I like movies that are aware of what they are selling... without [any] greater aspirations than to make people laugh and that's it.

In truth, there is barely enough story here to make a film.

While it is a pity that the story wasn't told with more visual finesse, this is trivial compared to our real-world problems. It takes a good movie to put that into perspective.

Great example of an old-fashioned, pure-at-heart escapist event movie that doesn't pretend to be anything that it's not and has boat loads of fun being its own ludicrous self.

I have to admit that Elia Kazan's expose of anti-semitism that came out shortly after the end of World War II made me feel pretty ignorant. I didn't realize that anti-semitism, at least to the extreme that it's presented here, was quite so rampant so shortly after the war.Kazan's film was released at a time when Hollywood was in social issue mode, making one hard-hitting film after another -- "The Lost Weekend" and "The Best Years of Our Lives" won the two Best Picture Academy Awards immediately prior to "Gentleman's Agreement," which won that award itself in 1947. These films seem pretty dated and heavy-handed now, but I think films like this were necessary then and are still necessary now. A film like "Crossfire," which also came out in 1947 and also addressed anti-semitism, is a much more interesting examination of the topic than "Gentleman's Agreement," but there was a whole big movie audience out there who wouldn't ever have watched that film because it was a B noir with gritty production values and a screenplay that doesn't tell its audience how it's supposed to feel. "Gentleman's Agreement," on the other hand, stars the attractive and glamorous Gregory Peck and Dorothy Maguire, and it presents its points in such a tidily wrapped and happy package that an audience can feel both good about the way the film ends and about themselves for being so progressive and open minded for watching it in the first place.Peck was nominated for Best Actor, and he hits his marks, but he's a boring character, and his performance consists almost completely of sanctimonious speechifying. Maguire was also nominated for Best Actress, and while her character is probably the most aggravating, she's also the most interesting and probably most representative of the majority of filmgoers who would have seen this movie, liberal progressives who voice a lot of outrage but actually enable social injustice when it comes right down to doing anything important about it. The film goes after her for her complacency, and even gives her a pretty frank and blistering soliloquy in which she admits her relief and happiness at not being Jewish, not being poor, etc. -- in other words, an admission that she should feel guilty for her white privilege but doesn't because she likes it. Pretty strong stuff for the time, and crazily relevant today, when people put Black Lives Matters signs in their front yards but then send their white darlings to private schools to avoid having them go to school with blacks and hispanics.Celeste Holm, one of my favorite actresses of all time, won a Best Supporting Actress Oscar for her small role as a fashion editor who says what's on her mind. She lights up the screen every time she's on it, but the film doesn't give her much to do, and really her character could have been excised altogether without much changing the film. Anne Revere, as Peck's salt-of-the-earth mom, was also nominated for Best Supporting Actress. Elia Kazan, who was named that year's Best Director, provides uncharacteristically dull direction; the film is based on a novel, but it wouldn't have surprised me to find that it was based on a play, so stage bound does it feel. The film also scored nominations for Best Screenplay (Moss Hart) and Best Film Editing (Harmon Jones)."Gentleman's Agreement" sits squarely in the middle of Oscar's Best Pictures in terms of quality -- not nearly as good as some of the Academy's picks over the years, but not nearly as bad as some others.Grade: A-

I don't know if this counts as a spoiler, but this movie has one of THE sexiest moments in film. When Gregory Peck and Dorothy Maguire get up to dance, he holds out his arms to her, in a gentlemanly, Gregory Peck sort of way, and she steps all the way to him, body to body. WOW! And when, just before that at the table, she looks at him with calm, searching eyes, that seem to see him for the man he really is, on and off screen. Zounds. I've read reviews of Dorothy Maguire's work that rate her as one of the most under-appreciated actresses of her time, and I think this movie proves it. If Atticus Finch's wife had been alive in "To Kill A Mockingbird", she would have been perfect in the role.

Reporter Phil Green is hired by magazine publisher John Minify to write an article on anti-Semitism, but he just cannot figure out how to approach the subject. We watch the movie patiently waiting for him to come up with the idea of pretending to be a Jew. When he finally reveals that on a previous occasion he pretended to be an Okie in order to write about the plight of the Okies, and that on another occasion he pretended to be a coal miner in order to write about coal mining, we are a little irritated that it took him so long to think about pretending to be a Jew. Having done this sort of thing twice before, it should have occurred to him right off. This delay might have been improved dramatically if someone else had suggested the idea to him. We might imagine his mother saying, "You once pretended to be an Okie to learn what it was like to be an Okie, so why don't you pretend to be a Jew?" But since the movie has Phil come up with the idea himself, we can't help thinking, "It's about time!"When he finally does start pretending to be a Jew, he is shocked by all the prejudice he encounters, as when he tries to check into a high-class hotel and is refused service. Well, what did he think was going to happen? In fact, he seems to know less about anti-Semitism than everyone else in the movie. We get the impression that the person most ignorant about anti-Semitism has been picked to write an article about it. His girlfriend Kathy has to tell him that people with houses in nice neighborhoods have a gentleman's agreement not to sell or rent to Jews. Why is it that she knows about this, but he does not? Maybe she should be writing the article. At the very least, Phil could have collaborated with his Jewish friend and his Jewish secretary. Instead, the man who knows least about anti-Semitism thinks he has to write the article all by himself.And this raises the question, Why not have a Jew write the article? It does turn out that the magazine Phil is going to write the article for discriminates against Jews in its hiring policy, which Minify changes when he becomes aware of it. But that doesn't explain why Minify, who seems so determined to combat anti-Semitism, did not hire a Jew to do the job from the very beginning. We almost get the feeling that the article (and the movie itself, for that matter) would not be meaningful unless the Jewish experience were filtered through the mind of a gentile.Furthermore, since Phil is not a Jew, it is hard to believe that he would feel the effect of prejudice the same way a real Jew would. Phil acts deeply offended when he encounters prejudice. But if I had pretended to be a Jew in order to be able to write about anti-Semitism, every time someone offended me, I would gleefully sneak off to the restroom to write down notes, thinking, "Boy, this is going to be good stuff for that article I'm going to write."

Philip Green (Gregory Peck) is a widow with a son Tommy (Dean Stockwell). He is lured to a magazine to write a series on anti-Semitism by publisher John Minify (Albert Dekker). The publisher's niece Kathy Lacy (Dorothy McGuire) had suggested the idea in the first place. He is uncertain until he tries to explain it to his son. After his mother's near death experience, he realizes that he can't understand any experience unless he experience it himself. He comes up with a way to tackle the issue. He pretends to be Jewish to experience real racism.The subject was edgy for its time. Director Elia Kazan brings his skills to this movie early in his career. Gregory Peck is the personification of honor and goodness. He is perfect for the role. It takes about 30 minutes to get to the idea. Before that, the movie is a little bit slow. While the obvious racism is easy, it's the personal subtle racism that is more interesting. All the colors are painted. It isn't about ignorant backwoods rednecks. It is about all forms that is pervasive in everyday's life and no person is immune. And it has to be noted for its iconic status.