Featured Audience Ratings

• Jim H

  
  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… More
  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.

• Universal D

  
  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… More
  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.

• Chris W

  
  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… More
  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.

• AJ V

  
  This is a good serious drama about persecution of Jews in modern society (of the 40s).

• William S

  
  In 1947, I have no doubt it was a damning indictment of racial bigotry. But today it just feels smug and very dull. Personally I have always found it hard to get through anyway. Celeste Holm is the sole reason for sitting through this one again - and maybe Dorothy McGuire.… More
  In 1947, I have no doubt it was a damning indictment of racial bigotry. But today it just feels smug and very dull. Personally I have always found it hard to get through anyway. Celeste Holm is the sole reason for sitting through this one again - and maybe Dorothy McGuire. Granite-faced Peck remains an enigma to me. He only ever succeeds in sending me to sleep.

• Byron B

  
  I love the message of this movie. This I think is the best of several social issue movies from the 40's. Well written and really makes you think before you assume intelligent people would not be prejudice. Similar message to Crash, though not such complex intersecting… More
  I love the message of this movie. This I think is the best of several social issue movies from the 40's. Well written and really makes you think before you assume intelligent people would not be prejudice. Similar message to Crash, though not such complex intersecting storylines, it is just as powerful at times.

• Matthew Y

  
  Racism and homophobia are still relevant issues among our society today but antisemitism has mostly dissipated among civilized western society...well unless you're a religious extremist, Cartman or Mel Gibson. Due to this fact the impact of the film has likely been astoundingly… More
  Racism and homophobia are still relevant issues among our society today but antisemitism has mostly dissipated among civilized western society...well unless you're a religious extremist, Cartman or Mel Gibson. Due to this fact the impact of the film has likely been astoundingly lessened through the 60+ years since its release. The quality of the film from an entertainment aspect isn't anything too special either, aside from the pretty solid performances of Gregory Peck and Dorothy McGuire. Despite all this I found the film remarkably interesting just due to the fact that two-three generations ago being Jewish was such a big deal to some people. The importance of the film for the time is unquestionable but there are many films that have tackled the dark, the controversial and the tabu elements of our time. Gentleman's Agreement mostly exists now as an intriguing look-in at the past.

• Mike T

  
  The most consistently impressive thing that I've noticed in Kazan's work is that none of it feels dated. His focus as a director was always on realism, and as a result a lot of his work has stood the test of time better than loads of movies from the 1940s and 1950s. Gregory… More
  The most consistently impressive thing that I've noticed in Kazan's work is that none of it feels dated. His focus as a director was always on realism, and as a result a lot of his work has stood the test of time better than loads of movies from the 1940s and 1950s. Gregory Peck delivers a strong, powerful performance, and the surrounding actors are very convincing as well. I loved this script and I loved its execution.

• Simeon D

  
  Could be retitled "Gregory Peck Yells At Racists: The Movie" and serve as a prequel for To Kill A Mockingbird. Should this have one Best Picture: Nah. Movies like this were meant to be a runner up at the Oscars, not win the big prize. Elia Kazan has committed direction… More
  Could be retitled "Gregory Peck Yells At Racists: The Movie" and serve as a prequel for To Kill A Mockingbird. Should this have one Best Picture: Nah. Movies like this were meant to be a runner up at the Oscars, not win the big prize. Elia Kazan has committed direction and the performances are praiseworthy. 88/100

• Lord N

  
  The best part about this movie, better than Peck's acting performance, better than the screenplay, was the subject matter. wow. in 1947, two years after WWII, the world is still recovering from the Holocaust, this film came out. which is probably why it won Best Picture (for more… More
  The best part about this movie, better than Peck's acting performance, better than the screenplay, was the subject matter. wow. in 1947, two years after WWII, the world is still recovering from the Holocaust, this film came out. which is probably why it won Best Picture (for more on that see my senior project essay in my blogs). it was a bold film to be sure. it till is. the problems that this film is trying to expose (and successfully) are still not completely gone. It made some bold choices and I really respect that. however, I feel that this one was a close call. I really like and respect this film and I am alright with the fact that it won. one thing about this film though is you aren't 100% if they are exaggerating in some points. I doubt it but I can't be sure not having lived in the 1940s. Final Verdict: it's a close call. I am alright that it won but, call me crazy, the film that it is almost tied with was Miracle on 34th Street. (wow the dude who played Kris Kringle was great).

• Andre T

  
  It´s sad to say, when you have so many good actors and the direction of the legendary Elia Kazan, but for me this movie is a boring classic.The central plot of the story is interesting, but the romance part is a little exagerate.

• Dimitris S

  
  Anti-racist film evolving a perpetual egoism from Kazan's side,continuing relentlessly till we reach the culminating step with America,America.Whimsical and tragic in many circumstances,a picture where the major flaw stands on Dorothy McGuire's extravaganza.Holm is… More
  Anti-racist film evolving a perpetual egoism from Kazan's side,continuing relentlessly till we reach the culminating step with America,America.Whimsical and tragic in many circumstances,a picture where the major flaw stands on Dorothy McGuire's extravaganza.Holm is exceptional in a roller coaster part,Kazan's direction of his actors is always top-class.

• Lizzy B

  
  Um... so I fell asleep... but I got the general idea from waking up at some parts... annnnd... ya... I don't know Gregory Peck is always good... definitely felt like a sleeper... heh

Read all 13 featured audience ratings