User reviews

Fun adaptation of Mark Twain's classic novel with ideal casting of Mickey Rooney as Huck Finn. It's the story of an adventurous boy who sails down the Mississippi with his friend Jim, a runaway slave. Your kids might enjoy it if you're lucky enough to have kids who can appreciate older films or smart enough to understand the period in which the story takes place. Even if you don't have kids who fit that description, I'd say it's still worth trying to get them to watch it with you there to answer any questions they may have. The film obviously has some subject matter that kids (and a lot of adults) today may be oversensitive to. I'm speaking primarily of the character Jim, played brilliantly here by Rex Ingram. This part of the story is watered down from the novel but still people will grouse about it anyway. It's not surprising considering some have been trying to get the book banned from schools for decades now and have sadly been successful in some of our more politically militant indoctrination centers. Some fans of the book won't like that some changes have been made. It's not a perfect adaptation, for sure, but it's the best of any that I've seen.

Like any literary adaptation, this film throws out many scenes and changes others around. As a film, though, it works perfectly. Comparing it to the 1960 version, the reputation of the 1930s as the golden age of Hollywood is exemplified in this picture. Although the film and editing techniques were primitive at this point, the humour is funny, the characters click, and the drama is captivating. I'm not sure why this and the 1960 leave out the scene where Huck convinces Jim he's dreamt them separating in the fog, since its one of the most important in the novel. In any case, Jim's plight is tragic, and makes one shudder to think of the many people that had to be subjected to the institution of slavery. Rex Ingram gives a great performance, and his best scene may be in the jail, right before the lynch mob bursts through the door. "Somebody help me!" he cries. Amazing.

It should also be noted that Clara Blandickgives an outstanding performance as Miss Watson. Mickey Rooney is okay as Huck, but his acting style hasn't aged as well as the others in the film. Overall, I highly recommend this as great entertainment and a great film.

8/10

Recommended for family entertainment, "The Adventures of Huckleberry Finn" showcases the talents of "Mickey Rooney" and shows why he has been such a beloved actor for so many years.

Mickey Rooney stars as the title character, according to the book about 13 years old. Rooney was already past 18, but with his short stature and boyish face he looks exactly the part of young mischievous boy whom we see smoking his pipe and walking barefoot through the dust.

Based on Mark Twain's book of the same name, it is as closely adapted as the time constraints and censorship would allow. The general substance of the novel is left intact with a few details changed for the sake of dramatic license; otherwise it is well adapted as I remember from my recent re-reading of the novel.

Mickey Rooney is perfect in his portrayal of Huck, with his mischievous ways and always with a twinkle in his eye. Rex Ingram makes a thoughtful "Jim" whose quiet dignity makes Huck learn to accept him as a man, not just a piece of property to be owned.

The movie is quite funny and will become a favorite of the whole family with its wholesome characters and situations. If you get a chance to see it, I think you will agree that this is real entertainment that everyone can enjoy.

I am surprised that there is no other review for this movie and I am the first to post my opinion on this box office hit of 1939, a top 20 hit of its year. When I sat down to watch this adaptation of the famous Mark Twain novel, I knew the running time was under 90 minutes so I did not expect to get the full book which I have read but the cliff notes version which I have also read. But no, Louis B. Mayer just had to give it the MGM cornball effect with scenes which are not in the novel and which change the meaning and transformation of Huck's character. Mickey Rooney, the biggest child actor the movies have ever heard, and in my opinion, also the best it has had brings one of those flawless performances to the role. Rex Ingram makes for a good runaway slave Jim and the other performances are fine. Direction is pendant in the hands MGM journeyman - that is not a craftsman, not an auteur, imagination insignificant, camera angles; perfunctory, directing actors; left to your own devices - Richard Thorpe who had a long and healthy career in Hollywood. You wonder why? The first half does feel like a cliff notes version as the scenes skip through have a general lethargic pace but keeps your attention because the story is good anyway. The changes involve the capture of Jim and Huck's injury and the resolution of the aforementioned events. It is not what happens and tongue-in-cheek ending changes the message of Twain's classic. I won't say I didn't enjoy it. I just mean if you are going to alter a classic, you'd better come up with something better.

