IMDb रेटिंग
7.5/10
1.6 हज़ार
आपकी रेटिंग
अपनी भाषा में प्लॉट जोड़ेंA successful attorney has his Jewish heritage and poverty-stricken background brought home to him when he learns that his wife has been unfaithful.A successful attorney has his Jewish heritage and poverty-stricken background brought home to him when he learns that his wife has been unfaithful.A successful attorney has his Jewish heritage and poverty-stricken background brought home to him when he learns that his wife has been unfaithful.
- पुरस्कार
- कुल 2 जीत
John Hammond Dailey
- Charlie McFadden
- (as J.Hammond Dailey)
Robert Gordon
- Henry Susskind
- (as Bobby Gordon)
T.H. Manning
- Pete Malone
- (as T. H.Manning)
फ़ीचर्ड समीक्षाएं
While not technically lost, I call it this because very very few people have heard of it and it is not usually mentioned in discussions of John Barrymore's work. I only sought out the video after I saw it listed in the front of my Leonard Maltin guide in his list of 50 seldom-seen but great films. While his list is too heavily influenced by modern movies (more than half the list are movies just made within the last few years), this one one of the few older films listed. And, since I have adore older Hollywood films, I ran out to find a copy ASAP.
What did I like about the film? Well, first I have always loved John Barrymore films (apart from a few turkeys he made just before he died) and he is as good as you'll ever see him. Second, I really liked the film's moral compass. While Barrymore is the hero of the story, he is far from perfect and offers a more 3-dimensional sort of leading man. While he does so much of his work to help the poor and down-trodden, he is not averse to lying, insider stock trading or making a fast buck. Third, the supporting cast was very strong and full of unusual characters (aside from what I felt was an annoyingly written character, the receptionist). My favorite old films always feature a good ensemble cast for support. Fourth, it dares to be different. This lawyer is NOT Perry Mason (Warren Williams' series was very popular at the time this film was made) or like any one I have seen on film. Fifth, while the film COULD have been stagy given that all the action takes place in the building where the law firm is, its brisk pace keeps it from falling flat.
While I loved the pacing, this also brings me to about the only negative in the film. While the action is brisk, sometimes the dialog is a little TOO BRISK. Occasionally I found myself struggling to keep up with the rapid-fire dialog at the beginning of the film! Be sure to turn on your television's Closed Captioning!
What did I like about the film? Well, first I have always loved John Barrymore films (apart from a few turkeys he made just before he died) and he is as good as you'll ever see him. Second, I really liked the film's moral compass. While Barrymore is the hero of the story, he is far from perfect and offers a more 3-dimensional sort of leading man. While he does so much of his work to help the poor and down-trodden, he is not averse to lying, insider stock trading or making a fast buck. Third, the supporting cast was very strong and full of unusual characters (aside from what I felt was an annoyingly written character, the receptionist). My favorite old films always feature a good ensemble cast for support. Fourth, it dares to be different. This lawyer is NOT Perry Mason (Warren Williams' series was very popular at the time this film was made) or like any one I have seen on film. Fifth, while the film COULD have been stagy given that all the action takes place in the building where the law firm is, its brisk pace keeps it from falling flat.
While I loved the pacing, this also brings me to about the only negative in the film. While the action is brisk, sometimes the dialog is a little TOO BRISK. Occasionally I found myself struggling to keep up with the rapid-fire dialog at the beginning of the film! Be sure to turn on your television's Closed Captioning!
It's criminal that this superb melodrama, from a well-made play of the day, isn't better known. Barrymore, all cylinders firing yet giving a perfectly natural, restrained performance, is a hotshot New York lawyer facing personal and professional ruin; he may never have been better in the movies, and some of the magnetism that made him a stage legend shines through. Wyler makes no attempt to "open up" the stage material; he basically confines it to one (very beautiful) set, and his camera unobtrusively follows the legal-office denizens around, seemingly overhearing conversations, Altman-style. There's a lot of social history tucked away -- with commentary about Jews and gentiles, rich and poor, capitalist and communist -- and a whole stageful of compelling characters, who often define themselves in a walk, a smirk, a laugh. And yes, there are contrivances and coincidences, but that's the stuff the well-made melodramas of the time were made of, and they were seldom constructed as neatly as this. I saw it at a revival house, with a smart New York audience, and nobody laughed in the wrong place or grew cynical about the old social conventions that no longer apply. In fact, at the end they applauded good and hard -- after 70 years, this one's still a corker.
