In filming E.L. Doctorow's fictionalized account of the Rosenberg case and its implications for the children of Julius and Ethel Rosenberg, Sidney Lumet brought a good vision to the finished product. Lumet grew up in those times and had I'm sure peripheral associations with the kind of people that would have gone the same way as Julius and Ethel or in the case of the film and novel, Paul and Rochelle Isaacson. Lumet's love of New York also helps a lot in this film.

The fictionalized Rosenbergs are played by Mandy Patinkin and Lindsay Crouse. We get the idealism of the Rosenbergs, the history of persecution they felt, the empathy for other minorities. It should never be forgotten that it was Communists for their own reasons, but still were the first ones to take up black civil rights as a group cause. Radical politics and all, Patinkin and Crouse give their children a fine set of universal values to live by.

The real Rosenberg sons were adopted by another couple and to this day still try and claim a good legacy for their parents. In the film the title role of Daniel is played by Timothy Hutton and his sister is played by Ellen Barkin. Years after the executions of their parents they have continued the radical traditions of the parents, but they're into the protest politics of the sixties, involved in a mass movement the parents only dreamed about, but hardly under the auspices of the Communist Party USA.

Barkin is caught up in the moment, but Hutton wants to clear his parent's names. In real life it was Ethel Rosenberg's brother David Greenglass who fingered both of them as Communist spies. Greenglass was assigned as a sergeant to Los Alamos and purportedly did the actual stealing of the atomic bomb design. In other words for the kids it was a beloved uncle.

They should have kept that part of the story, but I'm willing to bet that E.L. Doctorow did not want to be sued by David Greenglass who is still alive now, so a family friend and hanger-on with the Communists played by Joseph Leon is the informer.

The highlight of the film is the confrontation scene with Hutton and Tovah Feldshuh playing the daughter of Joseph Leon. The growing up experiences of both are laid out naked and bare, the acting is some of the best both these players have ever done.

In real life Julius Rosenberg was guilty of being a ringleader of a nest of Communist spies. Ethel Rosenberg's guilt is far more problematic, the closest you could come to here is Mrs. Mary Surratt who ran the boardinghouse where Booth and his fellow conspirators met in the Lincoln assassination plot. Her son was part of the ring, but he fled the country so the country in the ill tempered mood it was in, countenanced the hanging of the mother instead. Ethel was probably supportive of her husband's activities as a dutiful wife and nothing more.

What is also clear is that the US government threw out the rulebook when it came to due process in the prosecution of the case. It was the times, you had to have been there.

Although it's not the real story, no more than Billy Bathgate was about Dutch Schultz, E.L. Doctorow and Sidney Lumet weave a very fine tale about some troubled times.

I recently watched this movie again after many years. I did not see it when it came out in 1983. That was a hectic and sad time at the beginning of the Reagan presidency, and I was busy fighting against the rising tide of that eras neo-Fascism. I wish I had seen it then. I think it would have piqued my interest in the subject and given me more tools to fight with. It has taken years for me to really appreciate what that dark period in time must have been like. I have done a lot of research on the Red Scare and the Communist Party in the US since then. And here we are again on the cusp of the ugly and dark side of American culture in a Trumpian future. So many parallels.

Sidney Lumet was a consummate director who tackled issues that were prescient and thoughtful. He excelled at helping his actors with character development and in creating a cinematic verisimilitude that puts you right in the period and place.

Timothy Hutton, an entirely under-appreciated actor, was perfect as Daniel. Ed Asner is always a joy to watch. The entire ensemble of actors made this a classic that should be studied by audiences and students in order to gain a critical understanding of the underbelly of American History, past present and future.

Bravo!

"Daniel" should have been an intricate, devastating account of ruined lives, another "Long Day's Journey into Night". With director Sidney Lumet at the helm and great actors on-board, audiences in 1983 were probably expecting a masterpiece. The first problem with this film about the traumatized American son and daughter of internationally-scandalized parents--convicted and put to death for spying for the Soviets in the 1950s--belongs in its own scenario; screenwriter E. L. Doctorow, adapting his novel "The Book of Daniel", and Lumet made a big fuss over the lineage of their piece, claiming it was in no way a portrait of real-life executed spies, Julius and Ethel Rosenberg, who left behind two sons. Of course it is, which makes all the dropped hints and 'fictionalized' details that much more annoying. A second problem--and a much larger one--lies in Doctorow's writing, which shuts the audience out early on. "Daniel" isn't a witty or chatty examination of past-and-present events; it's a dirge-like tale that holds any sort of clever banter in contempt. Lumet loves shouting actors on the screen, and here he keeps everyone hollering until there's nothing left to listen to (and nothing to look at except pained expressions). Timothy Hutton is miscast as Daniel; Mandy Patinkin, Lindsay Crouse, Ellen Barkin and Amanda Plummer are all wasted on unplayable material. * from ****