From crises including two World Wars and the Great Depression, the United States emerged in the 1950s as an unprecedented global power, intent on peace, and energized by remarkable prosperity. But new threats to domestic tranquility quickly arose in the immediate postwar period. Racial tensions ran high, Communist plots against the government were being routed out, and perhaps most shockingly the youth turned against society, violently so. Headlines abounded declaring that the youth were now a dangerous social problem. Nicholas Ray's "Rebel Without A Cause" took an unconventional look at juvenile delinquency, one that located the problem in what had once been the peaceful suburbs. This project examines the immediate reception of this enduring depiction of teenage alienation, using sources that situate the film in its historical context.

Crowther, Bosley. “The Screen: Delinquency; ' Rebel Without Cause' Has Debut at Astor.” New York Times, Oct 27, 1955, 28.

 

            In his review of Rebel Without a Cause (1955) Bosley Crowther is both drawn to and repulsed by the film’s controversial content. Crowther explains the logic of the film, that James Dean’s Jim Stark is the product of family dysfunction, chiefly the role-reversal of his parents. He repeatedly mentions the film’s intense and suspenseful nature and the terrifying depiction of a warped younger generation. The famous “chickie run” scene, which features Dean and his leather-jacketed rival racing towards a cliff, is called one of the film’s most chilling moments, and it’s most authentic since such races have been featured in the same periodical before. While Crowther commends the film for episodes of emotional truth and accuracy he concludes by condemning the work as somewhat socially irresponsible. Like Blackboard Jungle (1955), he considers the film excessively violent, featuring brutal scenes that may influence younger viewers, and offend older ones. Crowther also rejects Ray’s unnecessarily critical treatment of parental figures, the police, and other authorities. The Stark parents are so obviously problematic that they detract from the realism that the picture otherwise achieves. Overall the film is not reviewed as bad, being punctuated by strong performances by the entire cast.

            This review demonstrates that film’s like Rebel were viewed as a cause of the juvenile delinquency epidemic, even as today it is considered as an explanation of the condition of the modern teenager. Crowther’s shock at specific sequences in the film show the requirements of decency at the time, and how Rebel challenged those norms. Even after editing the film according to Production Code standards, Rebel  was still highly controversial.

 

            In the chapter entitled “Box Office,” Rathgeb describes the immediate box office success that Rebel Without a Cause (1955) experienced. The credit for this success was attributed to the rabid support of James Dean’s teenage, female fans, the resoundingly positive reviews the film received, and the relevance of its subject matter. In the midst of this success, the film was still being re-edited to accommodate censors in different national and international venues. The objectionable material included the switch-blade fight, which was re-cut to feature less violence and more crowd reactions, as well as the length of Buzz’s fall from the cliff and associated sounds. British censors especially felt that the film might be exporting juvenile delinquency to  their shores, and labeled the film “adults-only.” Some cities in the American south banned the film completely due to its graphic content. More than a box-office success, the film also produced a faithful fan base, drawing a remarkably high number of fan letters. The fan letters, from teenagers, parents, and delinquency professionals repeated a similar theme: that the film was an accurate portrayal of the youth’s problems that offered those who were suffering solace.

            This chapter demonstrates that Rebel Without a Cause was a critical and commercial success, citing a variety of newspapers reviews and box office figures from the time. Further emphasizing the positive reception of the film is Rathgeb’s inclusion of the content of the fan letters. Clearly, Rebel was an immediate source of identification for teenagers who demanded posthumous awards for the actor, or addressed him as if he were still alive. Finally, the warm domestic reception of this juvenile delinquency picture is in contrast to the British one, giving an international perspective on the social problem.