Scanialara You won't be disappointed!

Colibel Terrible acting, screenplay and direction.

Stellead Don't listen to the Hype. It's awful

Darin One of the film's great tricks is that, for a time, you think it will go down a rabbit hole of unrealistic glorification.

yawael The story talks about two brothers living with there father, and their father is almost the perfect man that can you see, but his biggest problem is that he loves one of his sons more than the other, and that's because he never understand him. And that Affects Cal ( Dean ) very much because no matter what he did he just can't win his father love, he feels that he is the unwanted son.James Dean delivered one of his best performances ever to the big screen, and for me among his three films this was his finest and that's because of the brilliant guide by Elia Kazan, now don't get me wrong Dean was a great actor and had a great talent but when you have a great director like Kazan you will bring the best of you, take a quick look at Kazan movies you can see that any actor who worked with him took an Oscar nomination.Dean really gave us an unforgettable performance of a complicated guy that no one could performance it, he stole almost every scene he was in, and who could forget the way he is looking with eyes full of tears after his father refused to take his birthday present. and the unforgettable ending which is full of love and forgiveness.Alongside dean there was a great cast most best of them was the talented Julie Harris and i really can't think of this film without remembering Harris Character which had a very sad childhood just as Cal's life.

SimonJack Although some of his other books receive more acclaim and readership ("The Grapes of Wrath," "Of Mice and Men," "The Winter of Our Discontent"), John Steinbeck said that "East of Eden" was the novel that he lived to write. Indeed, the moralism of his writing reached broader and deeper in Eden than in any of his other works. The story here is set mainly in Steinbeck's beloved Salinas Valley and Monterey County.Warner Brothers did a commendable job in bringing the story to life on the silver screen. It condensed a 600-page novel into a two–hour film, yet kept all of the main elements of the drama. The title for the story comes from the Bible. Genesis 4:16 reads, "Cain then left the Lord's presence and settled in the land of Nod, east of Eden." The plot of the story is a modern Cain and Abel tale, and it is repeated within succeeding generations. In the Bible, Cain brought "some of the fruits of the soil" to offer the Lord. Abel brought "the best of the firstlings," or "some of the firstlings and their fat portions." The latter were more pleasing to God. So, Cain did so-so, average, but Abel went out of his way to give the best to the Lord. God didn't love Cain any less -- he was just most pleased with Abel's offering. Yet Cain succumbed to pride, greed, envy, anger and lust. Most know the story of "East of Eden" or will find other reviews that discuss the plot. So, my remarks here are brief and cover some things not mentioned. Seeing this film again after many years, on a DVD, I had the advantage of extras that included some deleted scenes. I think one inclusion would have made the film perfect – the scene of Cal and Aron in their room after they had argued outside and Cal said that Aron was "the one he wanted" referring to his father's favoritism, as he saw it. Without that sequence, we see Cal suddenly perking up, pitching in and being Mr. good-guy helping his father. But, there's no real explanation or background to let us know why he would change. I don't know why they deleted that scene – it made the perfect fit and segue with Aron and Cal talking and Aron explaining in a way that Cal could understand. I don't think that would have made the movie too long in itself. James Dean had the largest role, as Cal, and was the male lead. And, yes, he was a new young and hot star of the time. All of the acting is excellent, including Dean's. But, I think the very best performances in this movie were by Julie Harris as Abra, Jo Van Fleet as Kate, and Raymond Massey as Adam. Richard Davalos, as Aron, wasn't far behind; and Van Fleet's performance was most deserving of the Oscar she won. James Dean made one more film after this – "Giant," which came out in October 1956. He wasn't alive to see it, because he was killed in a highway accident on Sept. 30, 1955. He had just finished filming for "Giant." That was just five months after "East of Eden" hit theaters. It's interesting to note that the site of Dean's accident was a few miles east of Paso Robles, California. That's at the southern end of the Salinas Valley of Steinbeck's "East of Eden."Those interested in Steinbeck should enjoy a visit to the National Steinbeck Center. It's a marvelous museum in downtown Salinas, CA.

elvircorhodzic EAST OF EDEN is an emotional drama about the lives of troubled people in a provincial family.Frustrated and alienated youth are living in a small California town. The boy is in constant conflict with their own religious father, who prefers the another son.I'm thrilled with the picture. Nature is the real beauty in this film. The problematic people in this atmosphere seem more credible. This is a powerful drama with different moods and clear psychoanalysis. It is fascinating that the director establishes a better relationship with the landscape and a weaker relationship with the protagonists.Nobody's perfect. A trite but true phrase. The only question is, who will find meaning in their own imperfections. The film can recognize good and evil. This attitude affects the clarity of emotions. Fortunately, Biblical allusion is not excessive. The brothers, in a way, symbolize duality in man himself to grotesque proportions. The struggle for acceptance in the family and society, which has tragic end !? This is not only preposterous, but is dotted with a kind of illusion.James Dean as Caleb Trask is unrepeatable, but the performance is overstated. Emotional character does not show a clear emotion. He is a hero and a villain in this film. The son who fought for an ounce of his father's love. The son, who is trying to buy his father's love. The protagonist who has a frank and somewhat noble purpose in life. James Dean is a strange combination between Marlon Brando and Montgomery Clift. Julie Harris as Abra Bacon is a young and inexperienced lady, who is forced to choose between the perfect son (the good guy) and imperfect son (the bad guy). Of course, she is not good enough for the perfect son, but she matures in time to save imperfect. Very good performance, I have to admit.Raymond Massey as Adam Trask in the role of the "perfect" and the strictly religious father. I can understand his seriousness, sense of justice, and even fanatical devotion, but persistent refusing attitude against his son I will never understand. I tried to find a reason at some redemption, but again I have not found a deeper meaning. Richard Davalos as Aron Trask was the perfect son. I felt resentment and envy in his character. Of course, after the knowledge of the life of his mother. That's awesome. The protagonist who believes in the eternal triumph of good over evil. Characterization is very bad in this case. Jo Van Fleet as Cathy Ames is the mother described as a monster without a shred of love. The evil that is necessary for the story.This movie is only a part of the novel and I made conclusions based on that.

uniformsierraalpha7 The film was a poorly directed and disappointing rendition of the novel and its moral.To be fair, one can only fit so much of such an extensive story into a movie, providing the director reasonable excuse to start so late into the novel, but also making him even more responsible for the fragment of the story he chose to recreate. The film in its entirety felt much like a roller coaster, having many interesting/exciting parts but lacking any real direction or focus. In relation to the novel, the film barely managed to show a connection, which was only achieved by loosely portraying major events and the characters themselves. The cast themselves, despite their valiant effort, either underacted or overacted, taking whatever moral or lesson the story might have possibly been connected to, and beating it even more, until it was barely recognizably, if existent at all. Throughout the film, the number of loose ends and spontaneous changes of depth in meaning was overwhelming, to the point of sight nausea. Significant scenes holding any philosophical value were also few and far between. To be fair, the film, when observed independent of its literary counterpart (if that relationship can even be established!) did maintain some level of intrigue, managing to keep me fairly interested and somewhat entertained. The actors also managed to retain some portion of the intensity and urgency ever so abundant in the novel, as well as maintain the personality of their personae.To conclude, the film missed the standard set by the novel so intricately written by Stienbeck. The bulk of my disappointment, which was immense to say the least, was the utter failure of the film to accurately portray the novel it was named after. Though decent as a film itself, it is sure to disappoint those who have rad the novel and enjoyed it in its entirety.