SOMETHING OF VALUE

US, 1957, 113 minutes, Black and white.
Rock Hudson, Dana Wynter, Sidney Poitier, Wendy Hiller, Juano Hernandez, Robert Beatty.
Directed by Richard Brooks.

Something of Value is a 1950s film about Kenyan independence. It was based on a very popular novel of the period by Robert Ruark.

Kenya had experienced the uprising of the Mau Mau, especially in the mid-1950s (as seen in such a British film as Simba). In this film, there is a focus on a long-time friendship between a white boy and a black boy. They grow up as Rock Hudson and Sidney Poitier. With the massacres of the whites and the imprisonment of the Kenyan leaders, the black man joins a rebel group, not approving of the slaughter.

Rock Hudson portrays a character who is suffering because of the persecution of his family but who believes that with reason and dialogue, peace can be achieved. This is his aim in his dialogue with the Sidney Poitier character.

This is an idealistic and optimistic film – especially in the context of the realities of the 1950s.

There is a strong supporting cast led by Wendy Hiller and Michael Pate.

The film was co-written and directed by Richard Brooks, a former writer (Crossfire) who began making films in the early 1950s (The Last Time I Saw Paris, Blackboard Jungle). He was to make a number of adaptations of plays and novels during the 50s and 60s including The Brothers Karamazov, Cat on a Hot Tin Roof, Lord Jim, In Cold Blood.

1. The meaning of the title as explained at the beginning? Its connection with Churchill's words, at the end of the film? The significance of the title for the story portrayed and Its themes?

2. How relevant is this film now in changed colonial situations? Is this a similar situation to problems now in the developing world? Does the film portray what was the attitude of the world then, of one man observing the changes?

3. How successful was the screenplay? Its presentation of good and bad characters? The situations? Did they seem too contrived? How spontaneous was the dialogue or did it seem to be preaching and emphasising message?

4. How much impact did the fi1m have? Would audiences find it convincing about colonial situations and racist problems? Would it urge change on an audience? Would it veer towards unreal entertainment?

5. How well did the film portray the contrast between Peter and Kimani? The happiness of the start, the initial clashes because of racistm,laws, the portrayal of two breeds of men, black and white? Peter’s fear of offending Kimani, rebellion? The role of KimaniJ in the raids and Peter's response? Peter's pursuit of Kimani? The unnecessary nature of Kimani’s death after the possible reconciliation? The two children black and white being brought up together at the end - would there be harmony or a repetition of the past? Were the main characters well drawn and portrayed, or was there am emphasis on them representing attitudes?

6. Holly as an attractive heroine? As a conventional white wife supporting her husband and suffering in Africa? Did she give any insight into the plight of the situation? A comparison of her with Elizabeth Newton? Elizabeth and her relationship to Jeff? An a victim of' the raid, as wanting to bear a child for a new Africa?

7. The portrayal of Mr McKenzie? as good and as wise, concerned? with the native Africans? A conventional good man or did he give insight into ‘necessary’ attitudes? The contrast between him and Jeff Newton. and his racist attitudes and disregard of human rights?

8. How interesting was the portrayal of Africa and people's love for Africa? Its plight, racism, history? The importance of the sequences of dinners with the whites discussing their attitudes? The contrast of the white style with the black style of life? The impetuous nature of Matson and his rabble-rousing? The fact that he, because of suspicions, caused disharmony at the end?

9. The portrayal of black Africa? How sympathetic, how real? As seen through Kimani, as a reluctant rebel? The portrayal of life of the villages, Africans as human beings equal to the whites?

10. Did the film show credibly how the Mau Mau societies arose? The sesne of injustice and rage? The importance of the sequences of iniation and audience response to these? The loyalty that the Mau Mau gained over people? The fact that all Africans did not agree? Audience response to the violence of the raids? The portrayal of police investigations? Internment and the rough attitudes of the whites even Peter? The starvation situation and the need for a truce? The possibilities in the truce between Peter and Kimani and the future of Africa? The breaking of the truce and suspicion because of the impetuous hostility of men like Matson?

11. The melodramatics or genuine drama of the final confrontation? The death of Kimani and its necessity? The pathos because of his attitudes and sense of betrayal and persecution?

12. How well does the film show the pattern of racism in the past? Is this a pattern still for the world and its race problems?