An affable, spry 1939 adaptation of Mark Twain's classic starring Mickey Rooney as Huck. Following the trials & tribulations of our ne'er do well adventurer who'd rather go fishing & smoke a pipe, Huck goes from one episode to the next eventually partnering w/Jim, a runaway slave, formerly in thrall to his benefactors (a pair of well meaning sisters), as he aims to get him on a steamboat bound for the North towards freedom but matters becomes complicated when Jim becomes the subject of a manhunt, suspected of Huck's murder (he faked his own death to ease the burden he feels he's placed on the sisters' plate). I'm embarrassed to say I've never read the immortal tome but know some of the situations depicted so I got the gist of the fable as Rooney, a pure delight, essays a lively take on our immortal rapscallion w/special mention going to Rex Ingram as Jim. Look for William Frawley (Fred Mertz from I Love Lucy) as one of 2 con men out to get a family's fortune.

I do not compare this movie to the book, because it is not faithful to the book. That was never the purpose of the movie. The purpose of this movie was to provide a vehicle for Mickey Rooney who was the biggest box office star in the world from 1939 to 1942. And justifiably so. He has loads of talent. I say has because he is NOT DEAD. I read with horror a post here by someone who assumed that Mickey Rooney was dead and more about that later.

For now the reasons why I think this movie is so good are simple. Beautiful presentation, cinematography, acting, direction and writing. The cast are without exception wonderful. Especially Mickey Rooney who just inhabits the role. The tears in his eyes when told by Rex Ingram that his "pap" is dead....pure gold. Speaking of Rex, his portrayal of Jim is sheer poetry. It isn't easy to bring such depth and layering and nuance to such a character and yet he just does wonders with the very unforgiving role.

Walter Connolly and William Frawley are hilarious and insanely funny and yet curiously terrifying at the same time as the King and the Duke.

The plot does differ a bit from the book but so did and do a lot of movies even today. Many people adore 1937's Captain's Courageous (including me) and are seemingly not bothered by the fact that it veers wildly from the Kipling novel. I am not sure why that is. It feels like some people are actively trying to denigrate Mickey Rooney and certainly he seems to be out of fashion, but someday I do believe people will revisit the man and his movies and realize just how good he was and is.

Which brings me back to Mickey Rooney.. I think its sad when one of the immortal legends of movie history can be so throughly maligned and ignored. At a time when movies mattered, Mickey Rooney stood at the top of the hill. He had it all. Superbe acting talent, as well as an amazing entertainer. To compare his acting with Freddie Bartholomew is unfair to both. Freddie probably was the most talented child actor EVER but he had zero in the entertainment category. He could neither sing, nor dance, and did not have a magnetic personality. In those three areas Mickey stands head and shoulders above him. Mickey can sing, dance, and play dozens of instruments. Only Judy Garland stands above him and that is because she was a better actor and singer by far and Mickey, to his eternal credit, knew this and loved her for it.

I find it heartbreakingly sad that this movie has garnered so few reviews; and more sad that this man who has given so much to the entertainment industry and to movies in particular, can be so ignored by our modern day, talentless, tasteless "entertainment" industry that one can actually be forgiven for assuming he is dead.

I would love to see the over payed, over indulged denizens of the entertainment industry actually pay homage to Mickey Rooney at the Oscars before it is too late and before we truly do lose this living legend forever.

Thank you Mickey Rooney for all that you have given us.

Ever wonder why Hollywood can't just transfer a book to the screen without taking liberties with the plot? In this case, what was wrong with the way Twain wrote it? It resembles the book somewhat, but the movie works better if you didn't read it.

This was a cover-your-tracks movie so that MGM couldn't be nailed as racists, so some of Twain's book is whitewashed here. The result is a bland, pablum version devoid of tension and told in one tone of voice, without the highs or lows and lacking any suspense where required, for instance when Huck and Jim in hiding witness the tarring and feathering of the King and the Duke.

Having said all that, was there ever any better juvenile actor than Mickey Rooney? A reader mentioned Freddie Bartholemew - anyone ever see Bartholemew sing or dance, or display any charisma? Mickey Rooney is responsible for any success this picture has had. In a similar vein, I always think Walter Connolly is a detriment to any picture in which he appears. This movie would have been better off with nearly anyone else as the King, as he is a shrill, unconvincing actor.

As is, "The Adventures Of Huckleberry Finn" is a good movie which could have been so much better.

