Is It Always Right to Be Right?

While I appreciate the intent of this film, and Orson Welles is always welcome, the film implies that there's a moral equivalency for each side being right.

If one person says 2 plus 2 is 4, and another side says it is 6.. That doesn't mean the answer is 5.

So yes, while we should listen to arguments, that does not mean compromise should happen.

If one side wants equality, and another side wants inequality, there does not seem to be a moral in between.

Fifty years on from this admittedly lacklustre animation, it's still worth listening to the words of Warren H. Schmidt's narrative (from Orson Welles) about the repetitive and fruitless nature of human belligerence. All the vested interests convinced that they, and they alone, are correct. No-one prepared to even hint that there might be room for manoeuvre or compromise as chasms begin to exist in society based on things like age, politics, race, sex, faith - and even chasms within chasms. Until, that is, someone somewhere has the courage to say that everything isn't just a case of black and white or right or wrong. Maybe bridges can and should be built if tolerance and understanding can be found amidst the hitherto bloody-minded and opinionated. Social media "influencers" in 2024 take note!

With Orson Welles' stentorian voice, he lays out what mankind needs. There is little to argue with unless your ox is being gored. All the bromides we have heard for decades are laid out, and they sound good. The problem lies in the the larger humanity, who want to be one of the factions. Simplistic and trite.

I can't compare this film to the other two Oscar nominees for 1971, as they apparently are not available. I assume that IS IT ALWAYS RIGHT TO BE RIGHT? was the best film, as it won...plus I really liked the film--even though it may seem a tad preachy.

This cartoon is about all the negative and polarizing issues we were confronted with in America at the time--racism,the generation gap, the war in Vietnam, etc.. In dealing with these issues, the film takes an amazingly neutral view--and suggests we all do the same. Now this does NOT mean that we should necessarily allow evil, but that we should all learn not to be so dogmatic and try to see the truth in both sides of the issue. In other words, seldom, if ever, is one side 100% right and being "right" should not be the goal but learning to understand and cooperate. It's all told through a parable and it's very clever. While it's all a bit obvious and perhaps preachy, the message is a good one and this film was incredibly timely back when it debuted.

As for the animation style, it ain't much to look at, but this was the case for all animation at the time. Simplistic backgrounds, low frame-rates and hastily drawn characters were all the norm, so I can't really penalize the film too much--it was a product of the times.

Fortunately, in addition to the nice message, clever parable and decent artwork, the film makers were also able to persuade Orson Welles to narrate--giving the film some clout and a touch of class.

Overall, a nice film--one that I wouldn't mind seeing again sometime.

Lee Mishkin's Oscar-winning "Is It Always Right to Be Right?" looks partly at the generation gap of the 1960s but more generally at polarization in general: both sides are so convinced of their rectitude that society suffers stagnation. Sound familiar? Narrated by Orson Welles, the cartoon makes the point that both sides have legitimate arguments. The setting never gets identified but it's clearly the US, with the adults emphasizing the high quality of life and the young people emphasizing the prominence of racism and militarism. All very important points.

This cartoon reminds us that not only do cartoons not have to be "cute" (animation is simply another type of filmmaking), but it's one of the best ways to draw attention to society's problems. I definitely recommend it.