Ragtime (1981)

In the beginning of the Twentieth Century, many dramas cross in a wonderful panel, showing the formation of the American society. Evelyn Nesbit Thaw (Elizabeth McGovern) is the wife of a millionaire, and pivot of a crime committed by her jealous husband. Her mother-in-law is a hypocrite old lady, who convinces Evelyn to lie in court for money, to avoid her son to go to the electric chair. Evelyn commits perjury, but the mother-in-law does not pay her the promised amount. Mary Steenburgen is a correct woman, having a very moralist husband. Her brother (Brad Dourif) is honest and idealist. The family hires Sarah, a black and single mother, with her baby. The father is the pianist Coalhouse Walker Jr. (Howard E. Rollins Jr.), who progresses in his career and comes back to Sarah, proposing her to get married with him. An incident with a group of racists makes him fighting for justice in a racist society. Rheinlander Waldo (James Cagney) is the chief of police, who is involved in the incident. This movie is another wonderful film of Milos Forman. Amazing the quantity of marvelous movies made by this fantastic director. The reconstitution of the period is magnificent. The cast is stunning. Elizabeth McGovern looks like a doll wearing those costumes. Her nude scene is also great. My vote is nine.

Title (Brazil): `Na Época do Ragtime' (`In the Age of the Ragtime')

Fmovies: 1906, to be specific, is when Stanford White was shot -- which of course marks the beginning date bookmark of the movie.

The "declaration of war" -- WW I -- as announced in a Newspaper headline at the end of the film, bookmarks the end of the movie -- and of the era.

Not trivial points, since a good part of the interest of this movie lies it it's serving as a relatively rare window into this period. Which unlike the 1930s or the 1920s which the plot summary and first comment confuse it with, is not a period which is much portrayed in film.

I'd say it's a pretty good, although not great, "costume" film. The first half is much stronger than the second half, both in historical interest and in character development.

Worth seeing though. Perhaps try seeing it right after "Age of Innocence", which is set primarily in the New York of the 1870s (although entirely among the upper upper class, instead of the somewhat broader class look, and city/near country look of Ragtime).

"Ragtime" is a very mixed bag. On paper, virtually everything about it seems right. The production values are absolutely first rate, the cast is excellent. Can't fault the direction either.

But...something's missing.

Though it's hardly a bore, there's something about Foreman's "Ragtime" that simply doesn't ring and feel true. It all feels so staged and deliberate. It simply lacks a feeling of reality. It reminds me of one of those stodgy historical films I was made to sit through in grade school in the 1970s when the Bicentennial was the rage. Those films showing America's progress were entertaining but never believable for even an minute. That's Foreman's "Ragtime". Rather than feel anything for any of the characters, the film is made out like some kind of historical pageant. Maybe that was Foreman's point but it doesn't work as drama and it never pulls the viewer completely into it's world.

Ragtime fmovies. RAGTIMEÂ…Director Milos FormanÂ… Cast IncÂ… JAMES CAGNEYÂ…Pat O'BrienÂ…Donald O'ConnorÂ… This cast is a blast from the pastÂ… We film for a few days at Oxford and for me it doesn't get any better than this. The scenes are interior of a big office and I'm dressed as a US cop. Pat O'Brien came onto the set first and shook hands with many of the Supporting Artists (Including me) ''How are you son, you look good'' he said.. Well that's the best way for me to start the day because now I felt good that this man had taken time to welcome all of us. Pat moved around the room chatting to cast and crew alike and we were all waiting for the main man to arrive on set.. The noise was quite deafening until someone said ''He's here''. You could have heard a pin drop as the main man entered the set. Everyone stood and applauded and waited for James Cagney to take his position on the set before silence resumed. There they were in front of me my two heroes of the black and white days of cinema. I think I've seen every film that James has made (Some of them many times) I feel sorry for the kids of today that never got to see he's early films and think a good film today has to be bombarded with special effects to make it work. Let me list some of films of James Cagney to let the kids of today and tomorrow know what they have missed. The Public Enemy (1931), Scarface (1932), Yankee Doodle Dandy (1942), White Heat (1949). Then in the 50s Love Me Or Leave Me (With Doris Day), Mr Roberts. (With a young Jack Lemmon). I could watch all these films again and never tire. This was to be James Cagney's last film and I would like to say, thank you Mr Cagney for entertaining me for so many years.

This a truly terrific period piece directed by Milos Forman(Cuckoo's Nest, Amadeus) and starring terrific cast. The film takes place in the very early 1900's and follows the lives of at least four different people/families. As the movie gets going, it begins to focus mostly on an African American man and his struggle to be heard in society after he is mistreated by a group of firemen. Everything that follows is equally powerful and fascinating as the man tries to find justice in the turn of the century America. This fine film is richly textured with turn of the century atmosphere, music and actual newsreels from the period which all contribute to this fascinating story. Also nice to see James Cagney one more time. This is a film that I would recommend to anyone who is interested in what life was like at the turn of century. A fantastic film. ***3/4 out of ****.

A short commentary: Having read through a few of the comments here, I note that there are several which express disappointment that the movie didn't do the book justice. Personally, having read the book some time after seeing the movie, I can understand their point, but realistically it's the type of book which would be nearly be impossible to do justice to, as there are so many broad interwoven threads in the book that it would require at least a 6 hour movie to even scratch the surface, and even then, putting it all together into a singular coherent whole which would hold the viewer's interest for that long would be quite a mean feat indeed. So instead of looking at it as an attempt to fully capture the book, it might be best to simply appreciate it for what it is, rather than what it isn't. And I believe that on its own terms it succeeds admirably, and remains one of my favorite movies of all time.

Another way of looking at this, as an introduction to the book, rather than vice versa it has some value on those terms. Perhaps if I hadn't seen the movie I might never have happened upon the book, and never known what I'd missed.