducated and abused daughter of Bob Ewell. Inexplicably, Gregory Peck's cross-examination scene is not quite as sensitive as Atticus is in the book; Peck never reveals that flash of pain at having to destroy Mayella's false testimony.

Little Scout's key scene, where she embarrasses the lynch mob (collectively no better than Tom Ewell alone) just with her amiable child's chatter, is EVERY BIT as powerful and stressful as in the book. Probably more, because body language is a much better form of expression for a scene like this.

Brock Peters' Tom Robinson is the archetypal decent black man who, YES, felt sorry for a brutalized white woman, as we all ought to. Don't bother debating `what if he was guilty', because TKAM is not a whodunnit; it's an expose of what used to happen WHEN a black man was innocent. The heartbreaking destruction of Tom Robinson's proverbial mockingbird is our collective shame, even now, because similar dismissive laziness still happens. It's every person's character that matters, not whether they're `Methodists'.

We do construct our identities as part of various groups. But no group membership, or belief about it, makes any person categorically virtuous. That still hinges on a person's strengths, and crucially, their weaknesses. A person's bad character will overwhelm whatever beliefs they hold; their good character will enhance them. We are all free to act better, or worse, than our beliefs; we're NOT powerless over them, so no-one should ever die over a belief. Cooler thinking than mere violence must rule, or else objective justice will never materialize. And it's only justice if the judgement is accurate; but accuracy requires the abolition of the sort of intellectual/societal laziness that regularly befalls the weakest subgroups of society. Well, we all saw the intellectual rigour of that lynch mob. Would you trust them to tell the time? You might not feel happy trusting even the sheriff (Frank Overton), testifying in court but no better than a hick himself: `Oh, I guess that would make it her LEFT'. Those powerful imbeciles stood in judgement over some societally fragile people, like Tom, and yes, like Mayella.

It's still powerful how Tom's hammering as sarcastic legal argument by the prosecutor (William Windom) served to bring home Tom's societal fragility; and we're humbled at the quiet dignity of the entire black population who soberingly stood in the rafters to honor Atticus' failed attempt. The movie was made in 1961, some 7 years before the martyrdom of Martin Luther King Jr, yet in the light of recent gang-related violence, it's clear there are still many who think their group belonging excuses/masks their brutality as people. It does not. And the brutality came first.

This movie needs to be seen by the young, to open their hearts to humanity, and their standards for their own personal character, for the rest of their lives. 10/10.

This is a deeply moving and powerful film about right and wrong seen through the eyes of children.

[Fella_shibby · 10/10 · 9 February 2016]

I first saw this in the early 90s.

Revisited it on a dvd which I own in 2009 with my kids. My 6 year old boy n 5 year old daughter was captivated by this seemingly simple story told through the eyes of children.

Perhaps also it was the fact that the part of the story that dealt with Boo Radley, held a kind of mystery.

My daughter kinda got scared of the character Boo.

I remember she asked me to buy for her bib overalls/dungarees aft enjoying this movie.

Revisited again few days back n now my kids are 13 n 12 respectively.

Felt like writing a review now inspite of knowing that everything has already been said about this wonderful movie.

This is one of the greatest movies of all time, indeed n one of my personal fav.

The character Atticus Finch is indeed the greatest screen hero of the 20th century.

The child actors are excellent and the young Mary Badham as Scout is remarkable.

Mulligan's direction is flawless. Art Direction by Henry Bumstead and Set Decoration by Oliver Emert are brilliant. They indeed bring to life what a small Southern Town would have been like in the early thirties.

Excellent cinematography by Russel Harlan. The use of black-and-white cinematography conveys the mood of Depression-era small-town America perfectly and one of the best things is the music by Elmer Bernstein.

Gregory Peck's best performance in my opinion.

(Edited n inserted this line aft re watching it again in Nov 2021 n now my kids are 17 n 18 respectively).

This movie n the story is indeed timeless classic.

