Damox.com

Jim Stark (James Dean) seems to have a decent enough life. His family has money, he has a car, and one would think he'd have no trouble picking up girls. His problems at home are causing his problems. His dad can't tell him how to be a man because he isn't much of one himself. His mother is controlling over his father's life, and his grandmother (father's mother) is in the home too, as the mother-in-law that gives Jim's mother one more reason to despise her own husband.

One particularly strange character is Plato (Sal Mineo). It's hard to compare Plato to any character in any other movie. He more than looks up to Jim. I'd say his "ga-ga" for him. It was a little too much for me. Maybe they should have just made him gay. It would have caused a big stir back in 1955, but it also would have made this movie a barrier-breaker. Plus it would have made a lot more sense.

The scene with the chicken run seemed ridiculous. Sure, teenagers can be wild, we get it! I don't know any high schoolers that would participate in such a stupid event. Some ruffians call Jim a chicken, so therefore he has drive a car towards a cliff and jump out before it hits the edge?

To this film's credit, elements from it have been imitated many times over the past fifty years, from Back to the Future (main character won't let people get away with calling him a chicken) to The Simpsons and just about everything in between. The thing that really irritated me about Rebel Without A Cause is that I can't figure out who the rebel is supposed to be. Is Jim the rebel, because he gets into a few fights and he does some crazy teenage stuff (pretty soft for a rebel, if you ask me)? Are Jim's parents the rebels, because they have lower morals than Jim and their dysfunction is destroying the whole family? Is it Judy (Natalie Wood), the girl next door with loose morals (probably not, because her cause seems to be ruining her own reputation)? Okay, so it's clear from everything we know (or think we know) about this movie that the rebel is Jim. I would say his cause is getting his parents' attention. It's the same cause that millions of teens (and toddlers) around the world have. Nothing special there. I just can't feel sympathetic towards anyone in this movie. It's hard to believe that the teens in this movie could have grown up and now look down upon the "wild youth" of modern times. If this is how teens acted before drugs "took over" then I'd have to wonder why we'd ever want to fight a war on drugs. I'll give this film a 6, but only because it holds special "classic" status.

Rating: 6.0 out of 10