All The King's Men Analysis

English II Final
All The King’s Men

“All The King’s Men”, the novel, written by Robert Penn Warren and the film, directed by Steven Zallian, were both brilliant creations. As stated in the New York Times article, “Whatever its flaws, Warren’s book, a meaty stew of lurid Southern-gothic pulp and high-minded literariness, seems to provide the recipe for a grand, melodramatic prestige picture” (1). Whether you are watching a movie or reading a book there is an image in your mind. With a movie you are seeing the image that the director wants you to see, whereas in a novel the author is describing the image but, you yourself are using your own imagination to put the author’s words together to create an image. In some cases when you are reading
a novel the descriptions and your imagination working together create an extremely powerful image. In other cases actually being able to see a situation with your own eyes makes it more dramatic and powerful, all depending on how it is projected. The novel does an amazing job with giving the reader specific details, but I some cases a person needs to witness the action with their own eyes.
Question 1: Willie Stark is a very powerful speaker.
He is powerful because he has faith in what he is preaching. In the film, Willie’s speech, as well as the crowd’s reaction, is much more deep and powerful than the way it is depicted in the novel. In both the novel as well as in the film, Willie’s speech starts off slow and isn’t enough to catch the attention of the town’s people immediately. The novel doesn’t show any distinct indication that Willie ever captures the attention of the people. In the film as soon as Willie has mentioned the school house disaster, everyone starts to flock towards the stage where Willie is standing. He then explains how his running for governor was nothing but a fraud set up put together by Joe Harrison. In the novel, Willie ends his speech by saying “I’m resigning in favor of MacMurfee”, then goes on to say he and the other hicks will kill Joe Harrison, and leaves it at that (140). However, in the film after he explains the Joe Harrison scandal in a very stern, determined tone, catching the crowds undivided attention, he announces that he is going to run for governor on his own and gets everyone around chanting. In this case the movie is much more powerful than the novel because the viewer is able to witness the crowd’s reaction to the fullest extent. The way Willie makes his speech by yelling and showing determination and aggressiveness actually makes you believe what he is saying and makes you as the viewer want to yell along with the
town’s people. The faces of the town’s people are so mesmerized by what Willie is saying and seeing their positive grinning faces chanting back “nail em’ up”, makes it so real that you start to believe it yourself.
Question 2: Jack Burden and Willie Stark pay a visit to Judge Irwin’s house regarding the impeachment of Stark as the governor. In the novel it goes into an abundance of Jack’s thoughts from the time he enters the Judge’s house until his exiting. Therefore the novel is much more effective and powerful regarding this conflict. The novel goes into great detail about Jack’s remembrance of the Judge. When Judge Irwin opens the door for Jack, Jack notices that the Judge hasn’t changed much since he has remembered him. Jack then goes on to explain that the library of the Judges house had not changed at all. He could remember the smell of the room from the long afternoons he had spent in that room reading with the Judge (65). This is very powerful because it is showing the reader how strong the connection between judge and jack is and how much of a past relationship they had. It shows that deep down it is bothering Jack to be there, intruding on the Judge. This part of the novel explains a great deal of Jack’s thought, whereas in the film there is no way of indicating what Jack is thinking. The Judge makes a deceitful remark towards Jack, saying “I didn’t realize, Jack, that your duties included those of a body servant, but, of course, if I am mistaken –“ (66). In the novel it goes on to explain Jacks feelings towards this offensive comment. He is thinking how he could slap Judge Irwin’s face for the remark he has made about pouring Willie a drink. In the film there is no indication of Jack being this irritated. Also in the film it does not show a transition of Jack’s moods, from being happy and reminiscing on the past he had with Judge Irwin, to becoming angry toward the statement made by the Judge. Not always does a viewing a scene make it appear to be more powerful, a novel can be so descriptive that you feel like you are actually there where a movie can be portraying the same scene and make it so brief that it is of no importance.