American Classic

[SnoopyStyle · 10/10 · 22 February 2014]

Based on Harper Lee's Pulitzer Prize winning book, Scout (Mary Badham) is a 6 year old girl living in Maycomb, Alabama during the 1930s. It's a tired old town life with his lawyer father Atticus Finch (Gregory Peck) and his little brother Jem. Then Atticus takes a case to defend a black man Tom Robinson accused of raping a white teen girl Mayella Ewell. It sends the town into a frenzy which only Atticus and the innocence of Scout are able to withstand.

It's an American classic. Gregory Peck exudes stature, compassion and dignity. It takes an important book and honors it with an impressive film. The trick of the movie is to look at the issue of race through the eyes of Scout. It also features Robert Duvall as the iconic Boo Radley. There is one point in the movie after the trial is over that always gets me. As Atticus walks out of the courtroom, all the blacks in the balcony stand up. Reverend Sykes tells Scout to stand. "Miss Jean Louise. Miss Jean Louise, stand up. Your father's passing." There is something so poignant and so overwhelming about that moment.

A Clear and Uncluttered Eye

[bill-25659 · 10/10 · 20 June 2020]

Equal parts heartwarming and heartrending, this is one of the tiny number of films that is hard to overpraise. Deep south depression-era prejudice is filtered clear and uncluttered through the eyes of white children. I watched this again on Juneteenth and its quiet, gentle impact is devastating. Peck is wonderful, of course, but the kids are incredible. Every scene is crafted by Robert Mulligan with creativity and realism. The final 20 minutes flip from harrowing to something that feels like prayer. If you saw this as a kid in 1962, you watched the story unfold with an innocent eye. As a grownup in 2020, and certainly if you have kids of your own, you'll be an emotional wreck halfway through. The film is every bit as satisfying as the book.

'Do you know what a compromise is?'

[HotToastyRag · 7/10 · 10 August 2017]

To Kill a Mockingbird is pretty famous in my household. My mom loved Gregory Peck's portrayal of the integrity-filled, honest, caring, patient father so much that she named my brother Atticus. It was a running quotation when I was growing up to say, "Do you know what a compromise is?" with a little Southern drawl. I know my family is one of millions who have tried to emulate Gregory Peck's clipped pronunciation of "Scout"; that one word is another one of our famous and long-running movie quotations.

Unfortunately, there's nothing more American than racism, and in this adaptation of one of the most iconic American novels, lawyer Atticus Finch defends a black man falsely accused of raping a white woman. Since it's the South, you can only imagine the backlash he and his family receive from the community when he steps up to give Tom Robinson his right to a fair trial. As in the novel, the story is told from the point of view of Scout, Atticus's young daughter. Mary Badham plays Scout, and she's not only adorable, but completely earned her Oscar nomination. She was only ten years old, and the youngest actress to be nominated at that time!

To Kill a Mockingbird marks Gregory Peck's most famous role, and while everyone knows the famous "In the name of God" powerful courtroom speech, his performance isn't just a "Gregory Peck role". He's a caring, concerned father, and the scenes between Greg and Mary are beautiful. Greg won an Oscar for his performance, and the film also picked up statues for Adapted Screenplay and Art Direction. Elmer Bernstein's lovely theme was nominated, but it was hard to compete against Laurence of Arabia, which took the music, director, and picture awards away from To Kill a Mockingbird. This is a real American classic, so if you're that one person in the country who hasn't yet seen it, rent it so you can join in the conversation with all your family and friends. Even if you're particularly attached to the novel and don't generally like film adaptations, give it a chance. Harper Lee herself loved the movie and thought Gregory Peck's performance was so wonderful, she gave him her father's (the real Atticus Finch) pocket watch. Peck's grandson is named Harper, which is really sweet, and it shows just how much this role and film meant to him and his family.

A film that's close to my heart

[little_biker_girl · 10/10 · 6 December 2005]

About ten years ago, a year or so after I was married, I became quite ill and was bed-ridden for almost two weeks. I was in so much pain I could not sit on the sofa and look at television; my eyes hurt so badly from my fever that I couldn't even lie in bed and read. It was Christmas season and my husband, working in retail, worked extra long hours. With no way to entertain myself or even to sleep, the long hours spent alone were almost unbearable. Then I had an idea: I had seen that our public library had books on tape. I asked my husband if he would find something interesting for me, not having any idea what sort of "books" they might have. He chose To Kill a Mockingbird.

