Gentleman's Agreement (1947)

Director:

Elia Kazan

Writer:

Moss Hart (screenplay)

Release Date:

February 1948 (USA)

Genre:

Drama | Romance

Plot:

A reporter pretends to be Jewish in order to cover a story on anti-Semitism, and personally discovers the true depths of bigotry and hatred.

Plot Keywords:

Jewish | Racism | Anti Semitism | Magazine | Jew

Awards:

Won 3 Oscars. Another 7 wins & 6 nominations

Cast

Gregory Peck	...	Philip Schuyler Green
Dorothy McGuire	...	Kathy Lacy
John Garfield	...	Dave Goldman
Celeste Holm	...	Anne Dettrey
Anne Revere	...	Mrs. Green
June Havoc	...	Elaine Wales
Albert Dekker	...	John Minify
Jane Wyatt	...	Jane
Dean Stockwell	...	Tommy Green
Nicholas Joy	...	Dr. Craigie
Sam Jaffe	...	Professor Fred Lieberman
Harold Vermilyea	...	Lou Jordan
Ransom M. Sherman	...	Bill Payson

Also Known As:

Laura Z. Hobson's Gentleman's Agreement (UK) (complete title) (USA) (complete title)

Runtime:

118 min

Country:

USA

Language:

English

Color:

Black and White

Aspect Ratio:

1.37 : 1

Sound Mix:

Mono (Western Electric Recording)

Certification:

Canada:PG (video rating) | Brazil:Livre | West Germany:12 (f) (w) | UK:A (original rating) | UK:U (tv rating) | UK:U (video rating) (1990) | Argentina:13 | Finland:S | Spain:13 | USA:Approved (PCA #12488) | Sweden:Btl | Australia:G

Filming Locations:

Darien, Connecticut, USA

Company:

Twentieth Century-Fox Film Corporation

Trivia:

When other studio chiefs, who were mostly Jewish, heard about the making of this film, they asked the producer not to make it. They feared its theme of anti-Semitism would simply stir up a hornet's nest and preferred to deal with the problem quietly. Not only did production continue, but a scene was subsequently included that mirrored that confrontation.

Goofs:

Factual errors: When Phil is taking Tommy to meet his (Phil's) mother at Saks Fifth Avenue, they stop in front of the statue of Atlas outside Rockefeller Center. In the shot of the two of them talking, with Fifth Avenue in the background, Saks is directly behind them, diagonally across the street on the right, with St. Patrick's Cathedral on the left. But when Phil looks at his watch and tells Tommy they'd better leave to meet grandma, the two hurry off back north along Fifth Avenue - in the completely opposite direction of the plainly visible Saks.

Quotes:

Elaine Wales: I changed my name. Did you?
Phil Green: Green has always been my name. What's yours?
Elaine Wales: Estelle Walovsky. I couldn't take it. The applications, I mean. So one day I wrote the same firm two letters, same as you're doing now. I sent the Elaine Wales one, and I sent it after they said there were no openings. Well, I got the job, all right. Do you know what firm that was? "Smith's Weekly."
Phil Green: No.
Elaine Wales: Yes, Mr. Green. The great liberal magazine that fights injustice on all sides.

Movie Connections:

Referenced in People Like Us: Making 'Philadelphia' (2003) (V)

Yes, this IS a great film...

I love this film, though it has faults. It isn't very lively or humorous, and some parts are just plain baffling. Peck is supposed to be the moral spokesman, but so many of the other actors--John Garfield, Dorthy McGuire, Dean Stockwell, Celeste Holm, Sam Jaffe--suggest less priggishness/puritanism and more humanity/warmth than he does. How can we think him morally superior when he comes across like a sulking browbeater? I wish a Spencer Tracy or even a James Stewart had played his role. Sometimes, I feel like saying, "Lighten up, Greg! Say, did you ever here the one about the Rabbi and the three bellydancers? You'll love it."

Nor is it just the casting. Many of Anne Revere's lines make me wince with their naivety, and I think she has the most embarrassing role in the movie. However, I really hate the scene when Peck berates his secretary, June Havoc, basically telling her that the only thing that differentiates a Jew from a Christian is just a word--as if cultural and ethnic differences didn't exist or matter.

I could go on, because I think I know this film's faults as well as any of its critics. However, the movie's virtues obviously outweigh its shortcomings and dated moments. In fact, after over sixty years, not one other Hollywood film confronts bigotry as intelligently as this one. That's right; not one. Why? Because every other one deals only with bigotry in the extreme--and the result is they don't really attack bigotry, they attack violence. Many bigots who keep their kids out of culturally diverse schools can watch MISSISSIPPI BURNING, IN THE HEAT OF THE NIGHT, CROSSFIRE, etc., and can self-congratulatingly say to themselves, "Well, that's not me; I know I'm not a racist." Of course, violent prejudice is the worst form there is, but, in case you didn't know, it is not violent prejudice that minorities confront on a daily basis. It is the unspoken, insensitive attitudes that GENTLEMAN'S AGREEMENT is brave enough (and unique enough) to attack. Despite its dated moments, it's no wonder this movie raises nervous hairs to this day. It makes one actually wonder: is it wrong to tell a politically incorrect joke? Those who think the answer is simple, please think again.

Some have commented that they don't understand what the title refers to and it is significant. A gentleman's agreement is one made without writing or even speech--an agreement that's understood or assumed to be understood. In regards to the film, the term refers to those innumerable bigots who so unthinkingly assume that their prejudices are agreed upon. Speaking as a member of the U.S.'s privileged minority (a white, anglo-saxon, Protestant heterosexual male), I can attest that all of the sexist, racist comments I have had to hear have always been spoken by someone who silently assumed that I would agree with him, making it a gentleman's agreement. The movie, of course, says it's time to break the agreement. A lot of people didn't like such a message when the film came out, and a lot of them don't like it now.