PUNTUACIÓN EN IMDb
7,2/10
1,8 mil
TU PUNTUACIÓN
Una trabajadora es amenazada por su tiránico empleador.Una trabajadora es amenazada por su tiránico empleador.Una trabajadora es amenazada por su tiránico empleador.
- Dirección
- Guión
- Reparto principal
- Premios
- 1 premio en total
Frank McGlynn Sr.
- The Editor
- (escenas eliminadas)
Oscar Apfel
- Board of Directors Member #5
- (sin acreditar)
Harry C. Bradley
- Employee Who Refuses Paycut
- (sin acreditar)
Helene Chadwick
- Attendee at Meeting of Department Heads
- (sin acreditar)
Berton Churchill
- Mr. Bradford
- (sin acreditar)
Jesse De Vorska
- Jewish Football Customer
- (sin acreditar)
Neal Dodd
- Minister at Wedding
- (sin acreditar)
Clarence Geldert
- Board of Directors Member
- (sin acreditar)
Reseñas destacadas
Behind the pedestrian title lurks a rather savage look at survival-era capitalism as played out during that desperate depression year of 1933. Who else is better outfitted to protect the average working stiff from cut-throat competition and unemployment than a tiger shark bigger than those circling around. Department store shark Warren William is in charge of 12,000 average Joe's, and by golly he's going to keep them swimming even if he has to eat half of them in the process. Bravura performance from William-- watch his eyes slink around the hallway before he enters the hotel room to ravish a drunkenly compliant Loretta Young. His authoritative presence commands the movie as completely as he does his underlings. Film may come as a revelation to viewers unfamiliar with pre-Code Hollywood, before the censors took over in 1934. Nonetheless, it was an era of social frankness that would not emerge again until the counter-cultural 1960's, while the movie itself would play as well today as it did then, as one reviewer sagely observes.
Much of film's value lies in getting us to think about the appeal a strongman-tyrant presents during turbulent times. We loathe William's ruthless and often cruel tactics. But at the same time he's inventive, decisive, and brutally logical-- with a single-minded dedication that goes beyond personal happiness. In short, he becomes The Department Store in the same way an effective tyrant can personify The State. He's a figure to be loathed, yet grudgingly admired at the same time, while it's a credit to the film-makers that they pull off the ambivalence as well as they do. Two scenes stay with me that help define William's compelling side--watch him nearly throw up at the smarmy speech given in behalf of the store's worthless owners, plus his face-to-face denunciation of bankers as parasitically unproductive, a passage that probably brought depression-era audiences to their feet.There are also unexpected deposits of humor, such as the bald man/balloon gag that is hilariously inventive and likely a brainstorm from ace director Roy del Ruth. On the other hand, Wallace Ford simply lacks the kind of edge to make his role as William's assistant plausible. Instead, a face-off between William and, say, Cagney would have exploded the screen.
Anyhow, don't let the forgettable title or the now obscure Warren William fool you. There are so many memorable glimpses of human honesty, that the movie must be seen to be appreciated, especially by those unfamiliar with the pre-Code era. So catch up with this cynical little gem if you can.
Much of film's value lies in getting us to think about the appeal a strongman-tyrant presents during turbulent times. We loathe William's ruthless and often cruel tactics. But at the same time he's inventive, decisive, and brutally logical-- with a single-minded dedication that goes beyond personal happiness. In short, he becomes The Department Store in the same way an effective tyrant can personify The State. He's a figure to be loathed, yet grudgingly admired at the same time, while it's a credit to the film-makers that they pull off the ambivalence as well as they do. Two scenes stay with me that help define William's compelling side--watch him nearly throw up at the smarmy speech given in behalf of the store's worthless owners, plus his face-to-face denunciation of bankers as parasitically unproductive, a passage that probably brought depression-era audiences to their feet.There are also unexpected deposits of humor, such as the bald man/balloon gag that is hilariously inventive and likely a brainstorm from ace director Roy del Ruth. On the other hand, Wallace Ford simply lacks the kind of edge to make his role as William's assistant plausible. Instead, a face-off between William and, say, Cagney would have exploded the screen.
