IMDb रेटिंग
7.2/10
1.3 हज़ार
आपकी रेटिंग
अपनी भाषा में प्लॉट जोड़ेंThe vacationing head of a successful shoe company is placed as his rival's trustee, unbeknownst to them.The vacationing head of a successful shoe company is placed as his rival's trustee, unbeknownst to them.The vacationing head of a successful shoe company is placed as his rival's trustee, unbeknownst to them.
- निर्देशक
- लेखक
- स्टार
- पुरस्कार
- कुल 2 जीत
Charles E. Evans
- Mr. Haslitt
- (as Charles Evans)
Harry C. Bradley
- Reeves Company Board Member
- (बिना क्रेडिट के)
Don Brodie
- Hartland Company Salesman
- (बिना क्रेडिट के)
James Bush
- Tommy's Bridge Opponent
- (बिना क्रेडिट के)
Wallis Clark
- Mike - the Auditor
- (बिना क्रेडिट के)
Clay Clement
- Atkinson - Hartland Company Salesman
- (बिना क्रेडिट के)
Edward Cooper
- Jackson - Hartland's Butler
- (बिना क्रेडिट के)
फ़ीचर्ड समीक्षाएं
This was the second of two films that a young Bette Davis made with the great English actor George Arliss. In both films this one and The Man Who Played God, Arliss plays an older man who enjoys manipulating events and people for their own good as he sees it. In fact that other title is rather self explanatory.
The Working Man casts Arliss as a wealthy shoe manufacturer who is taking a long needed vacation and he leaves his nephew Hardie Albright in charge of the company. While on that vacation he meets the children of a recently deceased rival who are nice kids, but are wastrels and spendthrifts without a thought as to how the money they spend is made. In fact dad's company is tobogganing into bankruptcy due to bad management.
Bette Davis and Theodore Newton could have been his kids. The great manipulator gets him appointed the man who administers their trust and installs some discipline in both their lives. The end absolutely rights itself.
Bette Davis was never known for praising her colleagues save for a few. But George Arliss was one of the few who saw some of the talent and the fire in that woman to succeed and said so loudly and publicly to the brothers Warner. She writes in her memoirs how ever grateful she was to him for the rest of her life.
The fire in Davis burns rather brightly here because it contrasts with both Theodore Newton and Hardie Albright, a pair of young actors who give good performances, but really are rather bland next to Davis.
And Arliss is always a delight in comedy or drama. You've got to love that foxy old guy. And love The Working Man as well.
The Working Man casts Arliss as a wealthy shoe manufacturer who is taking a long needed vacation and he leaves his nephew Hardie Albright in charge of the company. While on that vacation he meets the children of a recently deceased rival who are nice kids, but are wastrels and spendthrifts without a thought as to how the money they spend is made. In fact dad's company is tobogganing into bankruptcy due to bad management.
Bette Davis and Theodore Newton could have been his kids. The great manipulator gets him appointed the man who administers their trust and installs some discipline in both their lives. The end absolutely rights itself.
Bette Davis was never known for praising her colleagues save for a few. But George Arliss was one of the few who saw some of the talent and the fire in that woman to succeed and said so loudly and publicly to the brothers Warner. She writes in her memoirs how ever grateful she was to him for the rest of her life.
The fire in Davis burns rather brightly here because it contrasts with both Theodore Newton and Hardie Albright, a pair of young actors who give good performances, but really are rather bland next to Davis.
And Arliss is always a delight in comedy or drama. You've got to love that foxy old guy. And love The Working Man as well.
I just saw this gem on TCM and was completely delighted. The story is clever and well-paced. All the supporting acting is excellent, all the way down to the tiny roles of the cook and maid. It was a treat to see Bette Davis so young and sparkling.
But the greatest pleasure for me was my first chance to closely observe George Arliss. I am glad I learned years ago to watch a really good movie at two levels: to accept the reconstructed or imagined reality of the film and simultaneously to see it as an artistic creation blending acting, set design, photography, music, etc., etc. This split focus allowed me to absolutely believe Arliss' character while at the same time marveling at the ease with which he played the part, particularly since the role involved a secret identity which he moved back and forth between. I can now understand Arliss' once nearly legendary reputation and I will look forward to every other Arliss movie I can find.
Almost as great a pleasure to me was to see a film that revolves around the business world without demonizing it. Our hero is truly "The Working Man", which title has two meanings, referring both to Arliss' character's pretended lowly identity and to his actual position as the hard-working head of a major enterprise. There is one sleazy businessman in the story, but it is clear that he is a rat and an exception and that successful businesses depend on hard-working, foresightful, intelligent, and dedicated men. (And women; I was surprised by a Bette Davis line about all the women doing great things running businesses. In 1933?). Compare this to films and TV of the last 10 or 20 years which are just as likely to show business giants as swindlers, thieves, murderers, etc., or at least as callous megalomaniacs. Arliss's character HAS character, and integrity, and intelligence, and I was glad to see a positive portrait of a great businessman, especially as depicted by a great actor.
