 |
| Journalist Philip Schuyler Green (Gregory Peck) pretends to be Jewish for a story on anti-Semitism. |
Release Date: Nov. 11, 1947. Running Time: 118 minutes. Screenplay: Moss Hart. Based on the novel by: Laura Z. Hobson. Producer: Darryl F. Zanuck. Director: Elia Kazan.
THE PLOT:
Philip Schuyler Green (Gregory Peck) is a journalist who has taken a job at a high-end, liberal New York publication. It's a good move for him; he's recently widowed, and the move allows him to be close to his mother, who can help with the raising of his young son (Dean Stockwell). Things look even brighter when he meets Kathy (Dorothy McGuire), the smart, attractive niece of his new editor, Mr. Minify (Albert Dekker)... but Phil's job is about to get in the way.
Minify feels driven to do a series on American Anti-Semitism, a subject he thinks Phil can do justice to. Phil is less enthusiastic, believing there is nothing new to say on the topic and fearing that his debut with the journal will amount to little more than: "prejudice is bad, and here are some statistics about it." Then he hits on an angle that he believes will allow for a more personal look at the topic.
Phil, who is still new to town and unknown to most, will pretend to be Jewish to everyone he meets, allowing him to experience the prejudice firsthand. But he finds it harder than expected to bear that weight, particularly when the most stinging responses come from those he would least expect...
 |
| Phil with his girlfriend, Kathy (Dorothy McGuire), and his Jewish best friend, Dave (John Garfield). |
CHARACTERS:
Phil: Gregory Peck was not the first choice, with the role originally offered to Cary Grant. I would have preferred Grant. The character as written has a judgmental streak, one that Peck leans into a little too hard. Still, he has fine individual moments. When Phil attempts to check into a hotel whose managers won't openly admit to refusing Jewish guests, he shows a stubbornness and quiet anger that is highly effective. Overall, however, he's more than a little wooden. Peck would himself later admit that he was too immature as an actor to deliver everything the script called for, and I would agree with that self-assessment.
Kathy: Dorothy McGuire's Kathy thinks all the right things and says them so long as she is safely in like-minded company. The idea for the anti-Semitism series was originally hers, and she is enthusiastic about Phil writing it... until he reveals the approach he's taking, at which point she instantly becomes distressed. She may share his convictions, but she lacks the courage to risk being ostracized, repeatedly urging Phil to avoid his ruse when he's meeting members of her social set.
On paper, all of this should be effective. In practice, almost nothing involving Kathy works. Peck and McGuire have no romantic chemistry, and the script tries to sell the relationship by having the two rote-recite their feelings while doing absolutely nothing to actually convey them. By the end of the movie, I'm not only unconvinced that these two love each other; I'm not even sure they particularly like each other!
Dave: John Garfield gives the movie's best performance as Phil's Jewish childhood friend, recently returned from World War II. Dave enters the film just past the halfway point, when Phil's ruse has been firmly established. The script quickly establishes a contrast between the sting Phil feels at experiencing prejudice for the first time against Dave's quieter, more internalized response to experiencing the same for his entire life. Dave is less vehement than Phil, but a couple of well-judged moments show that his wounds run far deeper. A particularly good scene sees him recalling the impact on his children of being excluded from a school trip. "That's the place they really get at you," Dave says, adding that the exclusion "wrecked them for a while."
Anne: Celeste Holm won the Best Supporting Actress Oscar as the magazine's fashion editor. Anne emerges as one of the few completely unprejudiced people Phil meets. She interacts with Phil, and later Dave, in a way that's entirely free of awkwardness, and she is blunt in assessing hypocrisy. Holm invests the character with intelligence and humor, and by the end of the movie seems like an altogether better match for Phil (and, for that matter, a better overall person) than Kathy.
Mrs. Green/Tommy: Anne Revere and a very young Dean Stockwell play the other members of Phil's family. His mother is quick-witted and stubborn, though she suffers from health issues that make Phil's threat near the end to leave New York seem a little bewildering; surely he doesn't plan to abandon her when she seems perpetually under threat of a heart attack, a stroke, or both? Stockwell's Tommy is a fairly typical 1940s urchin, just a little too adoring and perfectly behaved to be entirely believable, though Stockwell does well with a late scene in which Tommy comes home in tears after being bullied by classmates.
 |
| Phil finds an ally in Anne (Celeste Holm), who seems like an altogether better match for him than Kathy. |
THOUGHTS:
I'll admit, I wasn't entirely looking forward to Gentleman's Agreement. Though it's still regarded with respect for tackling its topic in 1947, time has seen it re-evaluated negatively as a movie. When it's mentioned in articles, it's usually put forward as an example of a "worthy" message picture that's ultimately a bit shallow.