For quite awhile into this film, I felt encouraged by its seemingly faithful adherence to Twain's great novel. About halfway through, however, I began recalling scenes from the book I'd read for the first time only 6 months ago, suddenly realizing how much of Twain's imaginative masterpiece had been omitted, which was disappointing. The film's ending was completely different from the novel in an effort to give the film an overhurried, cinematically exciting finish. Despite such transgressions, the movie truly looks authentic in terms of time, place, & costumes. Without exception, the acting is uniformly good. My only real disappointment with the film is that the primary engine of the story, the river, is never specifically named, i.e. The Mississippi. While most assuredly not filmed on the great waterway, none of its magisterial width or awesome natural beauty is depicted. It could be any river anywhere. As a matter of fact, the story's setting, its historical geography, is rather hazy & described in questionably vague fashion. Regrettably, Huck & Jim's famous journey along the great liquid conduit writhing its way through the nation's midsection is treated quite mundanely. Likewise, the fugitives' raft isn't presented in its entirety, its physical dimensions & components unclear. The viewer never sees the most famous log conveyance in literary history from above or afar, its relation to the river's grandeur wholly non-depicted. True, as desperate travellers fleeing for their lives, Jim & Huck wouldn't've spent their time "oohing & ahhing" over, or commenting on, the wonders of the wavy world upon which they'd embarked but the filmmakers made no attempt to create this feeling in the viewer. Some steamboat interaction, however, was competently & acceptably done. Although the scenes with the King & the Duke are both amusing & faithful to the novel, for which one can be grateful, watching this segment comes off as a little too lengthy & ponderous when viewed onscreen, deadening the pace of an ongoing story. As mentioned, the finale is almost wholly unrecognizable, involving a movie-invented character who plays no part in the novel, though he's a likeable & important character. Sadly, too, perhaps, the film completely omits the arrival of Tom Sawyer on the scene, comprising several of the most amusing & enjoyable chapters of Twain's tale. Mickey Rooney, of course, is superb as loveable, pipe-smoking, shoes-hating, school-avoiding rapscallion Huck, though a few years too old to be wholly in sync with Twain's immortal character. Rex Ingram is unforgettable as Jim, capturing the freedom-questing slave's humanity most sympathetically & movingly. The movie's well-made, atmospheric, & quite entertaining---an appreciated attempt at capturing the essence of Twain's timeless triumph, though only half-succeeding. The other half should've been the capturing of the sheer poetry of the thrilling, epochal, life-changing journey taken long-ago, when the nation yet was young, so many of its dreams, and, yes, flaws, hidden-away in the still-unknown future. The story of impartial, endlessly-flowing Ol' Man River, one that played such a huge role in our country's development---and 2 characters immortalized by Mr. Clemens in what was far-more than a mere adventure story. This 1939 movie-version is, & will remain, a good but forgotten cinematic artifact, while the original novel will just keep rollin' along.

The others were the 1993 Elijah Wood film which was quite good, the 1974 musical version which was heavily flawed but still above-average and the 1975 Ron Howard version which was soggy and actually very bad. The photography in this film may be at times less than lavish and the final third feels rushed, but of the four it was the version that came across on its own as the best. As an adaptation perhaps it's not great, then again this is adaptation we're talking about(when something is not faithful to its source it doesn't mean it's immediately bad) and it does deserve judgement on its own merits. And while it's not perfect, it has many merits. The authentic river locations are a major plus, while the dialogue flows well and manages to be entertaining and poignant and the story still has cohesion and a good sense of atmosphere. The film may have primarily have been a showcase for Mickey Rooney but even with that the story is thankfully not ignored. Jim's jail scene is deeply heart-breaking. The pacing does feel rushed in the final third of the film but for most of the film it is just right, while the direction is very competent if not entirely imaginative. But the best asset about this version of Huckleberry Finn is the acting, so effective to the extent that it's like the characters themselves stepping out of the pages, and we are talking also about physical resemblances. Mickey Rooney's Huck is charming, mischievous and towards the end affecting(he may be somewhat too old, though not by much, but he doesn't look like he is), while Rex Ingram(personal favourite actor in the film) is very dignified and nuanced as Jim and Victor Kilian's Pap dominates quite terrifyingly. Walter Connolly and William Frawley are wickedly funny and menacing, in almost all four versions the Duke and the King have been scene-stealing characters(apart from 1975, hardly any the actors acquitted themselves well apart from Jack Elam). Elizabeth Ridson is fine as well. Overall, very good and underrated, of the four versions so far seen it's the best by quite some way. 8/10 Bethany Cox

It's the classic Mark Twain story starring Mickey Rooney as Huckleberry Finn. Huck often skips school to fish down on the Mississippi river. He has the knack of telling tales. With reason, he decides to run away and fake his own death. The unintended consequence is that slave Jim gets accused of his murder. Together they aim to escape upriver. They encounter con-men Duke and King along the way.

