Terrible acting, screenplay and direction.

Overrated and overhyped

It’s fine. It's literally the definition of a fine movie. You’ve seen it before, you know every beat and outcome before the characters even do. Only question is how much escapism you’re looking for.

There are moments in this movie where the great movie it could've been peek out... They're fleeting, here, but they're worth savoring, and they happen often enough to make it worth your while.

Based on Sholem Asch's story/serial of the same name, "Uncle Moses" is an adaption set in NYC. It is the story of a Jewish man from a small town in the Pale who has come to America and owns a sweatshop that employs many people who came from the same small town. He falls for and marries a young woman who doesn't love him (she loves a young Marxist). The results.... well, you'll just have to watch it.One of the most interesting details in the film is its setting of the 1930s NY's Yiddish- Jewish community, which was recreated many years later in "Ragtime" and "Hester Street." It no longer exists the way it did back then (or earlier), and the first few minutes of film show a glimpse of how it was (in a documentary footage style). Most of the movie is filmed in a New Jersey studio, and within 2 rooms. The movie is mostly about how money does not create happiness, nor purchase one's heart. The movie is also strong on peoples' and workers' rights during the Great Depression (it's a 1932 film), much like its country-set relative, "Grapes of Wrath" (John Ford).The entire film is mostly spoken in Yiddish, a language rarely used in cinema. It does have English, showing that Jews from the Pale needed to use a franca lingua in business (much like today). For one who studies Jewish people in America, this film is priceless in this respect!The acting is a little stagy (Schwartz was a big theatre producer and director and many films of this era were based on theatrical works, or they were musicals). The plot is also melodramatic, but not overly so (like "The Jazz Singer"). In my opinion, the lesser acting came from the character of Mashale, who doesn't really age and doesn't have the depth of characterization as she does in the original stories (she's a near-feminist in the book). This may be because the movie is an adaptation and Uncle Moses is where the audience would focus their attention. An what a great acting job Schwartz does! The ending, which should look like be several years after the middle of the story, looks like it was done the same week. This always annoys me. Uncle Moses looks older, especially with the "sickly" makeup, but others look freshly out of the last shots. (I call this the "Untouchables Syndrome" - and if you have seen DePalma's movie, then you know what I am referring to).The "stagey-ness" of the movie would probably leave the casual viewer somewhat bored, but the movie is definitely for the student of film, Jewish culture (especially US immigrant), and pre-Holocaust Jewish cinema. It is a pretty good movie, and historical for many reasons mentioned above. Great companion pieces include "Avalon," "Grapes of Wrath," and "Hester Street."8 of 10. ---------- E.

One of the few surviving Yiddish language films from the early sound era is, despite painstaking restoration, a historian's artifact, of interest more to students of Jewish culture than to film buffs. The rarity of the feature is its primary virtue, and watching it is like opening a time capsule to a now-forgotten age of streetcars and gaslights, when Eastern European immigrants toiled away in the sweatshops of New York City's Lower East Side for petty despots opposed to unionization. One such tyrant is the title character (flamboyantly played by stage actor Maurice Schwartz), who may not be as noble as his Old Testament namesake, but still manages to prove by the end of the film that his heart is larger than his stomach. It might look stale after all these years, but with a generous sampling of romance, tragedy, and labor unrest the film can still be entertaining to viewers attuned to the style of such early sound relics.

The previous review has given an insightful and succinct summary of the plot.It's nice to see the great Schwartz develop his character.A hard,although not monstrous man,starts to show his softer,better and gentler nature.And,he becomes hurt,and behave reasonably.He's not just a stereotype and/or caricature of a capitalist who exploits his workers.This shows that the scriptwriter was interested in showing something true to life,and not just a piece of propaganda.Also interesting to see the role played by Svee Scooler.I'm so used to seeing him portray venerable characters in his later films,that I forgot that he,too,was once young.

Uncle Moses because of the fact that he owns a sweatshop on the lower East Side is treated like a king by all the poor people that know him or work with him. It is a very short step from being treated to believing and that happens with Moses, specially when he wants to get married to a young woman who does not love him but is forced to do so by her parents. Maurice Schwartz gives a great performance as Moses, in this excellent film spoken in Yiddish. He makes Moses a likable character, that in spite of his defects, is a "mench". By the fact that the film was made in 1932 it is also fascinating from an historical point of view because you see the lower East Side alive, with its carts, its people, its stores and restaurants. Also it shows how the workers start changing by joining the union in a search for better conditions.