Birdman of Alcatraz

GOOD NEWS: This is a riveting film start-to-finish, which is hard to do considering it runs over two hours. Burt Lancaster, one of the better actors, perhaps, of all time, gives a tremendous and very memorable performance. It's a cliché but this IS one story you will not forget!

Director John Frrankenheimer also is one of the best ever. Check out his resume, if you question that last statement. He has some masterful camera shots in here. In addition to the talents of the director and main actor, you have Karl Malden,Thelma Ritter, Telly Savalas and Edmond O'Brien - no slouches they - in solid supporting roles. The DVD also helps highlight the wonderful black-and-white photography.

Most prison stories are bleak and depressing. This one is not. Oh, it has some melodrama and a few tough scenes which include prison violence, but generally it is a fascinating character study....and, even for those of you who are not bird lovers, full of interesting information about our feathered friends. How they trained the birds to do some things in here also is amazing.

BAD NEWS: What a disappointment to do some research about the real "birdman," Robert Stroud. It turns out, as other reviewers have noted, the man was a sleaze-bag. No sense going into details since some of them are simply revolting. For those who simply want to remember this as a great movie and a great performance by Lancaster, do yourself a favor and leave it at that. In this case, ignorance IS bliss!

I've just seen this film on TV, it being several years since I saw it last. What a fine job Burt Lancaster makes of portraying Robert Stroud, a two-times murderer who finds inner peace when he nurses a young sparrow back to health in his prison cell. More birds follow, and in time he becomes an authority on bird pathology and develops several cures for diseases which were thought untreatable.

The quiet dignity that Lancaster gives to the part may or may not have been a genuine part of the real Robert Stroud but it is deeply moving, and the Director's careful treatment of the relationship he has with his long-term warder who grows old alongside him is one part of the film which can bring a lump to the throat.

Of course the film carries the message that not all prisoners should be treated with brutal disdain and could be seen as just another left-wing handwringer from a period when this kind of thing was popular among movie-makers, but it is certainly a top-notch example.

There are many combinations in Hollywood that produce fine work; and, then, there are those that produce tremendous work. Directors and actors can often be at odds, but when they are in sync, something wonderful can come of it. Hitchcock made classics with Jimmy Stewart and Cary Grant; Scorcese and Deniro transcend their contemporaries; and Burt Lancaster and John Frankenheimer made great movies together.

I've always liked Burt Lancaster. At first, I had only seen his swashbucklers and his westerns. But, as I discovered his dramas, my respect grew. Lancaster was the perfect leading man. He was tall, good looking, charming, and loaded with charisma. What's more, he had talent. He could turn out a pirate yarn or play a con artist who finds love; a marshall in the most famous gunfight, or a general who abandons his oath; a ghost of a doctor who gets that one at-bat, or a prisoner who becomes an expert on birds. Lancaster is brilliant in this film.

Lancaster was more than a movie star; he was an actor. He never sought the easy route, his life had never been easy. Maybe that's why his movies stand out. Nothing good ever comes easy.

Lancaster presents a brilliant portrayal of Robert Stroud. Whether it is historically accurate or not is beside the point. Lancaster represents the indomitable human spirit; no matter what challenge life throws at him, he rises above. Lancaster is understated in this role, but so powerful. He doesn't need method or make up or any tricks; just his humanity.

So many movies shine due to the presence of Lancaster; but his collaborations with Frankenheimer shine brightest. Frankenheimer is highly underrated, due to his later work; but, there was a period when he was one of the best. The Manchurian Candidate, Seven Days in May, The Train, and Birdman of Alcatraz are clear examples of his talent. Do yourself a favor, when you see a movie in the video store, or on tv, look for the names Frankenheimer and Lancaster. If you find them, watch the movie. You'll be glad you did.

I've always loved this film. It's moving, emotional, stirring, and poetic. It's even capable of generating great empathy with a man who we'd all prefer not to marry our daughters. Stroud, portrayed by Lancaster, is slowly pulled from a life of solitude, misery, hatred and violence by his love of birds. He becomes someone we can identify with, to care about, to wish he was free.