I had, of course, always heard of the book but apparently it was not on our required reading list in high school. Remembering how I had loathed so many of the books I was forced to read in school, I had mixed feelings when he brought it to me. Still, I welcomed ANY distraction to help pass the time. What an absolutely wonderful book it turned out to be. (If my memory is correct, it was read by Meryl Streep. What a beautiful job she did of it!) Looking back at it now, I'm glad I got so sick that winter, or I might not have had the opportunity to "read" it. What a comfort it was to me during a painful, difficult time.

A few years later I ran across the movie on television. I was so very pleased to see how well they translated it to film. No film ever captures EVERY facet of a book (or we'd have an awful lot of eight hour films out there!) but the book was definitely given justice. Having grown up in the deep south myself, even having myself attended segregated school and seen INTENSE prejudice amongst the privileged white upper-class, I applaud the book's writer and the film's producer all the more for producing such works during a time of indescribable social struggle and upheaval.

To Kill a Mockingbird is a strong, quiet film of great dignity... qualities that are sadly lacking in almost every film made in this country today. To me though, having first come across the book in the isolation of of sickness, listening to it hour after hour in the dim light of my bedroom, watching the grey winter clouds pass by the window as I listened, it will alway be my own special, personal film.

The Old Gray Bird Ain't What She Used To Be

[telegonus · 7/10 · 19 July 2001]

One hates to be the skunk at the garden party but this movie simply isn't as good as its reputation might suggest. It is extremely dated and calculated in ways that are now obvious but probably worked back in 1962. The dialogue has a tendency to go on for too long in almost every scene, as points are hammered home continuously, didactically, but aside from the scenes that belong only to the children the film is dramatically leaden and top heavy in what were at the time 'dangerous' and 'radical' ideas about racism and injustice (though they were fashionable in Hollywood), and frequently the movie feels like a sermon, and a self-congratulatory one at that.

As the story of children growing up in the Deep South during the Depression the film works fairly well. It is beautiful visually and the photography by the underrated Russell Harlan is flawless. The performances of the actors who play the children are superb. Had the movie stuck to being their story it might have been a masterpiece. The part about the elusive, ghostly Boo Radley struck a chord, and I suspect that most of us can remember a spooky neighbor or two and the stories we used to make up about them. So far, so good. But when the black man accused of rape entered the picture a different movie emerged: preachy, obvious, self-consciously genteel about bigotry being the preserve of poor, ignorant rural folks, and above all obvious. This is when it becomes a star vehicle for Gregory Peck, who delivers an extraordinarily self-righteous summation to the jury complete with "for the love God!", and I stopped believing what I was watching and I began thinking about some of the shabbier Rod Serling Twilight Zones of long ago, with their 'messages' about 'little people' at the end. The film shifts into high gear in the last act, with the attack on the children, which I still find frightening, but the damage had been done, and even with Boo (blessedly) back in the story the poetic mood of the earlier parts of the movie was recaptured only fitfully, and I had a feeling of having been set-up.

Some of the problem with the film is obviously the Harper Lee novel it was adapted from. Miss Lee wrote a good book but as a writer was a far cry from Faulkner or even Eudora Welty, and having reread large portions of it a few years ago I must say that it dates as badly as the movie. She was trying to do too much with her wistful story, and got her politics and poetics mixed up, and the result is an unsatisfactory stab at greatness, though I must say it's a good try. But alas she missed the mark, and so does the film. There's a good deal of sponantaneous feeling in the stuff about the kids, but when it shifts to grown-ups neither Miss Lee, director Robert Mulligan or screenwriter Horton Foote seems to know how to make things work. Suddenly the story turns moral with a vengeance. It's not easy to treat the issue of a man falsely accused of rape any other way, for sure, but it ruins the magical tone so meticulously built up in the earlier scenes. Yes, the world of childhood has as much to do with imagination as reality, and especially with imagination applied to reality as a means of interpretation, which in adults seems the preserve of artists and no one else. The move from childhood to adulthood is often tragic, as life's unpleasantries become unavoidable. Art at its best provides a respite from this as well as another way of seeing life, of feeling things differently and of thinking deeper thoughts. In art we have the opportunity to recapture at least some of the affect of childhood, but to do so with wisdom and understanding.

