Gentleman's Agreement (1947)

There's this idea that putting yourself in the shoes of others is an effective way to expose prejudice.

At times, someone will go "undercover" to find out what it's really like from another perspective, using their own outside experiences as a baseline for comparison.

Famously, it was seen in the 1961 nonfiction book, "Black Like Me," when a journalist darkened his skin to expose racism.

In the Oscar-nominated 1982 comedy "Tootsie," Dustin Hoffman's character dresses like a woman to get an acting role but inadvertently discovers how sexist the world can be.

And in one of the worst film ideas ever, C. Thomas Howell is a white man who takes tanning pills in order to steal a scholarship for minorities to Harvard in the 1986 comedy "Soul Man." Terrible idea.

Some of these stories have aged better than others. All include some moments that would make us cringe if they were written today. But all of them had good intentions (well, I'm not sure about "Soul Man") and aimed to expose prejudice with an unconventional approach.

Long before any of these came out was the 1947 Best Picture winner "Gentleman's Agreement," the story of a magazine journalist who tries to write about anti-semitism by pretending to be Jewish. Gregory Peck, in the lead role, exclaims at the breakfast table that he even knows what he'll title the article: "I was Jewish for Six Months." It's a laughable line and one that wasn't meant to be funny when it was written, but it underscores the movie's sincerity competing with its naivety and tone-deafness.

Peck's character Phillip Green soon finds out that prejudice towards Jews is a lot more prevalent than he realizes. He encounters a doorman who doesn't want to put Jewish names on the mailboxes because it could hurt property values. He has a discussion with a secretary at his building who is Jewish and hides it, making comments herself that are clearly self-loathing. (She uses a slur that starts with "k" to describe herself when she's acting "too Jewish" at times).

The title of the movie itself refers to the fact that many of these barriers to Jews are unspoken and just understood. It's a gentleman's agreement that nobody rents their summer home to Jewish family. Doesn't need to be said or in writing. But it's there.

The most troubling part of "Gentleman's Agreement" is that it deals with the comfortable upperclass. The problems that Green encounter deal with not getting into a country club or snide remarks during a cocktail party. Nobody is having slurs yelled at them. Nobody is physically assaulted in a hate crime. And despite coming out in 1947, nobody references the very recent Holocaust in Europe. The closest the movie ever gets to politics is a short and vague conversation about Israel being recognized as a nation that is briefly mentioned at a cocktail party.

Your heart does break when Green's son, played by Dean Stockwell (then a child actor but later co-star of the TV series "Quantum Leap"), cries to his father because children at school taunt him and call him names because it's rumored that he's Jewish.

Overall, "Gentleman's Agreement" isn't a bad movie. Like many "issues" movies that have gone on to win Best Picture at the Oscars ("Driving Miss Daisy," "Crash," "Rain Man"), they seem revolutionary at the time (I'd argue that "Crash" never was) but they look incredibly dated by today's audiences. And yes, "Green Book" might fall into that category for some too.

"Gentleman's Agreement" did actually make a difference in its day and that's evidenced by those who opposed its release. The political nature of the film upset the House Un-American Activities Committee and several actors turned down the lead role before Peck accepted it. Some Jewish filmmakers, such as Samuel Goldwyn, thought the movie would just stir up things and cast a spotlight on Jews who wanted to just go about their business unnoticed. "Gentleman's Agreement" might seem too soft by today's standards, but many films in 1947 wouldn't even say the word Jew, let alone discuss anti-semitism. Probably one of the most high profile exceptions would be Charlie Chaplin's talkie masterpiece "The Great Dictator" in 1940, which also caused controversy.

Elia Kazan would win a Best Director Oscar for this movie and he does an admirable job. He's also known for coaxing the best performances at of all of his actors, but this one doesn't rise to his later greatness seen in "East of Eden," "A Streetcar Named Desire" and his other Best Picture winner "On the Waterfront." Kazan is good but it's not his best.

Peck is good, but he's better in "To Kill A Mockingbird," "Cape Fear," "Roman Holiday" and "The Omen."

Celeste Holm won an Oscar for Best Supporting Actress but she's better in "All About Eve," another Best Picture winner.

In the end, it's probably good to watch "Gentleman's Agreement" to understand how much things have changed, and perhaps how much they haven't.