Mickey Rooney is a little too old to play Huckleberry Finn. He does his Mickey Rooney best and it would work if it's a few years earlier. He needs to be believably innocent. He's almost twenty and the pretense is showing through the cracks. The ending gets reworked with some awkward notes. I can see why it was done but the awkwardness remains. All in all, this is very much a Hollywood creation and that's not unexpected. Mickey's age is still a problem.

Much to Donald O'Connor's disappointment, no one associates him with playing Huckleberry Finn. It's Mickey Rooney who personifies the adorable, mischievous, barefoot hero. You just can't help but love him in this movie, even if he drove you crazy playing the lovesick, goofy Andy Hardy a dozen times. He's absolutely perfect, and with his infectious energy, he makes it seem like Mark Twain used time travel and met him before creating the character.

The screenplay of this version is very entertaining and engaging, including all the gimmicks and characters you know and love from Mark Twain's stories. You'll get to know Mickey's aunt, Elisabeth Risdon, and you'll come to love the push and pull between them. You'll enjoy the friendship between Mickey and Rex Ingram, who plays Jim. Walter Connolly and William Frawley play the two drifting conmen, and while they also steal lots of laughs, they also steal your attention and your hearts. Every scene of this movie is exciting and fun, and even though it might have been overshadowed by the large-scale epics of 1939, it's still a great movie in its own right. It doesn't have any "burning of Atlanta" scenes or a Technicolor splendor to transport you to another world, but it's unforgettable and heartwarming, which is some people's definition of a true classic.

MGM tailored Mark Twain's "The Adventures of Huckleberry Finn" for box office champion Mickey Rooney, with predictable results. Mainly, this is a comedy, with some rather exasperating omissions, and some cute additions. As with many child stars, the studio was by now relying heavily on height to help put across Rooney as a precocious thirteen-year-old. The whole ranges from workmanlike to good, with Rex Ingram's "Jim" helping the latter. As the swindlers, blustery Walter Connolly and rascally William Frawley are a funny team. The amusing ending actually works; at least, the studio resisted having Illinois lawyer "Abe" Lincoln actually make an appearance.

***** The Adventures of Huckleberry Finn (2/10/39) Richard Thorpe ~ Mickey Rooney, Rex Ingram, Walter Connolly, William Frawley

This is probably the least faithful version to Mark Twain's immortal novel that I've seen put on the big or small screen. Still this is one admirable production of The Adventures Of Huckleberry Finn and Mickey Rooney's starring performance is infectious and fun. The main points of the film are kept intact and that would be the whole sequence involving Huck Finn and Jim with those river con men the 'king' and the 'duke'. and the whole question of this white trash river kid helping a black slave whom he has been brought up to regard as inferior to freedom.

Through a combination of circumstances Huck Finn because he wants to get away from the widow Douglas's civilizing ways and his own father's brutal whipping Mickey Rooney as Huck fakes his own death and takes off on a raft with Jim, the widow's slave who wants to be reunited with his wife and child in a free state. But the law is hunting Jim not just for an escape, but for Huck's murder.

On the way these two pull Walter Connolly and William Frawley from the river where they've just been dumped after being caught cheating on a riverboat. The self styled king and duke get Huck to aid in a con being perpetrated on a young girl recently lost her father. They get Rooney to aid in the scheme lest they betray him and Rex Ingram to the authorities.

Here as in the novel the best scenes are with Rooney and Ingram as the slave Jim. For the first time in his life because the two are caught in the same predicament Rooney is seeing a black man as a human being. It makes him start reevaluating his thinking as Twain wanted many Americans to do. Twain came from the same background he's talking about the Missouri of his upbringing and how he came to escape that thinking with his character of Huck Finn.