In To Kill a Mockingbird we see a liberal take on childhood, as imagination is tranformed, in the course of the narrative, into a sense of civic responsibility. Children, mockingbirds and black folks are metamorphosed into a kind of helpless class. Only they, it seems, are truly in touch with nature, truth and the meaning of life. The adult whites are either good or bad, interesting only inasmuch as they have all the power and often use it badly. The trick, as the film implies, is to get these blinkered white grownups to appreciate the pure world of freedom and ease that the children, mockingbirds and blacks enjoy, and all will be well, or at least a whole lot better. But alas the reason the white grownups are so dull and moralistic, in good and bad ways, come from their sense of responsibility, which comes with power, and which children, mockingbirds and blacks don't have. When they do get power (viz. Lord Of the Flies) they prove as capable as adults of doing foul, nasty things. I think that Lee, Mulligan and Foote are aware of this contradiction, if only subconsciously, which is why the prevailing mood of the story is one of sadness.

Fine child acting, poor direction and story. Extremely Overrated.

[castricv · 4/10 · 30 March 2002]

Before I start my explanation of the above statements, I would like to comment that I am an avid Gregory Peck fan and I have also found his work to be of exceptional quality. This movie is no exception. I have also read Harper Lee's novel of the same name and found it to succeed in every area and every issue that it was trying to portray. Unfortunately, this success did not transfer to film, even with Mr. Peck and a cast of exceptionally talented child-actors. Every aspect of the film, with the exception of Mr. Peck and the children, is lacking, misguided, and often tries to pull at the heartstrings of early 1960's viewers with lame set-ups and other devices used to show one side and one man as being absolutely unerring and without vice. The movie takes a while to develop and for the first half-hour focuses primarily on the children. The children do rather everyday things and converse with each other about nothing of consequence on the film. They finally decide to explore a "haunted house" to see the "maniac" that lives within it. While I felt that this avenue might lead somewhere, nothing of any consequence, albeit a small meeting with the maniac at the end of the film, came of this rather long and drawn out plot line. Next, we see that Mr. Peck, who portrays a compassionate, strong father and lawyer, is assigned to defend a black man who has supposedly committed a rape of a white female. Subsequent to this, there is never any conversation among Peck and the defendant, no evidence discussed prior to trial, and no real character development of the defendant and even to a larger extent Mr. Peck. We then see a few scattered scenes of the ultra-racist and completely ignorant father-of-the-victim, who tries his best to cause trouble and say dirty things to black people. Though he is shown as mean and stupid, he doesn't do anything particularly characteristic of an enraged racist father, he merely calls Mr. Peck a "ni$%er lover " and spits a lot. You will notice that he is not even with the angry mob that tells Mr. Peck to hand over the prisoner so that they can lynch him. Finally, we arrive at a trial, where it is unbelievable that this case would have even gone to trial based on certain obvious fact that you will see in the movie. In trying to say any more directly involving the film's plot, I would be spoiling the movie for you, but suffice it to say, if Mr. Peck were not in this film and did not give such a rousing courtroom speech, this movie would have been forgotten long ago. The direction is poor and uneven, plot tangents go untouched or under-developed, and many of the characters and actors seem rather silly. Instead of achieving what the book did in terms of portraying racism in the Depression South and the intriguing stories of the children, the film manages to seem poorly done, even cheap, and the child actors's obvious talents go to waste on dead end plot lines. Even the costuming seems badly done. You will notice that all of the whites wear overalls, while the "enlightened" Mr. Peck and a handful of kind blacks wear suits. In closing instead of being a thoughtful and poignant depiction of racism in the South, it seems contrived. My recommendation is to avoid this unless you are an avid Gregory Peck fan and read the novel. But if you really want to watch a movie close to this subject that is done well, try In the Heat of the Night or any number of Sidney Portier's films. 4/10