Consistent with my last post, here’s the FBI’s 1947 movie review of It’s a Wonderful Life:
“With regard to the picture ‘It’s A Wonderful Life’, [REDACTED] stated in substance that the film represented a rather obvious attempt to discredit bankers by casting Lionel Barrymore as a ‘scrooge-type’ so that he would be the most hated man in the picture. This, according to these sources, is a common trick used by Communists.
“In addition, [REDACTED] stated that, in his opinion, this picture deliberately maligned the upper class, attempting to show the people who had money were mean and despicable characters. [REDACTED] related that if he had made this picture portraying the banker, he would have shown this individual to have been following the rules as laid down by the State Bank Examiners in connection with making loans. Further, [REDACTED] stated that the scene wouldn’t have ‘suffered at all’ in portraying the banker as a man who was protecting funds put in his care by private individuals and adhering to the rules governing the loan of that money rather than portraying the part as it was shown. In summary, [REDACTED] stated that it was not necessary to make the banker such a mean character and ‘I would never have done it that way.’”
In other words, they would have ruined the film much like they ruined so many people’s lives during the Red Scare, and just like the bankers ruined so many lives when the housing bubble burst.
For [REDACTED] I’m going to guess “Ayn Rand on a date with Ronald Reagan.”
Interestingly, George (Jimmy Stewert’s character) is a bank manager, and well-loved by everyone. Mr. Potter, the bad guy, is on the bank’s board of directors.
So obviously — well, obviously to anyone not looking for dirty commies under the bed — it’s not the banking that’s at issue in the movie. It’s whether the bank is of benefit to the community, or just to the owners. If it’s an attempt to discredit anyone, it’s people who are heartlessly greedy.
I wonder if we will soon read terrible reviews of Dickens’ “A Christmas Carol”? There’s still time this year.
I’m sure REDACTED would say that Dickens was a Communist.
The FBI must have had little to do in those days if they went after low traffic films looking for communists. The film was actually poorly received by the public when first released, becoming popular only much later on.
After the copyright expired and it was free! Free is always popular.
Maybe you should stop reading what the FBI has to say about anything. It’s not ever news.
Meanwhile, I’m disappointed that Ted Turner’s not in the game anymore to run this film on TV every night in December.
Probably back in the 90’s sometime: there was a Wall Street Journal editorial that criticized IaWL, as well. Not as pointedly as the FBI did, but which did think it was overly harsh on bankers.
That same night on CNN: their (now-retired) correspondent Myron Kandel criticized that editorial, saying “It’s a Wonderful Movie” and said it ought to be a lesson for bankers. Quite effective.
What was redacted? I’m guessing the FBI goon didn’t want to mention the J. Edgar Hoover Drag Queen extravaganza featurette at the beginning of the picture, and the trench coat in the G-Man’s lap to conceal his burgeoning man love for his boss up on the big screen, etc.
Law, er, Privilege Enforcement has always had the same objective.
Poor people, black people, union people, gay people, women folks, etc.
‘Just STFU or we’ll beat you down, literally, and/or figuratively.’
Fuck the FBI.