I just watched “The Good Earth” for the first time. Released in 1937, it’s based on the famous book by Pearl Buck. I’m a huge fan of Paul Muni, but was not as familiar with his co-star, Luise Rainer. She won an Oscar for this movie, only a year after winning for “The Great Ziegfeld” . . . being the first person to have won two Oscars . . . for two totally opposite kinds of roles. Unfortunately she didn’t make very many films, but is still alive, celebrating her 100th birthday this past Tuesday (the oldest living Oscar winner).
This film has many cultural insights into Chinese society of that period, but the most obvious is the total devaluation of women, aside from giving birth to sons.
It’s also, IIRC, the last movie produced by the legendary Irving Thalberg, one of the most important figures in Hollywood history. One of the inventors of the concept of Hollywood.
The book was fantastic. I tend to dislike a movie once I’ve read the book though (books are SO much better), so I’ll probably never see the movie. I would suggest that if you have no experience with either, go with the book.
The movie is really excellent, I only saw it for the first in the last two years. I was home sick and TCM was running a bunch of Luise Rainer’s film. I had never really heard of her before and I was impressed with her acting in movies like The Good Earth and her beauty in some of the other films. I was amazed I had been unaware of her.
Dramatic School was not so great but I really enjoyed *Escapade *with her and William Powell. I think it is an underrated if fairly lightweight movie.
Rainer’s career was very short, and she probably benefited the bloc voting that was going on at the Academy at the time.
Remember, the Academy was not founded to give awards for filmmaking; it was created to be a “corporate union” – a union run by the employer in order to give the appearance of there being a negotiation unit, but which would do what the studios wanted. The Oscar was an afterthought. And studios told their employees who to vote for in the early days. There was an agreement to spread the awards around the studios, so voters would be told who to vote for for each award (and the studios were counting the ballots, anyway). This faded out by the end of the 1930s.
I read the book when I was young-around 8, I think-and I loved it. It was one of 3 or 4 that was in one of those Reader’s Digest Condensed Books, and it had Robin Hood and the Scarlet Pimpernel in there, too. So those three were my favorites when I was little. I haven’t read it in dozens of years, though, and I think I ought to find out if the non-condensed version is any different.
AND I will look for this movie, too. Thanks for the heads-up!
Had to add…after years of looking for those books I had when I was younger <my folks actually gave them to me on my third birthday, with an inscription on the inside> I just realized that what I had was Reader’s Digest Best Loved Books for Young Readers. And I found two of the three I had on Ebay; I can’t wait to have them again.
Thank you again for posting this thread; been looking for those books for quite a while.
I love the book and re-read it every few years. Saw the movie about 20 years ago and was . . . singularly unimpressed. Mainly I thought Paul Muni’s portrayal of Wang Lung was way too chipper and animated, and that just ruined the rest of it for me.
I enjoyed both the book and the film. The interesting thing about Rainer’s performance is how much she portrays solely through gesture and facial expression. She actually has very little dialogue.
Not at all. Wang Lung in the book was generally a very serious and introverted fellow. He had a few moments of humor, but he didn’t go galumphing around like Muni did.
In the book, the uncle was jovial enough, but he was involved in the local version of the mob, so he had good reason; he did whatever the hell he wanted.