Anyhow, don't let the forgettable title or the now obscure Warren William fool you. There are so many memorable glimpses of human honesty, that the movie must be seen to be appreciated, especially by those unfamiliar with the pre-Code era. So catch up with this cynical little gem if you can.
In "Employees' Entrance," Warren William plays Kurt Anderson, a man who runs a department store with ruthlessness, disregarding employees and their private lives. In silent films, this is the type of role he played. But I'm more used to the fun William from "Daytime Wife," a Perry Mason movie, and others. He had a great laugh - but you won't hear it here.
Loretta Young, 20 when she made this film, is unbelievably beautiful as Madeleine, an employee who falls for fellow employee Martin (Wallace Ford). The two marry secretly. The tyrannical Anderson does everything that he can to break up what he thinks is a budding romance - he piles work on Martin and promotes him so that he has no time for women. Anderson, meanwhile, manages to seduce the lovely Madeleine twice! Anderson's tyranny isn't just against this couple - without giving it a thought, he ruins lives and companies. Yet in spite of this, there's something admirable about his innovations, and when he spots a smart, determined individual, he wastes no time promoting him.
A very non-precode ending that will make you really wish the code never existed. This film is not only interesting as a historical piece, but it's a look at the inner workings of a department store -- and a reminder that times really haven't changed that much.
Loretta Young, 20 when she made this film, is unbelievably beautiful as Madeleine, an employee who falls for fellow employee Martin (Wallace Ford). The two marry secretly. The tyrannical Anderson does everything that he can to break up what he thinks is a budding romance - he piles work on Martin and promotes him so that he has no time for women. Anderson, meanwhile, manages to seduce the lovely Madeleine twice! Anderson's tyranny isn't just against this couple - without giving it a thought, he ruins lives and companies. Yet in spite of this, there's something admirable about his innovations, and when he spots a smart, determined individual, he wastes no time promoting him.
A very non-precode ending that will make you really wish the code never existed. This film is not only interesting as a historical piece, but it's a look at the inner workings of a department store -- and a reminder that times really haven't changed that much.
A very watchable pre-code film - not so only it's risque elements but for acting (particularly Warren William), plot, comedy and fast pace. One of my favorites of the era.
It's very interesting how Warren William - who treats women like objects, tries to break up a budding romance (by seducing and sleeping with Loretta Young, not once but twice!!), indirectly leads to a employees' suicide, etc - manages to "win" in the end. For the most part, the is the "bad guy" in the story...although he has a few redeeming characteristics.
It's worth owning the video.
It's very interesting how Warren William - who treats women like objects, tries to break up a budding romance (by seducing and sleeping with Loretta Young, not once but twice!!), indirectly leads to a employees' suicide, etc - manages to "win" in the end. For the most part, the is the "bad guy" in the story...although he has a few redeeming characteristics.
It's worth owning the video.
This is a remarkable little movie.
It has a bad guy that you actually have to like. Most of the story is spent setting him up as a conventional villain, a ruthless guy who capriciously ruins lives. A hateful, selfish man, arrogant and exploitative.
Along the way, he sleeps with a pretty employee and then when he finds she is married to his protégé he tries to ruin the pair. A man he fired kills himself, and the pretty girl (Loretta Young) tries to. In his manner, he is as brusque and offensive as he can be. He hires a floozy to compromise a fellow executive. He harangues everyone.
And yet by the end you actually like the guy and are surprised at being tricked into doing so. He fights to avoid laying off thousands of employees (because of the depression) in a fight to the death with the bankers. He proves to be honest, if misogynistic.
The two girls are incredibly sexy, as this was made just before the code slammed the shutters on women in film.
Alice White plays the floozy just before a sex scandal ruined her career a second time. She had previous been "helped" by a few directors including Chaplin. We are seeing a real fading flapper here.
Loretta Young, at 20 is as beautifully photographed as she would ever be. How odd to see the pretty girl as one who could be seduced so... twice.