Early scenes live down to this reputation. There's a decidedly artificial quality to magazine editor Minify enthusing that they're going to "crack (anti-Semitism) wide open," as if he's talking about some scandal at City Hall instead of a fault that was ingrained in international culture. Another scene, in which Phil explains anti-Semitism to Tommy in broad and facile terms, is exactly the sort of material I had feared. At this point, I started bracing myself for 120 minutes of morally upright Gregory Peck explaining to us that, "Prejudice is bad, mm'kay?"
Then Phil initiates his ruse, kicking off the Second Act, and... the movie instantly gets better. A lot better. The script makes some keen observations about prejudice, saving its harshest condemnations not for open bigots or hate groups but instead for "nice people" whose tolerance of hate helps to fuel it.
Phil observes to his editor that this supposedly liberal magazine has somehow managed, in New York City no less, to avoid hiring any openly Jewish receptionists. Minify calls the hiring director on the carpet and institutes a strict policy that positions are open to all religions. This leads to backlash not from the general employees, but from Phil's own secretary, Elaine (June Havoc), a "passing" Jew who frets: "You just let them get one wrong Jew in here, and it'll come out of us!"
Minus one incident in a hotel lobby, the bulk of the anti-Semistism Phil encounters boils down to little things: careless comments, stares, physical avoidance. A steady parade of people showing that, once they learn he's Jewish, he's no longer considered "one of the group," which makes Phil ever angrier as the ruse goes on. As Dave observes, Phil doesn't have a lifetime of insulation, so he feels every snub. This is all considerably more sophisticated than I had anticipated, and it adds up to a film that retains its relevance decades after the fact, with its observations about anti-Semitism applying equally to any form of prejudice.
 |
| Phil becomes an exhibit for Kathy's social set. |
WEAKNESSES:
While much of Gentleman's Agreement exceeded my expectations, it's not hard to find reasons why its reputation has declined over time.
The Phil/Kathy love story is entirely artificial. They spend many scenes insisting (but not in any way showing) that they love each other, and even discuss marriage all of two dates after their first meeting. Phil's ruse takes a toll on them as a couple, but every argument follows the same pattern: Kathy tries to keep Phil from telling people that he's Jewish, Phil gets annoyed, and Kathy feels guilty. Even if the romance worked, this would get tedious. Since the romance doesn't work, it mainly feels like their scenes draw the film to a screeching halt.
For a film whose topic is anti-Semitism, it's remarkable how few Jewish characters are present. There are only three Jewish supporting characters: Dave, Elaine, and Professor Lieberman (Sam Jaffe), who is featured for exactly one scene. Of the three, only Dave registers as a significant character.
Also, Phil's ruse is limited to telling people that he's Jewish and waiting for a reaction. It does not extend to going to a synagogue or involving himself in any way with the larger Jewish community. The movie is set in New York City; even in 1947, I guarantee there was a larger Jewish community. Also, such involvement would easily lend depth and context to Phil's story. The film wants to insist that Jews are in no way inferior to Christians... but it seems to also want to keep any actual Jewishness at a safe distance.
The script devolves into heavy-handedness in its final reel. The last ten minutes features no less than three sledgehammer-like speeches, with the final "everybody's century" speech representing the filmmakers making sure we understand The Moral of the Story. This is a real pity, after all the wonderfully subtle, authentic-feeling observations made during the bulk of the running time.
 |
| Phil consoles his son, Tommy (Dean Stockwell), after he's bullied by classmates. |
OVERALL:
Gentleman's Agreement is a good movie... mostly. I was surprised by how relevant its main points remain, particularly about the type of unconscious daily prejudice that can be just as damaging as overt hate. That was not something I had expected from a vintage film reputed to be a bit clunky and heavy-handed, and these and other moments genuinely impressed me.
Unfortunately, it's easy to find fault with the movie, as well. The central romance is dreadful, and it drags the movie down considerably. It's glaring how few Jewish characters are present in a movie about anti-Semitism. Finally, it descends into preachiness in its final moments, leaving a much worse final impression than would otherwise have been the case.
On the whole, I think the good outweighs the bad. That said, this does not stand with the best vintage Oscar winners, and it probably isn't a movie casual filmgoers would watch for an evening's entertainment.
Overall Rating: 6/10.
Best Motion Picture - 1946: The Best Years of Our Lives
Best Motion Picture - 1948: Hamlet
Review Index
To receive new review updates, follow me:
On Twitter:
On Threads:
No comments:
Post a Comment