Spidersecu Don't Believe the Hype

Twilightfa Watch something else. There are very few redeeming qualities to this film.

Erica Derrick By the time the dramatic fireworks start popping off, each one feels earned.

Leoni Haney Yes, absolutely, there is fun to be had, as well as many, many things to go boom, all amid an atmospheric urban jungle.

dougdoepke No need to recap the plot or echo consensus points.Thanks to the movie, I got to memorize Lancaster's beaming rows of perfect teeth, all 500 of them. He does chew up the scenery, but I guess it's excusable since Gantry's supposed to be a natural showman. The movie was cutting edge 1960. Taking on revivalists was never big in the Hollywood playbook. But that's what both Lewis's novel and the movie adaptation do. Needless to say, the film was controversial when first released, many theatres refusing to show it, even one in my home town if I recall correctly. Lancaster's Gantry is pretty clearly a natural performer drawn to any kind of stage where he can command and feed his ego. Money seems secondary to that overriding desire as does the Lord. Importantly, Gantry's also an entrepreneur, working out business arrangements with others, church pastors included. Needless to say, it's not a pretty picture of revivalist tent shows or of some church pastors.On the other hand, Sister Sharon (Simmons) appears sincere in her divine mission, appearing on stage like an angel. Her role crucially provides some compensation to revivalism and its believers. The trouble is the good Sister is overwhelmed by Gantry's personality and incorporates him into the show despite his questionable motives. Thus she's conflicted between the demands of mind and body, a not uncommon human conflict that most any audience can grasp. Meantime, looking on cynically is newsman Lefferts (Kennedy) who in today's terms appears something of a secular humanist. Thus, he's sympathetic to the needy people seeking solutions even in the revivalist brand. Note how the supplicants are almost uniformly elderly and needy looking, a good realistic touch. Though the movie exposes much that's false with popular religion, the purity of the divine message is left to shine through like the untouched cross standing above the burning tabernacle. It's a symbol loaded with meaning, and no doubt helped get the movie sold to reluctant distributors. Overall, the movie remains an interesting mix of personalities and character, still relevant even 60- years later. Kudos to Lancaster and Brooks for taking on controversy at a time when movies generally avoided such.

Lechuguilla Probably the most significant thing to know about this film is that the story is set in 1927. Given, too, that the film's production was 1960, we can say that "Elmer Gantry" does not reflect the current, 21st century, state of religious fundamentalism in America. The film is basically how Hollywood, in the late 1950s, viewed tent religion in the early part of the twentieth century.Given that the Production Code, with its moral censorship guidelines, was still in force when the film was made, the script is a sanitized version of the Sinclair Lewis novel. Hollywood thus tries to straddle the fence in its faith vs. no-faith theme, and render characters as merely flawed, not evil.Thus, vacuum salesman Elmer Gantry (Burt Lancaster) may be slimy, deceptive, hypocritical, scheming, and manipulative, but he can also recite lines from the Bible. To make him any more diabolical would have angered a majority of viewers in 1960. Similarly, Sister Sharon (Jean Simmons) may collect money from those who go to her revivals, but it's to pay the bills and all the logistics necessary for her ministry. Further, she seems so sincere and, seemingly, can render miracles.We can thus forgive Hollywood for taking this approach to the story in 1960. At that time, nobody could foresee how self-serving and hateful religious fundamentalism would become in politics in the latter part of the 20th century. After all, Sister Sharon talked a lot about "love", not hate.The film is quite grandiose, a big-scale production, well over two hours in duration. Scenes are lavish in scope, heavy on dialogue, and visually robust, no doubt a carryover from those big screen sword and sandal epics of the 1950s. As such, the story seems contrived. Performances, especially that of Burt Lancaster, seem exaggerated.As a big, splashy Hollywood production, "Elmer Gantry" is okay, except for its length, its contrived story, and its exaggerated performances. But it doesn't reflect modern religious fundamentalism. For that, a more realistic, and relevant, movie is "Marjoe" (1972), about a child evangelist. And "Marjoe" is not contrived at all; it's a true story.

SnoopyStyle It's the prohibition era. Elmer Gantry (Burt Lancaster) is a slick traveling salesman who is a boozer and a dog hound. He is a born salesman well versed with the bible. He is so good that it is hard to tell the difference whether he's sincere or lying. He is one haunted by his checkered past and his immorality. He is taken with Sister Sharon Falconer (Jean Simmons) who runs revival meetings. She's a true believer. He badgers her until she allows him to preach. He becomes so successful that he becomes indispensable to Sister Sharon's roadshow. Bill Morgan sees thru Elmer and tells Sharon that in 1917 he was expelled from the seminary for seducing the deacon's daughter. She ignores the warning and they become a great success in the big city. Then his past comes back to haunt him in the form of Lulu Bains (Shirley Jones) who is now a prostitute.Burt Lancaster gives such a big performance. It is so big that it always has a tinge of falsehood. His laugh is so outrageous that it plays both sides of the divide. It's this big performance that is so memorable. Jean Simmons is the perfect compliment. She is the embodiment of purity of spirit. Burt definitely deserves his Oscar win. I can see some people taking offense from the depiction of religious revival. However I see a great role model in Sister Sharon. It's also a tale of salvation for Elmer Gantry.

princebansal1982 Elmer Gantry had nothing new for me in terms of plot. So I was looking forward to good acting to tide me over. Burt Lancaster won an Oscar for his role in this film. But frankly his performance was a bit hammy at times. Certain scenes did require a hammy performance, especially when he was preaching but he did that a lot. Jean Simmons was a delight though. I am a big fan of Audrey Hepburn and she reminds me of her. So that maybe a big reason why I liked her. Another thing that I didn't like was the character Elmer Gantry. The audience is never given a clear picture of him. Is he just a conman or good guy ? Instead he is shown as something of a conman with heart of gold. He just switches between good and bad so fast that I was sometimes left puzzled.