Conmen for the most part in film are presented as lovable rogues on the big and small screen. Twain's king and duke are some of the most realistically created conmen in literature. These two are rogues, but there's nothing lovable about the way they want to trim some young girl of her fortune and leave her penniless and homeless. Connolly and Frawley are quite hateful and great in their roles.

Huckleberry Finn is considered by many to be America's great novel and this abbreviated version might give you some indication why. It succeeds as this film does in entertaining you, but also making you think.

Back in the 1930s and 40s, Hollywood often took a rather cavalier attitude towards classic material. A great example is 1936's "Romeo & Juliet", which featured actors two to three times the age of the characters and credits 'additional dialog' to an MGM writer! Another is "Wuthering Heights"...where the studio tacked on a HAPPY ending!! Because of this, I assumed that they'd similarly ruin Mark Twain's classic story of Huck Finn...especially because the story has a strong abolitionist slant...and studios OFTEN would sanitize these sorts of things in order to not offend racist audience members! I was shocked, then, when the story turned out to be very close to the source material...and as a result, it is a fine movie. It also deeply humanizes Jim and makes for an amazingly heartfelt film. Well worth seeing.

By the way, at one point in the film, Huck is bitten by a rattlesnake and Jim cuts open the wound and sucks out the poison. Despite this being a common belief, this is NOT a good idea!! Kids, don't try this at home.

This movie is perfect for the nations #1 box office star of 1939. No wonder the public adored him! Mickey Rooney simply stated is the best actor that has ever lived. Mickey gives a down to earth and lovely performance.!!! The movie is very true to the book. If you loved the book, you will love this movie. It's wonderful!!!!!! Another great movie that was perfect for Mickey Rooney was Young Tom Edison. If you love him as Huck, then check out Young Tom Edison! Another Blockbuster performance by the MASTER performer. Mickey Rooney, may you live on in the hearts of all who love you! Also for your Rooney fans check out Boy's Town and The Human Comedy. The Andy Hardy series are also terrific God Bless you, and I love you Mickey!

Even though 14-year-old Huckleberry Finn stole, smoked, lied, cursed and was lazier than an old possum, he was still a likable sort of rascal who was always full of bull and yarns and home-spun advice for all of his gullible friends, and the likes.

Released in 1939 - The Adventures Of Huckleberry Finn would the first of 4 screen adaptations that energetically tackled Mark Twain's novel (written in 1884) of the same name.

Set in the year 1835 (where the action takes place in Missouri, along the Mississippi River), this decidedly average MGM production was still an entertaining and good-natured tale that I think was probably best suited for the enjoyment of a much younger audience than myself.

Though far from being faithful to the novel (where the racism was toned-down considerably), The Adventures Of Huckleberry Finn starred the young, gung-ho actor, Mickey Rooney (who was 19 at the time) as the title character.

Full of pep and energy, Rooney (like the rest of the cast) put in a sincere and believable performance which certainly helped to keep the story fresh and relatively interesting.

This picture's story focuses in on Huck's raft trip down the Mississippi, accompanied by Jim, a negro slave running away from being sold. Together these 2 strike a bond of friendship as they inevitably find themselves led through some harrowing events and hair-raising adventures.

I believe that this film was well appropriate for the time zone in which it was created.

When viewing this movie, one needs to place themselves in a time capsule so to speak. It is a movie based on a child's story.

I enjoy Mickey Rooney, and was sorry to hear of his passing around December 2006. He shows determinant energy in his acting on this film. Rex Ingram, although, this movie placed him in a very stereotypic role, he put his all into it.

The movie had several great actors, and great areas, I think anyone who views it through the eyes of a child, will truly enjoy it.

It's a shame that today's youth will never experience this classic literature. Political correctness has destroyed the American legacy.

fr muffinheuer: >...Mickey Rooney simply stated is the best actor that has ever lived...<

Um, no, he isn't. There are many others who far outshine him, but just because MGM kept partnering him in the "hey kids, let's put on a show!" movies, he just kept going. A far better kid actor was Freddie Bartholomew, who left movies when it was right to do so. Rooney just kept being in the same type of movie, and they got very dated very quickly.

He was good in "Captains Courageous" as Dan, and as Homer in "The Human Comedy" and somewhat fair in "It's a mad, mad, mad, mad world", but overall, just average.

Now that he spouts the studio line on Judy Garland and the way the studio got her addicted to drugs, he's just a former kid star who didn't age well.