Question 3: Jack pays Judge Irwin a visit regarding his involvement in the Littlepaugh scandal. The novel works better to show the conflict because it is much more explanatory in addressing each and every portion of the meeting between Jack and the Judge. Their conversation goes into full description of how they each feel about everything that they are discussing. It shows how passionate each part of their conversation is and addresses the main conflict showing how each of them feels about it. The novel casts the mood changes of jack and the judge very well, going from their happy mood to a point where they are getting aggressive. Jacks says “I thought he might be ready to reach for a weapon, or ready to spring at me” (522). The changing in moods is an important key point for the reader to understand the conflict between Jack and the Judge, considering their past relationship. In the film the mood between Jack and the Jude stays at an aggressive level, which does not show the ups and downs of their moods towards the conflicts. The mood changing shows how serious their conflict is because it reminds the reader about their father son like past. Judge Irwin admitting to the scandal makes more of a conflict between him and jack. Judge Irwin says “You know sometimes for a long time at a stretch it’s like it hadn’t happened. Not to me. Maybe to someone else, but not to me. Then I remember” (521). Jack now knows the correct information, which he was unsure of from the start. If he tells Willie he is ruining the connection between him and the judge, if he doesn’t tell Willie he is going against his boss. The film shows just a brief situation where it shows the anger in both of them but does not focus on the main part of their conflict showing the viewer the main problems. The novel does such a good job at portraying the moods of the characters that it gives the reader a better understand of how each character felt, making the reader feel for the characters and understand the main points. After Jack finds his mother screaming crying and she tells him that he has killed his father, this makes Jack aware of two things. The first is that Judge Irwin is his real father, and the second is that Jack is responsible for the suicide of his own father. Unlike in the film, the novel immediately brings the reader back to the past of Jack and the Judge trying to show how serious their main conflict was.

Question 4: The last few scenes in the film provides a much more dramatic and powerful closure than the ending of the novel. Novel ends in a great way and has a nice closing for a novel, but it was not as dramatic and powerful as the ending scene of the movie. In the film, the intensity of the ending scene keeps the audience at the edge of their seats. The way Adam comes out from hiding and shoots Willie multiple times in the chest the viewer automatically knows that there is no hope for Willie’s life. This depicts a much more dramatic scene, were as in the novel Willie does not die right there in then but is only injured from the gun shot and in result is bleeding from his hand. Jack narrates, “The Boss did not die there in the lobby under the dome. In fact, he lived quite a while and died on a clean, white, antiseptic bed, with all the benefits of science” (598). The novel is not presenting as much drama because his death is more expected, whereas in the film the sudden death of a main character is much more powerful. Steven Zallian’s idea of Willie and Adam dying side by side on the floor of the state house of Louisiana makes the ending of the film significantly more powerful. Seeing the blood of Willie and Adam pour out of them and run through the crevices of the state house floor makes a huge statement for the film. The blood of the “bad” is combining, showing the once you are corrupt you are just as bad as the next corrupt person. As stated in the article from Empire Magazine, “There are no good guys here, only not-so-bad-guys – and lots of em’” (1).

Whether a scene is presented in a novel or in a film, its dramatic and powerful image all depends on the way the event is depicted from the author or director’s perspective.
In some cases a book can describe something so vividly that it is significantly easy for the reader to instantly get that image in there head. The novel of All the Kings Men by Robert penn warren does an excellent job at presenting every detail to the reader so that they are able to get a lucid image in their minds. In some cases the description he provides the read with almost makes it seem real. In other circumstances it is the eye of the audience which brings the event to life. In the end, it all depends on the event being
illustrated.
Works Cited
“All The King’s Men”. Empire Magazine, UK: 2pp. Online. Internet. MRQE.com

Penn Warren, Robert. All The King’s Men. Orlando: Harcourt, 1974.

Scott, A.O. “Southern Fried Demagogue and His Lurid Downfall”. The New York Times: 3pp. Online. Internet. 22 September, 2006. MRQE.com

Zallian, Steven, Director. “All The King’s Men”. 2006