Counsellor at Law

Based upon the play "Counsellor at Law" by Elmer Rice, John Barrymore shines in this depression-era drama as George Simon, a Jewish lawyer who frantically juggles the scandals, crimes and crises that pass through his art deco office high in the Empire State Building. Simon is far from perfect and engages in insider trading and bleeds funds from wealthy clients, while tending to the needs of the less fortunate New Yorkers who come from his own working-class background. Everything seems to be going pretty well for him, but when a political enemy uncovers a past legal indiscretion and begins disbarment proceedings, Simon's socialite non-Jewish wife (Doris Kenyon) walks out on him and seeks comfort in the arms of another man (Melvyn Douglas). With the unflagging support of his faithful secretary (Bebe Dabiels in a truly magnificent performance) Simon attempts to exercise his legal skills to defend his reputation and protect those who rely upon him for justice.

Is George Simon a modern-day Robin Hood? In a sense he is, but he is far from perfect. Simon doesn't seem to grasp the many of his wrong-doings and largely blames his downfall on the outside world. John Barrymore gives a rich and very credible performance as a rags-to-riches Jewish lawyer, despite his Waspish appearance and Bebe Dabiels as his loyal secretary Miss 'Rexy' Gordon really gives a stand-out performance. A typical film of the era, fast-paced, and very stagy with the camera never moving out of the office, but thanks to Wyler's crisp direction and a superb cast this still makes very agreeable viewing, although the ending is so abrupt, I had to rewind in order to see what happened in order to see the last twenty minutes again. Everything goes so incredibly fast, attention must be paid.

Camera Obscura --- 8/10

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.

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 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.

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.