So why didn't I give the movie a 10? I can enjoy the now antique music of that era, but I thought it was intrusive at several points. Also, I thought the cleverly interwoven plot threads resolved themselves too abruptly at the end, which strained my belief for the only time in the story. But 9 out of 10 makes it still a great little film, and I'd give George Arliss more than 10 if I could.
But the greatest pleasure for me was my first chance to closely observe George Arliss. I am glad I learned years ago to watch a really good movie at two levels: to accept the reconstructed or imagined reality of the film and simultaneously to see it as an artistic creation blending acting, set design, photography, music, etc., etc. This split focus allowed me to absolutely believe Arliss' character while at the same time marveling at the ease with which he played the part, particularly since the role involved a secret identity which he moved back and forth between. I can now understand Arliss' once nearly legendary reputation and I will look forward to every other Arliss movie I can find.
Almost as great a pleasure to me was to see a film that revolves around the business world without demonizing it. Our hero is truly "The Working Man", which title has two meanings, referring both to Arliss' character's pretended lowly identity and to his actual position as the hard-working head of a major enterprise. There is one sleazy businessman in the story, but it is clear that he is a rat and an exception and that successful businesses depend on hard-working, foresightful, intelligent, and dedicated men. (And women; I was surprised by a Bette Davis line about all the women doing great things running businesses. In 1933?). Compare this to films and TV of the last 10 or 20 years which are just as likely to show business giants as swindlers, thieves, murderers, etc., or at least as callous megalomaniacs. Arliss's character HAS character, and integrity, and intelligence, and I was glad to see a positive portrait of a great businessman, especially as depicted by a great actor.
So why didn't I give the movie a 10? I can enjoy the now antique music of that era, but I thought it was intrusive at several points. Also, I thought the cleverly interwoven plot threads resolved themselves too abruptly at the end, which strained my belief for the only time in the story. But 9 out of 10 makes it still a great little film, and I'd give George Arliss more than 10 if I could.
New York shoe tycoon George Arliss (as John Reeves) clashes with nephew Hardie Albright (as Benjamin Burnett) over managing the family business. To show how the company will do without him, Mr. Arliss goes off on an extended vacation. While fishing, Arliss meets young swimmers Bette Davis and Theodore Newton (as Jenny and Tommy Hartland), inheritors of his deceased rival's shoe company. Arliss is immediately taken with Ms. Davis and Mr. Newton; he once courted their mother, also now deceased...
But the young duo party while manager Gordon Westcott (as Fred Pettison) runs their business into the ground...
Arliss decides to teach all the youngsters a lesson by assuming the identity of "John Walton" and taking over the rival shoe company. With a typically masterful performance, Arliss makes this lightweight story work beautifully. The younger players glow in his presence; this was acknowledged by Davis, who would eventually possess a similar magical screen presence. Arliss and director John G. Adolfi obviously work very well together, and with the cast. An Arliss picture had to be great experience for the actor.
******** The Working Man (4/20/33) John G. Adolfi ~ George Arliss, Bette Davis, Theodore Newton, Hardie Albright
But the young duo party while manager Gordon Westcott (as Fred Pettison) runs their business into the ground...
Arliss decides to teach all the youngsters a lesson by assuming the identity of "John Walton" and taking over the rival shoe company. With a typically masterful performance, Arliss makes this lightweight story work beautifully. The younger players glow in his presence; this was acknowledged by Davis, who would eventually possess a similar magical screen presence. Arliss and director John G. Adolfi obviously work very well together, and with the cast. An Arliss picture had to be great experience for the actor.
******** The Working Man (4/20/33) John G. Adolfi ~ George Arliss, Bette Davis, Theodore Newton, Hardie Albright
You know as soon as you hear Leo Forbstein's opening music from 42nd Street that this is going to give you that warm, slightly edgy but comfy high you only get from a Warner Brothers pre-code movie. This one's witty, it's upbeat but maybe a bit too 'nice.' Some reviewers seem to love this more than life itself - I thought it was ok.
It's got a nice vibe about it and although it's not at all sentimental it does have one of those 'let's celebrate the human spirit' types of moral message. The grown-up story and script however are cleverly written so its Capra-like message is delivered in a non-preachy way without ramming any of it down your throat. Like one of Capra's late 30s films, this also leaves you quite uplifted and inexplicably pleased with yourself for being one of those nice humans! If you're feeling a bit down, you'll feel better about life when you've watched this.
The one thing which lets this down is the acting - we're talking extras in FLASH GORDON skill levels here! During the early thirties, director John Adolfi was synonymous with George Arliss - he directed Mr Arliss quite well but he seemed to have ignored the rest of his cast. Being a silent film director, he didn't seem to notice how dreadful and totally unnatural the rest of the actors are. There doesn't seem any consistency in the characterisations - some are blustering with gestures like a villain from a Chaplin film whereas others just seem bored. One person does stand out - Theodore Newton gives one of the worst acting performances ever: you feel embarrassed for him. Obviously Bette Davis is predictably and annoyingly perfect actor but as for the rest of them, including George Arliss, it all seems a bit under-rehearsed. Coming from Warner Brothers, that's probably true - the whole thing was shot in just over a fortnight so maybe if they'd devoted a little more time to this it could have been less amateurish. I'm thinking it was the timescale because Adolfi did CENTRAL PARK with Joan Blondell a year earlier and the acting in that was perfectly fine.
