Customer Reviews
Dynamic Cinematic Rendering Of The Famous Play. - By: Mark Pearce, 05 Jan 2009 
17th Century Salem, Massachusetts.A group of teenage girls led by Abigail Williams(Winona Ryder)seek to divert attention away from their midnight conjuring by turning the town upside down with accusations of witchcraft against innocent god fearing members of the community.Throwin a corrupt town minister(Bruce Davison) & a "godless"stealer of his accused neighbours lands(Jeffrey Jones) & you have a brew for trouble.
When respected farmer John Proctor's (Daniel Day Lewis)wife Elizabeth(Joan Allen) is accused all hell breaks loose & deputy governor Judge Danforth(Paul Scofield) is calledin to render"justice".
Energetic,pretty faithful rendering of his own play by Arthur Miller is backed up by good performances & assured direction from Hytner.The central conceit that a group of young girls could convince a townspeople of a non-existant claim is just about carried with Ryder(a very ordinary actress at best)pulling off a difficult role with some aplomb.Her persistent sightings of the devilin the rafters had me looking at my own ceiling once or twice.
Scofield & Allen are superb & whether you choose to see the Crucible as a allegory on the comunist witch hunts of the 1950's as it surely is, I prefer to take a more contrary & personal position:The Crucible is a thoughtful & excellent piece of work that reminds me that organised religion is both foolish & divisive(look at our world)and that personal faith & benevolence should be good enough to ensure a worthwhile life.
Here endth the lesson.
Because I am not worth the dust on the feet of them that hang! - By: Ms. N. P. Dougan, 01 Nov 2007 
Because I am not worth the dust on the feet of them that hang! How may I live without my name? I have given you my soul; leave me my name!... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... .... ... ... ... ... .... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... .... ... ... ... ... .... ... After being caught dancing nakedin the woods, Abigail Williams hatches a plan with the other girlsin the village. Abigail claims that she has been fighting to save her own soul, as she is surrounded by people who worship the devil. Instead of dismissing these claims as foolish ramblings of a young girl, the town elders encourage her hysteria. Accusations fuelled by provincial politics, greed, spite, paranoia, & fear become commonplace. Many people are forced to make the ultimate sacrifice rather than tarnish their good name.
Arthur Miller was a prodigious American writer & I am sure, when making a movie of one of his plays, there is a certain amount of trepidation on the part of the Director & the actors to do a reputable job. After all, Mr Miller is not going to be blamed if they make a lousy film. Thankfully, Miller was available to write the screenplay. With a cast that included Daniel Day Lewis, Joan Allen, & Wynona Ryderin her heyday, not much can go wrong & it doesn't. The Crucible is a superb film, filled with frightening insights into mob mentality. It also shows how situations can get completely out of control when rational thought is replaced by foolishness & cruel intolerance. You may argue that The Crucible has lost some of its original impact. It was first shown to American audiencesin the 1950s, during McCarthy Era. However, the subtext is still very relevant today because, unfortunately, intolerance, injustice, & mass hysteria are still problems that people face the world over.
The Crucible is a compelling film with a formidable cast that looks & sounds authentic. You can't get much better than that!
A film of two halves, but ultimately moving and powerful - By: Trevor Willsmer, 19 Jun 2006 The Crucible is considerably simplified from the play. Despite Arthur Miller handling the adaptation himself, so much of the historical detail & motivation for the witchhunts is dropped to get the narrative moving faster that at the end of the day the whole thing seems to have been reduced to a simple case of a woman spurned & a bad case of mass hysteria. Some awkward performancesin the first half don't help either - Bruce Davison is shrilly ineffective, Daniel Day Lewis still seems to be doing Hawkeye, Joan Allen does her serious face again & the jury's still out on whether Winona Ryder is giving a convincing performance as an unconvincing liar or & unconvincing performance as a convincing liar. Yet the strength of the material shines through & suddenly, by the halfway point, you suddenly realise that you are completely gripped by it & that most of the performances have improved immeasurably once Paul Scofield has arrived to up the ante. Indeed, by the end the piece is genuinely tragic & moving (that said, I still maintain that the real hero of the piece is not John Proctor but Pastor Hale - the only character to realise his terrible error & to have the courage to publicly try to remedy it, however hopelessly). Excellent supporting performances from Karron Graves and, surprisingly, George Gaynes, although the houses seem a little too large for Puritan stock. Definitely a film of two halves, but worth seeing for the sheer power of the latter half.
