The Adventures of Huckleberry Finn (1960--1993)

Director: Michael Curtiz, Stephen Sommers          Writer: James Lee, Stephen Sommers
Film Score: Jerome Moross, Bill Conte                 Cinematography: Ted McCord, Janusz Kaminski
Starring: Eddie Hodges, Archie Moore, Elijah Wood and Courtney B. Vance

There has yet to be a definitive version of Mark Twain’s The Adventures of Huckleberry Finn for one simple reason: screenwriters just can’t leave well enough alone. Every time they try to “improve” the original work by changing it, they undermine the intention of the novel and thereby destroy the message that Twain was attempting to impart. In fact, I’m half convinced that screenwriters don’t even bother to read the novel and continue to make the same mistakes because they don’t know any better. Even the great Michael Curtiz, though he was saddled with a bad lead actor and a weak script, was unable to imbue his Huck Finn with anything like Twain’s intention. Stephen Sommers 1993 version, despite its better actors, is even worse. The biggest problem with both films is the complete misinterpretation of the character of Jim.

In Twain’s novel, Jim serves two purposes, to be the moral center of the book, not in words but in deeds, and that he be thoroughly a slave, adhering to all the stereotypes and not changing throughout the entire story. In this way it is incumbent upon Huck to do the changing, to realize for himself that what society has taught him about blacks is wrong. And he does this through spending time with Jim and eventually coming to realize that he is every bit as human as whites. What both films do to pervert this, in a gesture of political correctness I’m sure, is to make Jim the “smart” one, who both manipulates Huck--thereby losing his moral superiority--and by teaching him--thus destroying Huck’s ability to learn for himself through experience. It’s maddening to watch and it’s doubtful we’ll ever see a film that’s faithful to the novel because people just don’t understand what Twain was doing. This shouldn't be surprising, however, considering it took critics over fifty years before they realized the book was more than just a sequel to the children’s book Tom Sawyer. The reality is, Huck Finn is very much for adults because of its commentary on race in America.

The 1960 version suffers the most from poor acting by its two principals. Eddie Hodges has just the right look, with the red hair and big white teeth, but has a difficult time attenuating his facial and vocal expressions to give him any kind of emotional range. Boxer Archie Moore as Jim has a similar problem. The novel has three distinct sections, before the trip, during the trip, and after the trip downriver. Screenwriter James Lee apparently put the book in a blender and pulled out pages at random because characters from all over the book show up at any time. This, of course, destroys the episodic nature of the piece and deprives it of any sense of real storytelling. Apparently the feeling is, when approaching this piece, is that it can be treated as a series of interchangeable gags. It’s too bad, because the possibility for a dramatic treatment on film is so desperately needed. The appearance by Buster Keaton is great but again, it has nothing to do with the book. And the ending is completely ruined with Jim confessing his sins to Huck and never acquiring the free status he should have.

The 1993 Disney version of the film by Stephen Sommers has the opposite problem. The actors are all very good, including Wood and Vance who make a fantastic Huck and Jim. And while the script sticks to the basic structure of the novel, it does leave out the last section with Tom Sawyer. This version is also improved by the use of voice-over for Huck, replicating the first-person viewpoint of the novel. Where this version really takes a dive is the complete undermining of Jim, making him a master manipulator, using Huck to help him, lying to him to get what he wants, and making him, ironically, more unlikeable it trying to change him to be politically acceptable. Sommers also makes the poor choice of using a slave plantation to show Huck the evils of slavery rather than letting him learn on his own. Jim tries to atone for his sins at the end, but the utterly unbelievable conclusion in which they just let him go makes it even worse. Ultimately, both versions of The Adventures of Huckleberry Finn have their entertaining moments, but they are nowhere near Twain’s vision and purpose and can only be a let down for fans of the novel.