Overall it's surprisingly more entertaining than you think it's going to be. It's a happy film - and an intelligently written film too. I'm not sure I'd call it a comedy though.
It's got a nice vibe about it and although it's not at all sentimental it does have one of those 'let's celebrate the human spirit' types of moral message. The grown-up story and script however are cleverly written so its Capra-like message is delivered in a non-preachy way without ramming any of it down your throat. Like one of Capra's late 30s films, this also leaves you quite uplifted and inexplicably pleased with yourself for being one of those nice humans! If you're feeling a bit down, you'll feel better about life when you've watched this.
The one thing which lets this down is the acting - we're talking extras in FLASH GORDON skill levels here! During the early thirties, director John Adolfi was synonymous with George Arliss - he directed Mr Arliss quite well but he seemed to have ignored the rest of his cast. Being a silent film director, he didn't seem to notice how dreadful and totally unnatural the rest of the actors are. There doesn't seem any consistency in the characterisations - some are blustering with gestures like a villain from a Chaplin film whereas others just seem bored. One person does stand out - Theodore Newton gives one of the worst acting performances ever: you feel embarrassed for him. Obviously Bette Davis is predictably and annoyingly perfect actor but as for the rest of them, including George Arliss, it all seems a bit under-rehearsed. Coming from Warner Brothers, that's probably true - the whole thing was shot in just over a fortnight so maybe if they'd devoted a little more time to this it could have been less amateurish. I'm thinking it was the timescale because Adolfi did CENTRAL PARK with Joan Blondell a year earlier and the acting in that was perfectly fine.
Overall it's surprisingly more entertaining than you think it's going to be. It's a happy film - and an intelligently written film too. I'm not sure I'd call it a comedy though.
I've always immensely enjoyed comedies involving deception of sorts, where the audience is in on who a person really is, while most of the cast in the movie are not (The Devil and Miss Jones (1941) comes to mind as an example). This film is one of the best of that type, with wealthy shoe manufacturer George Arliss overhearing his nephew (Hardie Albright) saying he should retire so he can run the business and do it better. A little angry, Arliss goes on a fishing vacation to Maine where his old buddy J. Farrell MacDonald lives, and quite by accident meets up with the heirs (Bette Davis and Theodore Newton) of his chief competitor, who had just died. Arliss uses an alias, and they think he is somewhat of a bum when they take him back to New York with them because of a minor injury to his hand. There Arliss sees the sorry state their finances are in and how their shoe plant is purposely being run down by Gordon Westcott, who wants to buy it at a cheap price. Arliss somehow convinces the trustees of the estate to make him Davis' and Newton's guardian, and the fireworks begin as he takes charge of his competitor's shoe plant. Only MacDonald knows who he really is, and he keeps Arliss informed about any mail sent by Albright, who thinks he still is on vacation in Maine. So Arliss plays both ends against the middle, so to speak, and in the process teaches Davis, Newton and Albright a thing or two about life and business.
The real joy in the film is the very clever screenplay, but George Arliss is also terrific in the lead, with Davis and Newton not far behind. Arliss knew the role well having done it in the 1924 silent called "$20 a Week." And Gordon Westcott makes a good heavy. This is a very underrated gem of a comedy.
The real joy in the film is the very clever screenplay, but George Arliss is also terrific in the lead, with Davis and Newton not far behind. Arliss knew the role well having done it in the 1924 silent called "$20 a Week." And Gordon Westcott makes a good heavy. This is a very underrated gem of a comedy.
क्या आपको पता है
- ट्रिवियाShot in only 18 days.
- गूफ़When Reeves is going over the books with Jenny and Tommy, a column of figures is shown, depicting the firm's losses, and the total shown is $208,000. The actual sum should be $200,000.
- कनेक्शनRemade as Everybody's Old Man (1936)
- साउंडट्रैकYoung and Healthy
(1933) (uncredited)
Music by Harry Warren
Played during the opening credits and at the end
Also played during the Hartland party
टॉप पसंद
रेटिंग देने के लिए साइन-इन करें और वैयक्तिकृत सुझावों के लिए वॉचलिस्ट करें
विवरण
- रिलीज़ की तारीख़
- कंट्री ऑफ़ ओरिजिन
- भाषा
- इस रूप में भी जाना जाता है
- The Adopted Father
- फ़िल्माने की जगहें
- उत्पादन कंपनी
- IMDbPro पर और कंपनी क्रेडिट देखें
बॉक्स ऑफ़िस
- बजट
- $1,93,000(अनुमानित)
- चलने की अवधि1 घंटा 18 मिनट
- रंग
- ध्वनि मिश्रण
- पक्ष अनुपात
- 1.37 : 1
इस पेज में योगदान दें
किसी बदलाव का सुझाव दें या अनुपलब्ध कॉन्टेंट जोड़ें