Executive Suite

[Flopper]

If action-adventure is your thing, stop here — the action in Executive Suite takes place in the boardroom. Executive Suite explores the ruthless corporate environment and the clash between ambition and ethical behavior. Although it was released in the 1950s, the story’s premise remains as fresh and relevant today as when it was first written.

Everything about Executive Suite is stellar, from the cast, including William Holden, June Allyson, Barbara Stanwyck, Fredric March, Walter Pidgeon, Shelley Winters, Paul Douglas, Louis Calhern, Dean Jagger, and Nina Foch, to the direction by Robert Wise, the production by John Houseman, and a sharp script by Cameron Hawley.

The story opens in New York City, where corporate titan Avery Bullard is meeting with investment bankers about a future bond issue. Bullard, the president and driving force of the Tredway Corporation, a major furniture manufacturer based in the bustling industrial hub of Millburgh, Pennsylvania wires his secretary to call an executive board meeting for 6 o'clock. A short commuter flight will get him there just in time.

However, while hailing a taxi, Bullard suddenly drops dead in the street. What follows is an intriguing power struggle that reveals the character and shortcomings of the company’s top executives.

.Rotten Tomatoes gives it a score of 100%
It's available on Prime for few bucks, free on Max and probably available free elsewhere with ads.

 

[1srelluc]

I watched it on TCM last week.....I was not that impressed other than the acting.

 

[Flopper]

I watched it on TCM last week.....I was not that impressed other than the acting.

what type of movie do you like?

 

[1srelluc]

what type of movie do you like?

I just found it lacking compared to The Fountainhead of the same era which it tried to emulate.

 

[g5000]

William Holden is one of my favorite old-time actors. Not as much as Gregory Peck, but close.

Today's films about corporate intrigue are far more complex, and so Executive Suite looks dated, but was probably quite the sensation at the time.

The movie features a slimmer and only slightly less loud Shelley Winters.

Nina Foch bears a striking resemblance to Julia Garner who played Ruth in the Ozark series.

Foch's acting is too melodramatic.

 

[whitehall]

No corporations in the Country were more ruthless than the Hollywood studios in the 50's and yet they attacked and ridiculed real corporations who were dealing in hardware rather than fantasies.

 

[Flopper]

I just found it lacking compared to The Fountainhead of the same era which it tried to emulate.

Although I really like the cast, the book is better—as is usually the case. My issue with The Fountainhead, both the book and the movie, is that it’s overly idealistic in its condemnation of compromise and social conformity. But compromise is, in many ways, the foundation of society. Maybe the world’s greatest architect could afford to defy norms entirely, but the rest of us live in the real world, where maintaining our jobs, friendships, and place in the community often requires some degree of going along to get along. Unfortunately, that's just part of life.

 

[g5000]

No corporations in the Country were more ruthless than the Hollywood studios in the 50's and yet they attacked and ridiculed real corporations who were dealing in hardware rather than fantasies.

You obviously did not watch the movie.

 

[whitehall]

You obviously did not watch the movie.

I didn't watch Executive Suite. My post relies on the description of the movie using the words "ruthless corporate environment". My point is that it's pure hypocrisy because there was no more ruthless environment than the Hollywood studio structure that treated actors like slaves.

 

[Flopper]

No corporations in the Country were more ruthless than the Hollywood studios in the 50's and yet they attacked and ridiculed real corporations who were dealing in hardware rather than fantasies.

In Executive Suite, the business is very simple like a lot of corporation in the 50's. They made furniture in one plant. In Patterns the plant makes auto parts. Board members actually knew the workers.

I didn't watch Executive Suite. My post relies on the description of the movie using the words "ruthless corporate environment". My point is that it's pure hypocrisy because there was no more ruthless environment than the Hollywood studio structure that treated actors like slaves.

In the 1950s, corporate management was viewed not only as accountable to shareholders, but also to employees and customers. Executives were generally not seen as villains. In the film Executive Suite, for example, most of the board members are portrayed in a positive light. Today, such a portrayal would be rare, modern depictions often present the board as corrupt, with perhaps a lone member standing against the tide.

Filmmakers often reflect public sentiment, and today's perception of top corporate management is largely negative. As a result, Hollywood tends to portray them accordingly.

 

[Flopper]

William Holden is one of my favorite old-time actors. Not as much as Gregory Peck, but close.

Today's films about corporate intrigue are far more complex, and so Executive Suite looks dated, but was probably quite the sensation at the time.

The movie features a slimmer and only slightly less loud Shelley Winters.

Nina Foch bears a striking resemblance to Julia Garner who played Ruth in the Ozark series.

Foch's acting is too melodramatic.

I watch a lot of movies from the 1940s and 1950s, and almost all of them, except for historical dramas feel dated. That’s actually one of the reasons I enjoy them. I also love watching silent films from the 1920s and early talkies from the 1930s. If you watch these films closely, they reveal a great deal about how people saw the world at the time. They also show how movies were made, and how filmmakers reshaped reality into something audiences would pay to see and enjoy. Maybe you have to be a student of the history and the film industry of those days to enjoy them.

 

[g5000]

I watch a lot of movies from the 1940s and 1950s, and almost all of them, except for historical dramas feel dated. That’s actually one of the reasons I enjoy them. I also love watching silent films from the 1920s and early talkies from the 1930s. If you watch these films closely, they reveal a great deal about how people saw the world at the time. They also show how movies were made, and how filmmakers reshaped reality into something audiences would pay to see and enjoy. Maybe you have to be a student of the history and the film industry of those days to enjoy them.

I feel the same way about books. I love reading literature from the 19th century.

Writing was far more eloquent back then. Every sentence is gem.