Lo zio in vacanza

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.

I'd never seen this film before today, and I thoroughly enjoyed it. Parenthetically, I never saw either of its predecessors, either, which may be why I was surprised at this delightful film. George Arliss and Bette Davis absolutely charm here. The "farce" approach of this picture adds a tingle of excitement with every near-discovery of the real identities of the characters and their relationships to one another. While many TCM patrons and film enthusiasts will enjoy this for the pleasurable experience that classic films bring, I'd suggest that it be shared with folks who are relatively new to this area as an introduction to how wonderful classic films can be. The only gripe I have w/the construction of the film is the way the ending is so quickly and neatly tied up. There was an abrupt resolution without a gradual denouement to allow the audience to enjoy the conclusion longer. Other than that detail, I enjoyed everything else immensely. I recommend this wholeheartedly to both old viewers and new ones.

This obscure "Bette Davis" film is obscure enough that I had never seen it. I had heard that this was another of the minor programmers Davis made towards the beginning of the Warner Brothers career. I had also seen a number of George Arliss films and while I enjoyed them, I always thought Alriss' style of theatrical acting was quite out of date in 1933.

What a pleasant surprise! This was shown on TCM today, and is a cleverly written story about a man helps a rival company out of his problems due to his prior love for the late rival's late wife, and the fact that he met and like her children! This is not a typical Warner Brothers programmer....in many ways it's one of the brightest, most enjoyable Warner Brothers films of the period.

Gee, it would be swell to see Warners put it out on DVD.

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.

Starring a great actor, George Arliss, whose talents are on display throughout this film, The Working Man also features a young Bette Davis, Hardie Albright, and Theodore Newton, all of whom should have become major star vehicles for Warner. In a plot that is unusual, but easy to follow, the best of human nature is brought to the surface and that is always a winner with an audience. This film feels "right" from beginning to end, and all of the people involved in its production deserve credit for an early lighthearted masterpiece. This should be considered a classic in that vein. A must see for any film aficionado or just an entertaining evening watching a movie for the family. This is worthy of the highest ratings.