But that's all by the way. The writing of this thing is so competent it rocked me back. I watch a lot of movies and usually have to let my imagination fill in for various deficiencies. Not so here. The writer of this also did the "Kennel Murder Case" of the same year, also excellent.
Excellent again. A good old straight ahead movie that fools you into thinking it is straight ahead and then it turns things a bit upside down.
Ted's Evaluation -- 3 of 3: Worth watching.
It has a bad guy that you actually have to like. Most of the story is spent setting him up as a conventional villain, a ruthless guy who capriciously ruins lives. A hateful, selfish man, arrogant and exploitative.
Along the way, he sleeps with a pretty employee and then when he finds she is married to his protégé he tries to ruin the pair. A man he fired kills himself, and the pretty girl (Loretta Young) tries to. In his manner, he is as brusque and offensive as he can be. He hires a floozy to compromise a fellow executive. He harangues everyone.
And yet by the end you actually like the guy and are surprised at being tricked into doing so. He fights to avoid laying off thousands of employees (because of the depression) in a fight to the death with the bankers. He proves to be honest, if misogynistic.
The two girls are incredibly sexy, as this was made just before the code slammed the shutters on women in film.
Alice White plays the floozy just before a sex scandal ruined her career a second time. She had previous been "helped" by a few directors including Chaplin. We are seeing a real fading flapper here.
Loretta Young, at 20 is as beautifully photographed as she would ever be. How odd to see the pretty girl as one who could be seduced so... twice.
But that's all by the way. The writing of this thing is so competent it rocked me back. I watch a lot of movies and usually have to let my imagination fill in for various deficiencies. Not so here. The writer of this also did the "Kennel Murder Case" of the same year, also excellent.
Excellent again. A good old straight ahead movie that fools you into thinking it is straight ahead and then it turns things a bit upside down.
Ted's Evaluation -- 3 of 3: Worth watching.
I ran across this movie by chance and then ran to IMBD to learn more about it. I was amazed by how the film enlightened me on the era and actually how similar corporations and people in them still behave today.. William Warren is excellent in the role of the tyrannical boss with the hots for the married sales girl (Loretta Young). I was surprised by the the openness of the film (for the time), but apparently after reading some of the other comments, this is typical of the pre-code era of films. Too bad things had to change. You can pick up a lot of social history from this kind of film despite it being a bit one dimensional.
¿Sabías que...?
- CuriosidadesThis was silent-picture star Albert Gran's last film; he died in an auto accident after the film was finished, but before it was released. Ironically, in the film's final sequence he and Warren William are racing through the streets of Manhattan in a taxicab to a Board of Directors meeting, but they arrive safely and without incident.
- PifiasHale Hamilton's character Monroe is said to be a descendant of James Monroe and Benjamin Franklin. James Monroe had two daughters and no sons. Descendants, if any, would not have the surname Monroe.
- Citas
Kurt Anderson: When did YOU develop principles?
Polly Dale: Oh, I saved a couple out of the crash.
- ConexionesFeatured in Hollywood prohibido (2008)
- Banda sonoraI Found a Million Dollar Baby (In a Five and Ten Cent Store)
(1931) (uncredited)
Music by Harry Warren
Played as background music in scenes with Alice White
Selecciones populares
Inicia sesión para calificar y añadir a tu lista para recibir recomendaciones personalizadas
- How long is Employees' Entrance?Con tecnología de Alexa
Detalles
- Fecha de lanzamiento
- País de origen
- Idioma
- Títulos en diferentes países
- Vi som gå affärsvägen
- Localizaciones del rodaje
- May Co Department Store, 801 S Broadway, Los Ángeles, California, Estados Unidos(opening scenes, department store)
- Empresa productora
- Ver más compañías en los créditos en IMDbPro
Taquilla
- Presupuesto
- 188.000 US$ (estimación)
- Duración
- 1h 15min(75 min)
- Color
- Mezcla de sonido
- Relación de aspecto
- 1.37 : 1
Contribuir a esta página
Sugerir un cambio o añadir el contenido que falta