IMDb RATING
6.8/10
1.2K
YOUR RATING
A middle-aged man tries to reconnect with his illegitimate son, who was given to an orphanage many years ago.A middle-aged man tries to reconnect with his illegitimate son, who was given to an orphanage many years ago.A middle-aged man tries to reconnect with his illegitimate son, who was given to an orphanage many years ago.
- Director
- Writers
- Stars
Byron Amidon
- Minor Role
- (uncredited)
Margaret Bert
- Nurse
- (uncredited)
Nesdon Booth
- Pool Room Proprietor
- (uncredited)
Lovyss Bradley
- Department Store Customer
- (uncredited)
- Director
- Writers
- All cast & crew
- Production, box office & more at IMDbPro
Featured reviews
This film turned out to be a real tear-jerker, but in a good way!! James Cagney takes centre stage as the man looking for the son he has never seen. Barbara Stanwyck is good in a supporting role, although I felt she could have been given an even better part. There are some lovely scenes between Cagney and the young girl he ends up bonding with and overall I did enjoy this movie very much.
I was drawn to this, as I so often am with many TCM movies, by the cast, and was very impressed with the film as a whole. Dealing with the issue of adoption, it centers on an unmarried tycoon who seeks out his son, the offspring of the girl he abandoned in his youth. It is an intelligent script which deal sensitively with the competing rights and needs of adopted children and of biological parents. Cagney is wonderful as the tycoon, reminding us that he was a better actor than just his gangster roles would lead us to believe. Walter Pigeon is marvelous as the lawyer, and though I've never been a fan of Barbara Stanwyck, she and Cagney play beautifully against each other here. As some have said the plot is a bit contrived, but all stories are contrived to some extent. In this the relationships play out convincingly, and I found the ending genuinely touching. This overlooked gem is well worth watching.
I first saw this film about 20 years ago on Turner Classic Movies and I was far from impressed--so much so that I long resisted seeing it again. However, on a lark, I decided to see it again--especially because I barely remembered the film--just that I didn't particularly like it. In hindsight, I am thrilled that I saw it again since it was far better than I'd remembered plus there were some truly wonderful moments.
The film begins with a very rich and successful James Cagney announcing to his board of directors that he was taking an extended leave of absence and wouldn't tell them why. It turns out that 20 years earlier, Cagney had fathered a child out of wedlock and he was trying to reconnect with this lost child. Naturally the adoption agency was not about to just give him this information and eventually Cagney unleashes lawyers and exerts his influences to try to force the issue.
At the same time, there is a plot involving a nice young girl who Cagney meets who is also pregnant and without resources, so it looks like she'll need to give up her baby. Considering the very obvious parallel, it's not at all surprising where this all leads, but it is still very emotionally satisfying to watch. In addition, there is a great scene at a bowling alley that is full of depth and emotion you often don't find in a Cagney film.
A highly unusual and soap opera-like film that still manages to satisfy despite a bit of predictability. It was well worth a look--I'm glad I did again.
The film begins with a very rich and successful James Cagney announcing to his board of directors that he was taking an extended leave of absence and wouldn't tell them why. It turns out that 20 years earlier, Cagney had fathered a child out of wedlock and he was trying to reconnect with this lost child. Naturally the adoption agency was not about to just give him this information and eventually Cagney unleashes lawyers and exerts his influences to try to force the issue.
At the same time, there is a plot involving a nice young girl who Cagney meets who is also pregnant and without resources, so it looks like she'll need to give up her baby. Considering the very obvious parallel, it's not at all surprising where this all leads, but it is still very emotionally satisfying to watch. In addition, there is a great scene at a bowling alley that is full of depth and emotion you often don't find in a Cagney film.
A highly unusual and soap opera-like film that still manages to satisfy despite a bit of predictability. It was well worth a look--I'm glad I did again.
Maltin calls this a soap opera. That's what I expected it to be, but I feel that it's better than that, largely due to Cagney's performance. He's quite believable as a middle aged man who regrets the mistakes of his youth. Barbara Stanwyck is a woman struggling with an emotional and legal conflict. Throw in a good courtroom scene, and you've got a movie that holds your interest to the end. The final resolution is a bit sappy, but overall, the film is pretty good.
The two old pros, Cagney and Stanwyck are the reason to watch this one. Neither chews the scenery; there's no romantic subplot between them, yet their scenes together are wonderful. Stanwyck shows no femme fatal sexiness or been there done that humor. She's just a nice, hard working person, and when confronted with Cagney's type A "I'm used to getting what I want", she sweetly deflects it instead of the fireworks you'd normally expect from a Stanwyck character. For his part, Cagney drops his tough guy image and when faced with the pain his past misdeeds have caused, makes no attempt to evade responsibility.
They're on opposite sides, yet show a respect for each other.
No motivation is shown for Bradford's sudden desire to drop everything to find the son he abandoned 20 years before. It might have been better if a chance meeting with Betty Lou Keim's abandoned, pregnant teen had served as the spark. Clearly, she reminds him of the girl he abandoned.
The other major flaw, is that being in his 50s, it would have been more realistic if Bradford's abandonment of his newborn son been 30 years before instead of 20. The guy that plays his son (Don Dubbins) looks and acts much older than a 20 year old. Also, 20 years before, Bradford would have been in his mid 30s, way too old to be a callow college boy. And is 20 years enough time to build such a large business? I also can't help wishing they'd cast someone who looked like Cagney to play Cagney's long lost son, like Richard Jaeckel.
They're on opposite sides, yet show a respect for each other.
No motivation is shown for Bradford's sudden desire to drop everything to find the son he abandoned 20 years before. It might have been better if a chance meeting with Betty Lou Keim's abandoned, pregnant teen had served as the spark. Clearly, she reminds him of the girl he abandoned.
The other major flaw, is that being in his 50s, it would have been more realistic if Bradford's abandonment of his newborn son been 30 years before instead of 20. The guy that plays his son (Don Dubbins) looks and acts much older than a 20 year old. Also, 20 years before, Bradford would have been in his mid 30s, way too old to be a callow college boy. And is 20 years enough time to build such a large business? I also can't help wishing they'd cast someone who looked like Cagney to play Cagney's long lost son, like Richard Jaeckel.
Did you know
- TriviaFirst film roles of Michael Landon and Tom Laughlin.
- GoofsWhen Cagney rings doorbell on his first visit to Stanwyck's house, the bell rings before he actually presses the button.
- Quotes
Ann Dempster: There's always a kind of hope in everything.
Details
- Release date
- Country of origin
- Language
- Also known as
- All Our Tomorrows
- Filming locations
- Production company
- See more company credits at IMDbPro
Box office
- Budget
- $1,257,000 (estimated)
- Runtime1 hour 31 minutes
- Color
- Sound mix
- Aspect ratio
- 1.85 : 1
Contribute to this page
Suggest an edit or add missing content