The LEGO Movie 2: The Second Part
Green Book
Widows
The Walking Dead
Log in with Facebook
OR
By creating an account, you agree to the Privacy Policy and the Terms and Policies, and to receive email from Rotten Tomatoes and Fandango.
Please enter your email address and we will email you a new password.
We want to hear what you have to say but need to verify your account. Just leave us a message here and we will work on getting you verified.
Please reference “Error Code 2121” when contacting customer service.
Critics Consensus: It occasionally fails to live up to its subject matter -- and is perhaps an 'important' film more than a 'great' one -- but the performances from Gregory Peck and Dorothy McGuire are superb.
Critic Consensus: It occasionally fails to live up to its subject matter -- and is perhaps an 'important' film more than a 'great' one -- but the performances from Gregory Peck and Dorothy McGuire are superb.
All Critics (37) | Top Critics (9) | Fresh (29) | Rotten (8) | DVD (5)
The words ring out with clarity from the Mayfair screen and there is no mistaking their meaning. They are not lost on the wind, but hit you full in the face, making you sit up and take notice of the force behind them.
Agreement was tame, cautious stuff even back then.
By dispassionate critical standards, Gentleman's Agreement is not a success. It is a tract rather than a play and it has the crusader's shortcomings.
The movie is as powerful today as when it captured the Best Picture Oscar a few years after Hitler's genocide ended in Europe.
Gentleman's Agreement is an important experiment, honestly approached and successfully brought off.
It looks pretty timorous now.
Powerful film still makes one of the most insightful attacks on racism ever shot.
Can Gentleman's Agreement be a salient, good movie, and still be entirely too corny? Maybe it's just because I'm looking back at it from the modern day, but Gentleman's Agreement plays hokey and preachy a lot of the time.
Diabolically dull and somber to the point that it's almost worth laughing at it, except that Gregory Peck's incredibly serious expressions have the tendency to make laughter dry out and die.
An eye-opener in its day, this exposure of high-society racial prejudice still has the power to compel.
The style may have dated but the motives which drive the film still feel fresh and energetic.
You'd think a 60-year-old movie about prejudice would be passé by now. You'd be wrong.
A newspaperman lies and tells his co-workers that he's Jewish in order to experience prejudice. A strong performance by Gregory Peck is the main attraction to this film. That sonorous voice, his unflinching gaze, and his imperious demeanor make him the type of person who exudes integrity, and when he plays characters like Phil or Atticus Finch, actor and character become one. The film is reductive in its treatment of race/prejudice. I don't think one can truly understand prejudice by "playing Jewish." Yes, one can come close, and one can feel discriminated against in a cursory way, but I imagine that prejudice cuts deeper if one has a bone-deep connection with the discriminated against. Of course, I can't be sure. Also, the ending seemed ham-handed and maudlin, and I didn't think that what happened reflects what these people really would have done. Overall, Gregory Peck is always compelling even in films that aren't.
Super Reviewer
Very serious piece about silent prejudice, where the usual hallmarks of bigotry are hidden under a polished but greasy veneer of smiling good manners. Ahead of its time by decades at least, the crux of the tale interestingly happens inside of a blossoming love affair between two we-know-better-than-that cosmopolitans, ably delivered by Peck and (very underrated but nuanced and shining) Dorothy McQuire.
Back when it was released during the late 1940s, this film was really quite something. It was a serious drma which tackled the issue of prejudice, specifically anti-semitism, something that really struck a chord given the historical evetns of the years preceeding it's release. I can see why it won some Oscars (including Best Picture), but I can't really say if it was the most deserving of the award or not. It is a good movie though, although it comes across as rather tame and typical by moden standards. So, in order to really enjoy it, you just have to force yourself into the same environment that the film was made and takes place in. You can get enjoyment out of it if you don't do that, but you might not find the film to be as impactful, either. It is a tad bit boring, and I think they could have handled the issues a little better, but, given the circumstances, they really pushed the envelope for the time, and did the best they could. I do like the performances though, because Peck is as reliable and watchable as always. The others are good too, but unfortunately, the score makes everyone seem more melodramatic than was probably intended. All in all, a decent enough film that tries to explore some serious issues. Some of its relevancy has worn off, but the principles remain. If you want to see how important social and cultural issues were dealt with via film in the past, you could do a whole lot worse than this.
This is a good serious drama about persecution of Jews in modern society (of the 40s).
There are no approved quotes yet for this movie.
View All