What a wonderful film. Just saw it last night for the first time. My first impression viewing the movie was that this was the best performance I had seen from Barrymore. I was wondering if perhaps I had gotten a little carried away, but from reading some of the other comments I see that there is great concurrence on this point. In general this lost gem is fast, funny, poignant and incredibly well acted.
So few films tell the story of a Jewish character, but this one does and very well. Barrymore is a surprising casting choice for the lead, but it is hard to imagine that anyone else could have been as good, much less better. Bebe Daniels is just excellent in the role of the loyal secretary, much better than in her more famous role in 42nd Street. John Qualen and Vincent Sherman are also very good in small roles.
If you are looking for an enjoyable hour and one half that will amuse and also make you think at the same time, jump on this rarely seen jewel. It is reputedly hard to purchase, but TCM recently featured it on its station and hopefully will do so again soon.
So few films tell the story of a Jewish character, but this one does and very well. Barrymore is a surprising casting choice for the lead, but it is hard to imagine that anyone else could have been as good, much less better. Bebe Daniels is just excellent in the role of the loyal secretary, much better than in her more famous role in 42nd Street. John Qualen and Vincent Sherman are also very good in small roles.
If you are looking for an enjoyable hour and one half that will amuse and also make you think at the same time, jump on this rarely seen jewel. It is reputedly hard to purchase, but TCM recently featured it on its station and hopefully will do so again soon.
10mardri
This film is so rare that probably few people have heard of it. What a terrible shame! The only copy I have was taped from cable TV several years ago. I
never dreamed that I would be reading such appreciation of this little treasure by so many others! There should be a movement afoot to try to bring this
wonderful work out of obscurity, at least to get it on video!
I have read that John Barrymore considered himself miscast here. But I think he was the best possible choice for this film role (played on Broadway by Paul
Muni). At a time when Hitler was just coming to power, I wouldn't want to
imagine the response by the average U.S. moviegoer toward an actual Jewish
actor trying to elicit sympathy for the personal struggles of a Jewish man trying to get himself accepted into Gentile society in this way.
As for the office setting, well, I work for a New York law firm, and this film hits the target dead on! It evokes perfectly the scurry of New York office life, as well as the latest technologies, the fashions and the speech patterns of the period, like that adorable switchboard operator! Bravo to William Wyler!
I have seen many, many John Barrymore movies, and I agree with everyone
else writing here that this must certainly be his best surviving performance, his monument, for those of us who never saw his Richard III or Hamlet. It's even
better than "Twentieth Century" and "Grand Hotel". In an era when silent-movie histrionics was still evident in the acting style, his performance is subtle, nuanced, very modern and deeply affecting, especially in that final scene!
never dreamed that I would be reading such appreciation of this little treasure by so many others! There should be a movement afoot to try to bring this
wonderful work out of obscurity, at least to get it on video!
I have read that John Barrymore considered himself miscast here. But I think he was the best possible choice for this film role (played on Broadway by Paul
Muni). At a time when Hitler was just coming to power, I wouldn't want to
imagine the response by the average U.S. moviegoer toward an actual Jewish
actor trying to elicit sympathy for the personal struggles of a Jewish man trying to get himself accepted into Gentile society in this way.
As for the office setting, well, I work for a New York law firm, and this film hits the target dead on! It evokes perfectly the scurry of New York office life, as well as the latest technologies, the fashions and the speech patterns of the period, like that adorable switchboard operator! Bravo to William Wyler!
I have seen many, many John Barrymore movies, and I agree with everyone
else writing here that this must certainly be his best surviving performance, his monument, for those of us who never saw his Richard III or Hamlet. It's even
better than "Twentieth Century" and "Grand Hotel". In an era when silent-movie histrionics was still evident in the acting style, his performance is subtle, nuanced, very modern and deeply affecting, especially in that final scene!
What a surprise this film was: the boring title hardly leads you to expect much. Barrymore really shows his chops as a pure actor, someone who can bring off a character through expression, gesture, posture, accent, tone of voice, body language, mannerisms, &c. This is an adaptation of a play about an self-made Jewish lawyer in New York. It's hard to believe that Barrymore was, in life, more like his character's wife than the lawyer he plays here. He brings off the self-made man's insecurities in every detail, from his macho way of walking to his fidgety hands and overloud way of talking and laughing. He even drops some of his g's, and I love the way he says "Yeah" (Oscar Jaffe would blanch). The script is full of telling details. Notice how the lawyer offers a guest a choice of cigar or cigarette from an expensive box, and then forgets to offer him a light. Because Wyler is at the controls, these nuances aren't hammered at the audience either.
