Why do some believe Lucifer was best portrayed in the movie the devil and Daniel Webster?
A down-on-his-luck farmer makes a deal with the devil for seven years of prosperity. When Mr. Scratch comes to collect, orator and hero of the common man Daniel Webster comes to the rescue. Based on the short story by Stephen Vincent Benet. Also known as “All That Money Can Buy.” This film could never work now, because Americans are far too cynical to accept a politician beating the Devil in a battle of morals. Now the politician would be in the Devil’s hip pocket. “The Devil and Daniel Webster” is a creepy, effective little morality tale about a farmer who sells his soul to the devil in exchange for prosperity and the politician who ends up defending him and winning it back. What seemed startling in 1941 feels mostly creaky by today’s standards, but there are still some fresh moments of film making in this one. William Dieterle was obviously open to experimentation when it comes to the use of cinematography and sound, and the movie has a striking visual look. The plot is mostly connec
But for my money, the very best screen portrayal of Lucifer is in the masterful 1941 movie The Devil and Daniel Webster (the Criterion DVD which is now available in many stores). In this transposing of the Faust story to mid-19th century rural America, Walter Huston, one of the best character actors of his time, is the grizzled Mr Scratch who buys a poor farmer’s soul in exchange for a hoard of gold coins. The expression “You can’t take your eyes off him when he’s on the screen” probably didn’t originate with Huston’s performance, but it should have. He’s mesmeric, diabolical and charming all at once, in a folksy, Midwestern sort of way. Compared to him, Jack Nicholson looks like he belongs in a church choir. Sources: http://www.business-standard.
