AKA how to build a bureaucratic monster. When a frustrated farmer speaks his mind and cultivates a grassroots political following, he’s recruited to throw his hat into a state-wide election. It’s a trick, of course, a ruse by the incumbent to split votes during a contentious campaign, and the initial results are effective. On the trail, our farmer is flustered and overwhelmed, a neophyte in over his head who struggles to maintain his former vigor while remaining on-message. Eventually he figures things out - both the deception and the secrets of electoral success - and, though it’s too late for that first ballot, he applies these lessons four years later with far better returns. While he may still have a lot to learn about the gig, the state’s new governor doesn’t need instruction on everything. Like the correlation between power and corruption.

The core of this idea is strong. There’s pathos in watching a good person fall victim to the system, sacrificing ideals in favor of popular acclaim and personal rewards. Broderick Crawford is exceptional in that role, retaining shades of the simple man he once was in the grand narcissist he eventually becomes. The editing is all over the place, though, and that can make for some very difficult sailing as the plot intensifies and Crawford’s actions grow more erratic. Rumor has it that director Robert Rossen’s original cut was obscenely long and borderline-incoherent, leading to more drastic edits that left countless scenes and stories shredded. Lost subplots are referenced without explanation. Mid-stream conversations abruptly fade to the next scene. Minor characters are never properly introduced, only tossed into the churn. This makes for a frustrating, confusing watch and eventually robs the inevitable climax of some power. Even that crucial moment wasn’t immune to the editor’s knife, it seems.

I feel like this particular best picture winner was rewarded for the potential of what it could have been, more than the reality of what it is. It definitely has the bones to be something great, but the end result is an underachievement.

Honesty, integrity, corruption and murder!

Willie Stark is an upstanding pillar of the community, when he is coaxed into standing in the local election he gets a thirst for politics. As he progresses through the political ranks he loses sight of the very things that he first stood for, with him, and all those associated with him getting muddier by the day.

Adapted by Robert Rossen (director and screenplay) from the Pulitzer Prize winning novel by Robert Penn Warren, All The King's Men is the story about the rise and fall of a rotten politician. Almost certainly based on Louisiana Governor, Huey Pierce Long, it's a towering piece of work that is as politically cynical as it is ego centrically human. Not merely just another film about "when good guys go bad", this picture serves notice to the many things that drives politics on, for better or worse. The role of the press is under scrutiny for example, and just how come simple things such as rallies can be staged by some conniving aide sitting at the back? All roads in this gritty piece are paved with suspicious looking stones, the very foundations of which have been murkily formed.

It's a testament to Rossen and his excellent cast that All The King's Men is still as potent today as it obviously was back at the tail end of the 40s. Every once in a while a similarly themed film will come our way, but few, if any, can boast the hard hitting realism that seams throughout Rossen's film. Helped by location shooting at run down Stockton in California, and boosted by a powerhouse performance from Broderick Crawford as Stark, this film most definitely is a hallmark in the political genre. Nominated for seven Academy Awards, it won three in the main categories, Best Actor (Crawford), Best Picture (rightly) and Best Supporting Actress (Mercedes McCambridge with an incredible debut performance). 9/10