The Man Who Could Work Miracles

This picture had a story by H.G. Wells, good cast members and outstanding special effects for the 1930's. What happened? something got lost between the book and the screen. I didn't read the book but it's hard to believe H.G. Wells could write a book so uneven in it's treatment of a man suddenly endowed with a gift for miracles. At first he is timid and reluctant to do anything noteworthy, then by the end he goes completely overboard in the opposite direction - and that is an understatement.

But then there are the special effects, which are eye-popping for this time period. Did you think the effects were remarkable in "King Kong"? This picture makes those look simple by comparison, and that's the real reason for my rating. The cast was fine and it's hard to quarrel with Roland Young in any movie he's in, but overall the story was a disappointment. You can 'suspend your disbelief' to a point - to approximately a half-hour from the end.

What would a world without want be like? The answer has been the subject of countless stories, not a few movies, & every sensitive soul's nighttime sighing for ages. H. G. Wells poses the question by having godlike beings give a department store clerk, George McWhirter Fotheringay, that ability, & watching it evolve, as he bounces from adviser to adviser, from the sexy girl he desires to a retired British Army man.

The film is a treat, especially for those of us accustomed to (& maybe a little bored by) the Star Trek treatment of absolute power conferred on lowly mortals. I don't know much about the history of science fiction in the movies, but Wells goes about everything (he wrote the script, based on his novel) with the fabulous in mind, while adding purely sci-fi touches, which I won't give away.

Fotheringay is no bleeding-heart aching to turn the world into a painless utopia, nor is he a selfish, power-hungry perve, but a nondescript man who takes his time to figure out just what has happened to him before bringing everything to a head. In the meantime, we're given what amounts to a funny English comedy of manners, as well as a peek into a time (& place) where science fiction took a different direction. (For example: if you found out you had miraculous powers, would you tell anyone? I don't think I would. & if you told anyone, wouldn't you imagine the authorities pouncing on you at the first opportunity? Not so in 1930's Essex!)

The ending seems Gene Roddenberry-esque, & perhaps the Star Trek creator admired & shared Wells' humanism; but the film shines with neat-o special effects (some cool stuff, for the time) & a wonderful performance by Roland Young. A must-see for those who like their sci-fi earthbound & thought-provoking.

(My subject line, by the way, refers to anarchy as a form of government in which there are no governments, just self-government; I don't mean it in the common usage of disorder or chaos. The movie touches on the idea that, without their lives being controlled by those in power, who have a vested interest in people needing money & goods, people might find other ways to spend their time - like, for example, in creation.)

The film, almost seventy five years after its release as this review is written, still provides a dilemma that could be endlessly discussed on the human condition.

A man is given unlimited power by three deities as they look down on the earth. The mind of Wells is highly visible as the plot develops.

It is approached in a tongue in cheek manner and the special effects of the time must have been very labor intensive in relation to the genius of todays computer graphics.

The moral questions could employ any philosopher in endless discussion. A relatively young Ralph Richardson portraying an old character gives us a glimpse into the early career of a classic British actor.

In a strange way it is a kind of feel good movie and very thought provoking. It may also intrigue the present day viewer as they consider the possibility of the cinema goer in the 1930s wondering how the camera tricks were performed.

Okay, much has already been discussed about the philosophical merits of this film and the deep, profound underlying morals within and the gentle yet omni-present humour laced throughout The Man Who Could Work Miracles. I agree it is there but to varying degrees of success. Who knew H. G. Wells did the script himself(I didn't know he was even still alive then). Because he did, you knew it would have some kind of social message - and it does. What would we do if given complete, absolute power? Can mankind given this power effectively change? Will mankind come to some communal consent as to the betterment of the species as a whole? Well, being the true Machiavellian at heart philosophically that I am - I knew the answers to these questions as posed by Wells who by this time in his life seeing Europe yet again on the fringe of war in 1936 must have come to the same conclusions. But Wells to his credit leaves the viewer the opportunity to decide what he/she thinks with little prodding from the script. While the movie has a lot of hokey dialog and contrived plot sequences, I enjoyed it overall and its message of - whatever it is to you goes here. The acting is charming at the very least. Roland Young is always good and he portrays Mr. Farthingay with great affability and anonymity. Young is one of the best things about the movie as he stumbles in his fashion through the dialog and the scenes with calculating indifference as only he can do. The supporting cast is ably aided with the likes of Ralph Richardson, Joan Gardner, Joan Hickson, George Zucco, and as two godlike spirits watching earth - George Sanders looking incredibly young and Torin Thatcher(from The Seventh Voyage of Sinbad fame). The best outside of Young is Earnest Thesiger from The Bride of Frankenstein and The Old, Dark House fame playing a minister named Mr. Maydig who wants Young to do only good, beneficial things for mankind - at least it appears so ostensibly. No one and I mean no one can deliver a line like Thesiger! Words from his mouth are music to my ears. There are some problems with the film. Much of it comes off as forced and not very amusing. The script ends really in a muddle of a mess. How about the ridiculous music and the title sequence at the beginning of the film. What was up with that huh? But despite these shortcomings, see The Man Who Could Work Miracles for what it is - a thought picture that has a message presented in a light-hearted fashion.

The Man Who Could Work Miracles has its start in the heavens where some Greek God like creatures are roaming among the stars, one of them played by an as yet unknown George Sanders. Apparently H.G. Wells's idea of a Deity was closer to the Greeks and Romans than Christianity. In any event these three creatures discuss the happenings on planet earth where a group of puny creatures dominate, but who might start getting into their realm in the heavens in a few generations.

Let's see what they can do if one of them is granted our powers, creation with a mere thought. And with a random selection of a celestial finger it lands on meek little Roland Young as he's entering his local pub.

It takes time for Young to grasp the significance of his gift and this is Wells's most telling comment on the film, the sheer pettiness of the average man. From parlor tricks to trying to improve his love life, Young just can't seem to get it into his head what he can do.

Of course they're others who do think about these things more deeply than young. But I believe what H.G. Wells was trying to say is that even those who see a bigger picture than Young and attempt to use him only see it from a narrow perspective. The former colonel Ralph Richardson thinks of conquest, Edward Chapman thinks in terms of business and commerce, Ernest Thesiger is a dreamy Utopian with a theological background. Even Young sees the flaws in each of their versions of Utopia.

H.G. Wells in his other film that came out around the same time provided the answer by his lights. It was the scientists who should establish the benevolent despotism of the age, they alone have the wisdom to rule all of us. Wells said as much in Things To Come, though I never saw any evidence in the film and in real life that scientists are any better qualified than anyone else. Still that was his view.

The subject of humans being given the Godlike power of creation has been done many times. In a more serious version it was the subject of a classic Star Trek episode with Gary Lockwood being given just that power and in a half hour Twilight Zone episode, a hapless Burgess Meredith was a subject of a similar experiment. Meredith made Young's character look hip and appealing.

Though some might argue that Cosmo Topper was his career screen role, I would hold out that Everyman George William Fotheringay, selected by the Gods to be The Man Who Could Work Miracles is Roland Young's best part. He's such a hapless slob that each and every one of us can identify with. You might think you would know what to do given his power, but when you examine yourself a bit further......................