They Came to a City

THEY CAME TO A CITY is based on a play by J.B. Preistley and stars Googie Withers and John Clements. It's sort of an "Outward Bound" story of disparate people who find themselves on a road that leads to a monolithic waiting room before a giant door. While waiting, each person explains his/her life, hopes, gripes, etc. When the door finally opens they descend in "the city." We never see it. As they emerge from the city, some are struck by the new social order, happiness of the people, the freedom, etc. while others are repelled by what they see. This utopia seems based on socialist views.

Coming toward the end of WWII, the story is framed by a couple sitting by a roadside overlooking a manufacturing city. They are arguing about what kind of world will emerge after the war. Will things be different. A man wanders by (J.B. Priestley himself) and he joins in, telling the story of his utopia.

Those who hate "the city" include a selfish dowager who browbeats her mousy daughter, a man of the landed gentry who lives on inherited money, a ruthless industrialist who makes money in order to make more money, and a jealous wife who hates anyone to has the things she wants. Those who like the city include the mousy daughter, an old charwoman, the henpecked husband, the world-weary barmaid (Withers), and the stoker (Clements) who has searched the world for a paradise.

While not very cinematic, the overall idea is quite interesting, and the actors (mostly from the stage play) are quite good. Besides Withers and Clements, the film co-stars Raymond Huntley and Renee Gadd as the Strittons, Ada Reeve as the charwoman, Mabel Terry-Lewis and Frances Rowe as the dowager and daughter, A.E. Matthews as the industrialist, Norman Shelley as the landed gentry.

Lovely piece about assorted people who discovered a happy land far far away - and some found it happier than others. But as noted elsewhere, the Utopia is portrayed without any explanation of how we got there. As another reviewer says, it captured the mood of the times. That mood produced the Attlee government - and after six years of it, it took another 13 before Labour got in again - and Harold Wilson had the sense not to promise Utopia. Unfortunately, The comparison with Lost Horizon is very apt, but Shangri-La doesn't work without it's supernatural elements - which unfortunately we don't possess.,

A British drama; A story about how people might live if they were presented with the opportunity to live in a utopia, an "ideal" city, exploring their hopes and reasons for doing so. This is an eloquent, stagy allegory based on a play of the same title by J. B. Priestley. The direction, acting, and photography are all good, apart from occasional fits of overcooked melodrama within its bounds. It is an intelligent screenplay, but the tale within it lacks cinematic dimension with long, static sequences of dialogue; the audience is robbed of the pictorial element of what is hinted at about the mysterious settlement. Tied to this is a quite heavy political slant in the script, which is left for the viewer to accept as a task rather than for them to explore by diversion; the audience is locked out. Though the theme of universal friendship is explored well.

A very pleasant surprise. This is an allegory about an imagined socialist paradise, and the judgements that various archetypical citizens would have of it. I Loved it.

It happens that I watched this - on FUBI - on the same night that I watched a documentary about Jane Jacobs, the sociologist of cities and advocate of bottom-up community building. This was a perfect follow up.

It's presented as a series of exchanges between the disparate characters, contrasting their values, experience and social orientation. While it could be criticized as didactic and predictable, I found it well executed and fun. I especially loved Googie Withers as the working class gal whose been around the block a few times but isn't ready to go cynical.

In tone and flavor it's like a blend of Capra with Powell & Pressburger.

Not exactly highly entertaining but it's not supposed to be entertaining as it's a comparison of posh rich people to poor ones.

Unsurprisingly the rich posh ones are not keen on a society where all are equal so the privileged positions that they currently enjoy would be lost. Eighty years later and nothing has changed as the rich continue to get richer and the poor get poorer.

My favourite character was the washerwoman who held the film together with her comments.

The set must have been very cheap to construct as it seemed to have been made of plywood painter to resemble stone.

Worth a watch but don't expect any excitement like a car chase for example.