The Oscar Project #10: The Life of Emile Zola (1937)

by Chris Marshall:

One of my favorite aspects of The Oscar Project is that I am constantly learning and experiencing new things. The first winner I had seen previously was Casablanca, meaning the first 15 of these posts are written about movies that were new to me. Some, like The Life of Emile Zola, I had only heard of because they were on the list of Best Picture winners. I cannot otherwise recall a single instance of somebody talking about this film.

But what a revelation it was! It wasn’t the single best I’ve seen so far, but it’s pretty close, as you’ll see when I post my Best of the Decade list on May 6. I made the claim in my introductory post that winning an Oscar automatically puts a film into the canon, but there are exceptions to every rule, Emile Zola being one. That is such a pity; this is a movie that deserves to be seen by more people.

It was the second biopic to win the top award, following on the heels of The Great Ziegfeld. That film turned into a debacle because it tried to be and do too much. Emile Zola focuses on its primary subject exclusively, and while it dedicates a brief few moments to his early life, it zeroes in on a single event, what became known as the Dreyfus Affair.

Coming into the film, I only associated Zola with the phrase “J’accuse!” I knew the meaning of the phrase, but I didn’t know the historical context in which it was written. In a nutshell, the French military accused, tried, and convicted a Jewish officer (Albert Dreyfus) of treason, and they sentenced him to exile on Devil’s Island. Shortly afterward, evidence came to light that suggested Dreyfus was innocent, but the military suppressed it, fearing they would lose credibility if it was discovered that they convicted the wrong man.

Dreyfus’s family, feeling they were out of options, went to Zola for help, as he had a history of Fighting for Causes and Being a Firebrand. He reluctantly accepted and penned his world-famous “J’accuse” essay. It ran on the front page of a major newspaper, excoriated the French government, and created an uproar. He was of course arrested right away.

At this point, the film switches from a traditional biopic to an extremely well-orchestrated courtroom drama. Have you ever noticed how much more exciting trials used to be in the old days? People would just run in at the last second with new evidence. The gallery would harrumph with disapproval. There was just no order to anything, and it was amazing.

Care to guess who won the trial? Not Emile Zola! This is a realistic story, so Zola is found guilty and sentenced to a year in prison. But Emile wasn’t made for prison, so he fled to England. In the meantime, based on some evidence that came to light during his trial, Dreyfus was exonerated and everybody lived happily ever after.

I don’t know enough about Emile Zola to say if Paul Muni was true to life in his characterization, but regardless, he was convincing. The performances were very toned down and naturalistic, which was refreshing in an era where many actors were still in over-the-top mode.

I have written this post hurriedly; I hope it’s not too evident. As I said earlier, I really enjoyed this movie, and I wish I had more time to do it justice. Seek it out. It’s relatively short, and it goes by fast. You won’t be disappointed.