Many film scholars have claimed that Wyler, maybe because he avoided catfights with his studio bosses, was no "auteur". Wyler never puffed himself up, either, in the way someone like Welles did. Yet the style is already visible here, long before Deep Focus, in the simultaneous double and triple reaction shots, the multiple planes of action, the underplaying and long takes, the natural dialogue, the strong performances from the bit players-- and most of all in the realistic, accurate, detailed design. This is basically a B movie. It's all shot on one basic set, in fact. But what a set! Get all that Art Deco glass and the Socialist-Realist reliefs.
Those who don't think Wyler had a style should check out "Carrie" (1952), separated from this film by almost 20 years and starring this other guy by the name of Olivier-- who always credited Wyler for teaching him how to act in films. Barrymore maybe got a few pointers for his performance here, too. All in all this is a great way to film a play, and a nice Depression period piece too.
Many film scholars have claimed that Wyler, maybe because he avoided catfights with his studio bosses, was no "auteur". Wyler never puffed himself up, either, in the way someone like Welles did. Yet the style is already visible here, long before Deep Focus, in the simultaneous double and triple reaction shots, the multiple planes of action, the underplaying and long takes, the natural dialogue, the strong performances from the bit players-- and most of all in the realistic, accurate, detailed design. This is basically a B movie. It's all shot on one basic set, in fact. But what a set! Get all that Art Deco glass and the Socialist-Realist reliefs.
Those who don't think Wyler had a style should check out "Carrie" (1952), separated from this film by almost 20 years and starring this other guy by the name of Olivier-- who always credited Wyler for teaching him how to act in films. Barrymore maybe got a few pointers for his performance here, too. All in all this is a great way to film a play, and a nice Depression period piece too.
क्या आपको पता है
- ट्रिवियाAlthough this film is frank about some matters, the Production Code of the Hays Office - i.e., censorship - was still in effect. In one 16mm print there is a curious moment of dead air at the end of Lillian Larue's parting speech to George Simon. She says (approximately), "Well, for God's sake, what do they expect for ten thousand dollars?" John Barrymore keeps looking at Larue (Thelma Todd) as if she is still speaking, and she must be, but there is no sound. Her last words in the text of the play are, "A virgin?"
- गूफ़At 44:10 into the film actress Angela Jacobs who plays the frumpy secretary Goldie Rindskopf is seen walking towards the cameras in the hallway in front of the elevators. She is wearing a black dress with scattered white dots. Much comedy relief is made of men watching her walk away with the spots accenting her motions. However, when the camera angles switches at 44:15 and this time when she is walking away from the camera she is wearing a different dress that is made up of mostly white flowers with very little black seen between the much busier pattern.
- भाव
Bessie Green: [answering a call] I thought you were dead and buried. Well sure I missed you, like Booth missed Lincoln. What do you think I've been doing, sitting around the house embroidering doilies?
- क्रेज़ी क्रेडिटThe opening credits cast list has the heading "The Players" preceding a list solely of the actors' names. "A Good Cast Is Worth Repeating... The Players" is the heading of end credits, which solely lists the same actors' names in the same order as the opening credits.
- कनेक्शनFeatured in American Masters: Directed by William Wyler (1986)
टॉप पसंद
रेटिंग देने के लिए साइन-इन करें और वैयक्तिकृत सुझावों के लिए वॉचलिस्ट करें
- How long is Counsellor at Law?Alexa द्वारा संचालित
विवरण
- रिलीज़ की तारीख़
- कंट्री ऑफ़ ओरिजिन
- भाषाएं
- इस रूप में भी जाना जाता है
- Der Staranwalt von Manhattan
- फ़िल्माने की जगहें
- उत्पादन कंपनी
- IMDbPro पर और कंपनी क्रेडिट देखें
- चलने की अवधि
- 1 घं 22 मि(82 min)
- रंग
- पक्ष अनुपात
- 1.37 : 1
इस पेज में योगदान दें
किसी बदलाव का सुझाव दें या अनुपलब्ध कॉन्टेंट जोड़ें