No extras of any kind on the UK disc (unlike the US disc, which features commentary by the director & Miller as well as a brief interview with Miller), but it does at least boast a decent 1.85:1 widescreen transfer.
"Your justice would freeze beer." - By: Mary Whipple, 30 Jun 2004 
Although the playwright Arthur Miller was also the screenwriter for this production starring Winona Ryder & Daniel Day-Lewis, the film bears little resemblance to the playin tone & impact. Director Nicholas Hytner has abandoned the intimate, almost claustrophobic atmosphere of the dark, interior scenesin the play,in favor of an expansive setting, with many scenes set outside, including panoramic shots of Salemin 1692, full of costumed "citizens." The expanded setting makes the psychology & motivation of the witchcraft hysteria more difficult to determine, since the intensity of the settlers' repressed, interior lives is not obvious. In addition, the explanatory notes which Miller incorporates into the play about the various land disputes, religious controversies, & personal animosities, which led to specific individuals being accused & arrested for witchcraft, are seen only peripherally.
As a result, we see Winona Ryder, as Abigail Williams, & her coterie of bewitched girls, screaming hysterically & accusing innocent women of witchcraft without the necessary background which would make these accusations plausible. Her previous relationship with John Proctor (Daniel Day-Lewis),in the absence of other motivations, seems to be the primary reason for her behavior, but this thwarted love does not explain the extent of her rage or the involvement of the other girls. Day-Lewis is reduced to the role of victim, & one of the hallmarks of his acting, his subtlety, is absent here. Some details of the scenery also ring false. Housesin this period were very small because of the difficulty of heating, though John Proctor's house here is as large as that of a governor, & other buildings, including the church/meeting house are huge, contrary to the religious avoidance of display during the period.
This is a Hollywood version of the witchcraft trials, capitalizing on the sensational without conveying the tumultuous background--the Indian wars which were just ending, the growing independence of individuals, the increasing resentment of the all-powerful church with its hard-line restrictions, the limitations placed on women, & most importantly, the lack of any role whatsoever for young women, who were not old enough to assume a woman's role but were old enough to have reached sexual maturity without any outlet for their feelings, a lethal mix of boredom & repression. The film is beautiful, & the acting, though one-dimensional, is as effective as it can bein the absence of fully-developed motivation for the girls' hysteria. The "witches" are reduced to cartoons here, & Miller's parallels between these trials & the McCarthy hearings of the 1950s, which put the play's trials into a modern context, are missing. Mary Whipple
More Than Accusations - By: , 18 May 2004 Winona Ryder & Daniel Day Lewis starin this adaptation of The Crucible by Arthur Miller. The film portrays the growth of the mass witch crazein Salem, Massachussettsin 1692. From the beginning of the film, it is apparent that this is is not just a historical interpretation, but a production that delves into the web of fear, prejudice & deceit created by a simple lie.
Abigail Williams (Ryder) plays the housemaid who loses her job when her mistress, suspects that she has a fancy for her husband, John Proctor. (Daniel Day Lewis)
Ryder has a delightfully evil personnain this film & while you want her to pay for her sins, the film pulls youin with each of her lies & pretences. Day Lewis expertly pulls off a character that would be a challenge for any actor, & one who keeps you watching until the end.
As you watch The Crucible, bearin mind that though this is not necessarily an accurate historical interpretation of what happenedin Salem during the witch craze, the horrifying events that take placein this film aren't far from the truth. The realityin Miller's play shines through. An acusation of dabblingin the occult led to the death of 19, whether they were wrongly victimised or not. I challenge you not to be moved by what you see.
