Ce monde à part

... by not marrying his father in the first place. Let me explain.

Kate Judson (Diane Brewster) marries socialite Bill Lawrence (Adam West... yes THAT Adam West). Kate marries him because her mother wants the marriage into high society. But apparently, Bill is gay. The film comes as close to saying that as you could in 1959. He runs out of the honeymoon suite. Kate runs to the man she really loves, construction company owner Mike Flanagan (Brian Keith). When she returns home later that night she learns Bill has died in an accident. Nine months later a son is born. But the mother in law has PIs all over the place and tells Kate she knows this is not her grandson and offers to pay her off as long as she and the baby relinquish the Lawrence name. Kate refuses, because the Lawrence name will open doors for her son some day. She also refuses to marry the father whom she loves, because "people will talk" and possibly figure out his real parentage.

So the son grows up to be Paul Newman, Mike Flanagan overpays him to work at his flourishing construction business, and as he grows into manhood he is now rubbing elbows with some of the most insufferable snobs ever committed to celluloid. They lie. They cheat. They steal. They mess with him professionally and romantically. He tries to keep his honor, but they don't make it easy for him.

If Kate had married Mike in the beginning she would have had all of the money she ever needed because Mike was very successful, avoided both her and her son's suffering, and yes, those snobs would have had nothing to do with her family, but after watching this film that seems like a plus.

Billie Burke as a widow worth a billion dollars in today's money is hilarious. She ventures out on Christmas just to make sure her dog is mentioned in her will. Robert Vaughn is a standout as a blue blood friend of Newman's character who drinks heavily to deal with the hypocrisy of his relatives.

"The Young Philadelphians" begins on an odd note. A lady marries--only to have her new hubby say that he CAN'T consummate the marriage! I THINK this was implying he was a homosexual--but it was so vague you wonder if the man just didn't have a penis. All I know is that she stormed out--and later that night he killed himself. In the time between, she met with her old boyfriend (Brian Keith) and I THINK they implied they had sex. And, if we are to believe this odd build up, she became pregnant that night. The lady's brand-new mother-in-law wants to take the child and raise him herself--but the mother vows to do it without her dead husband's family's money. Years pass and the child is now a good looking college student (Paul Newman) who works for Keith (who you assume is his biological father). All this vagueness thanks to 1950s standards--which, in the case of this film, tended to weaken the narrative. I just wish they'd been a lot more explicit and this is by far the worst aspect of the film.

As for the rest of the film, it's very, very good. It's all about Newman and his rise as a lawyer in Philadelphia--and his dealings with the city's elite families. Much of the film simply chronicles his life events--his first love, his attending law school, military service and his rise through the ranks in the legal field. Despite this sounding rather pedestrian, it isn't--Newman did a great job and the script is very well written and with excellent dialog.

Later in the film, Newman has finally worked his way to being a very well-respected and successful lawyer. He has a chance to go into politics, marry a gorgeous women from the best of families and he has every reason to be happy. However, out of the blue, a new case comes along--one that could upset all of his plans. What's he to do? Overall, it's a film that is very, very good but with a small re-write it could have been a lot better. Either making the first portion tighter would have helped or simply eliminating this soap opera-like plot would have made the film stronger. But, looking past this, the film is still a very good and often overlooked Newman vehicle.

By the way, a few final points. My daughter saw this film with me and said that the small portion that takes place at the University of Pennsylvania looks like it was filmed at the school--as she recognized some of the buildings. Although IMDb doesn't say it was filmed there, it does say that the filmmakers did a good job making it look right. Also, to my knowledge, it's the only film I've ever seen about a tax attorney--and I'll have to tell my friend, Terri (a tax lawyer) about it! Finally, although I sometimes have disliked Billie Burke in films as she sometimes dominated the film too much with her ditsy act, here her bit part was fantastic--and used very effectively. I loved her in the film.

The Young Philadelpians which was made in 1959 is tame by today's standards; out-dated for sure. Yet, when it was made it was not only controversial, but very daring for it's time; dealing with homosexuality, child-birth out of wed-lock, mental illness, adultery, suicide and alcohol abuse.

Paul Newman was out-standing in the role of Anthony Judson Lawrence, a career driven lawyer, whose mother is hiding a deep dark secret. Newman is at his physical prime; handsome and lean. Everyone in this classic black and white soap opera was great. Just a really entertaining rainy night movie.

Vincent Sherman directed this long but interesting drama that stars Paul Newman as Anthony Judson Lawrence, an ambitious young man in Philadelphia society who rises from construction foreman to law school student with a good offer of employment that is interrupted by the Korean War, which sees Tony distinguish himself even more. After his discharge, he resumes his successful career, finding love along the way. There is a sad development when old friend(and fellow war veteran) 'Chet'(played by Robert Vaughn) has fallen on hard times, now an alcoholic accused of murder, and wanting Anthony to defend him, despite his inexperience... Despite the potential simple soap opera story, this is a well acted and written film that is surprisingly interesting. Glossy but entertaining.

Absolutely agree about the high quality of Oscar-nominee Robert Vaughn's performance. It must be his finest movie moment. And Barbara Rush does herself proud, too. Film's reality holds up even 40 years later; one of the era's more credible dramatizations.