But...and I'm sorry to be the one to tell you this, but Hollywood doesn't always get it right. Yeah, really. The movie is fiction from start to finish. Tom Gaddis' book was wonderful I actually bought a copy at the Alcatraz gift shop years ago and read it eagerly. I believed I had the true story of Stroud. And believed it for years. Until I read 'Birdman: The Many Faces of Robert Stroud' by Jolene Babyak. What a change. When I confirmed the book's accounts from other sources. I was stunned that we'd been so duped by the book and movie.

So there's a lot more to Stroud than Lancaster's gentle giant. He was a vicious psychopath who had killed twice, and wanted to kill more. He wasn't in solitary because of some misprint in his execution order. He was kept in solitary because he was too dangerous to keep with the regular prison population. He was also a savage homosexual rapist who wrote child pornography and had absolutely no regrets about it. When he was up for parole, he openly stated he wanted to get out before he was too old, because 'there were some people who needed killing.' His birdwork, too, was a fabrication. it's been proved now that most of Stroud's writings were plagiarized from other bird books, and even his remedies were nearly as dangerous as they were healing. He got lucky on some, that's all. No reputable bird breeder uses his remedies today. Stroud was alive when the movie was made. He'd smuggled bits and pieces of his 'autobiography,' heavily slanted in his favor, to Tom Gaddis, his own little gullible ghostwriter. And then it hit the big screen. The story generated piles of mail pleading for Stroud's release. He must have smiled at that, if he knew. The U.S. Bureau of Prisons knew what it was doing keeping Stroud in captivity. He was dangerous and would have probably killed even as an old man. He died the day before JFK was shot. I have an old San Jose Mercury News, from November 23, 1963 which on the fhird page has a small article entitled: "Autopsy Performed on Birdman Stroud.' His death in Springfield would have been front-page news but for the JFK Assassination. Actually, a tiny blurb is all he deserved. Have I seen the movie since I read the truth? Sure, but now I watch it for the acting, the cinematography, the drama, not the fiction. It is a great movie, and even Academy Award material. Frankenheimer's direction is superb, with a wonderful score and high accuracy in what life in prison was like in the early half of the last century. Lancaster, Malden, Brand, even a young Telly Savalas did a masterful job. The only thing I'd add is I wonder what the producers who decided to tell this story in such a favorable light, including the writers would have thought if Stroud had been paroled, and then started killing again. I wonder.

For the film, I give it an 8/10. For a work of fiction, a 10/10.

"Birdman of Alcatraz" depicts a fictionalized version of the life of Robert Stroud, a real prisoner who served a life sentence in various American prisons, including Alcatraz.

As other viewers have commented, the film fictionalizes the life of the real Robert Stroud, who was a murderer and who has been accused of being a pedophile, as well.

This fictionalization should not interfere with an intelligent viewer's enjoyment of a fine film.

Too, this fictionalization doesn't change the key features of Stroud's case -- a bad man, a man who is shown on screen to be a real murderer, was condemned to death by the state. That much is true from Stroud's real life story, and that much is shown in the film.

Stroud was a difficult person who did not treat other people decently. That much was true of the real Stroud and that is shown in the film.

Stroud's mother pled for his life and President Woodrow Wilson commuted his sentence to life. A warden, aware of how difficult Stroud was to control, declared that Stroud be kept in segregation. That much is true in Stroud's real life story, and that is depicted in the film.

Finally, Stroud became noteworthy for his research and writing on canaries, after he found an injured bird in the recreation yard. That much was true in Stroud's life, and that is shown in the film.

Those who argue that the film is not as accurate as it could be have a point, but the film does follow the facts outlined above.

The film is quiet, and black and white, and yet riveting.

It is an example of a kind of film-making that is sadly lost today. The film attempts a serious discussion of serious issues: the value of a man, the death penalty, the role of prisons, their wardens and guards, the possibility of human connection, even under conditions of relative isolation. Stroud makes some human contact with his guard, and with a fellow inmate he communicates with via tapping.

The film is riveting because its entire cast has a kind of star power that is hard to find today. Even given his quiet, surly performance in this black and white film, you can't take your eyes off of Burt Lancaster. The supporting cast is equally excellent.

This film is a must for anyone interested in cinematic treatments of prisons, of the death penalty, of questions of human worth, even the worth of persons who display their lack of worth in, almost, their every act, and, the kind of films of the late fifties and early sixties that provided intelligent discussions of social issues.

It's also a great movie if you just want to be entertained.