The Man Who Could Work Miracles (1936) User Reviews

H.G.Wells's Opinion Of The Human Condition

[bkoganbing · 8/10 · 13 March 2009]

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......................

"We'll start the Golden Age, somewhere in the afternoon ..."

[henri sauvage · 8/10 · 17 December 2001]

This is undoubtedly the best film adaptation by H.G. Wells of his own work, a wry fable free of the leaden polemics that so marred "Things To Come".

Roland Young -- who played the title character to mischievous ghosts Cary Grant and Constance Bennett in the 1937 comedy "Topper" -- is outstanding as George Fotheringay, a mousy store clerk who must come to grips with the sudden gift of almost unlimited power. He can literally do anything -- except change the human heart, as he finds when he commands his beautiful coworker Ada to fall madly in love with him, and she merely laughs in his face. (Incidentally, "George" is Wells' middle name, and Roland Young bears more than a little resemblance to a younger H.G.)

Mischa Spoliansky's score is by turns droll and light-hearted, complementing the story perfectly, as George struggles to make sense of his new-found abilities.

He learns the danger of an unguarded word, when he tells an officious constable who wants to run him in for disturbing the peace to "go to blazes", leading to a hilarious bit in which the constable, finding himself instantaneously transported to the nether regions of brimstone and hellfire, tries to keep calm and take notes about the incident while his notepad smolders. Fortunately, George isn't the vindictive type. As soon as he realizes what he's done, he rescues Constable Plod from the Inferno. (Although, just to be on the safe side and give him some time to cool off, George also teleports him to San Francisco.)

Since he makes no secret of his miracle-working, George is bombarded with advice from his coworkers and various worthies on how he should use his powers. His boss wants to sign him to an exclusive contract, establishing a chain of "miracle" stores featuring instantaneous delivery, with free healing clinics offered on Tuesdays and Fridays to allay George's discomfort with exploiting his talent solely for monetary gain.

Mr. Maydig -- a Baptist minister and amateur philosopher played to prim perfection by gaunt character actor Ernest Thesiger -- advises George to bring the Millennium, to end war and disease and poverty. George cooperates with Maydig to the extent of fulfilling a Biblical prophecy, converting the prized antique cutlery collection belonging to a local representative of the gentry (Sir Ralph Richardson) into what his butler describes with a visible shudder as "agricultural implements".

Even worse, at Maydig's insistence George adds injury to insult by turning all of Colonel Winstanley's fine whiskey into non-alcoholic "temperance water". The butler (George Zucco) gets another of the best lines in the movie. Accused of having done something to the Colonel's tipple, he's the picture of wounded innocence as he responds: "Sir! I'd as soon poison a baby as tamper with good whiskey!"

Next morning, after meeting George and seeing further proof of his unlimited power, the Colonel naturally concludes this mild-seeming clerk is a dire threat to the established order. Taking matters into his own hands, Winstanley almost succeeds in assassinating George, triggering the climactic sequence in which George declares himself invulnerable and immortal and decides he will remake the world to his own plan, starting now.

What happens next is too weird and wonderful for me to spoil it for anyone who hasn't seen the film, except to observe that it's not the typical "absolute power corrupts absolutely" denouement that modern viewers have come to expect. "The Man Who Could Work Miracles" is a wise, funny and humane comment on the human psyche, a film which can be enjoyed many times and still seem fresh with each viewing.

Very thought-provoking

[planktonrules · 8/10 · 4 January 2010]

This is a nice little film that I'd never heard about but should have, as it's a nice little film. In many ways it's a lot like the "Twilight Zone" episode with Burgess Meredith where aliens give him extraordinary strength as an experiment. Here, however, angelic beings are talking in the heavens and one of them decides to pick a random person on Earth and give them practically limitless power--to see what effect this would have on the person and planet.

Ordinary Roland Young (sporting a toupee) is the guy chosen for this gift. However, unlike what you'd expect, he is slow to exploit this power and only does mostly simple tricks with it at the beginning. However, when it comes to making bigger changes in his life and to the planet, he's hesitant and seeks out advice from respected members of the community on what to do with his powers. One, a vicar, wants Young to do good with the power--but what, exactly, should this be and what are the repercussion? Another, played wonderfully by Ralph Richardson, is a pompous caricature of an English "gentleman" and wants Young to use his powers to kick butt! Others have various ideas and ultimately Young gets in well over his head.

Overall, the film is quite funny (particular in Richardson's scenes) as well as thought-provoking--an interesting combination. It makes you wonder what you might do if given god-like powers. An interesting portrait of human nature and our obvious foibles.

H.G. Wells' Fantasy of Anarchy

[selfhelpradio · 28 August 1999]

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.)

absolute power in the hands of the common man

[blanche-2 · 7/10 · 30 May 2015]

We've probably all fantasized about what we would do with a lot of money. But absolute power? H.G. Wells attacks this question in "The Man Who Could Work Miracles," from 1936, with a screenplay written by Wells himself.

This British film stars Roland Young, who played Topper in the movies and also "Uncle Willy" in one of my favorite films, The Philadelphia Story.

The gods, Indifference (George Sanders), PLayer (Ivan Brandt) and Observer (Torin Thatcher) discussing the lowliness of humans, wonder what would happen if man had absolute power. One of the gods, to prove a point, points a finger at George McWhirter Fotheringay (Roland Young) out at night, en route to a pub.

George, frankly, doesn't do much with his new gift. He turns a lamp upside down, makes kittens and rabbits and fruit appear, cleans up his station at the haberdashery where he works, takes away a coworker's (Joan Hickson) freckles, dresses the beautiful Ada (Joan Gardner) in jewels -- his goals don't seem very lofty. The only thing he can't do is change people.

George seeks advice from several people; his boss, who wants George to harness his power only for the store; Ada who believes he should heal people; and finally a vicar, Maydig (Ernest Thesiger) who says, "We'll start the Golden Age tomorrow afternoon" - an age in which there would be no disease, no want for funds, no war. To which George asks, yes, but what will people DO?

This is a delightful film that raises obvious questions which the viewer has to answer for oneself. The god at the end of the film sums up my feeling. Nothing changes overnight, if they change at all.

Standouts in the film are Young, Thesiger, and of course, Ralph Richardson as a colonel whom the vicar wants stripped of his sword collection and his alcohol.

When he finds out that he's sober because of George, he wants to kill him. George Zucco is his butler, uttering the immortal words, "Oh, sir, I'd sooner poison a baby than tamper with the alcohol."

Joan Hickson, known to millions as Miss Marple, was a young character woman here and plays Effie. Joan Gardner was discovered by the film's director, Alexander Korda, and actually married his brother Zoltan in 1930. She retired shortly after this film and stayed married to Korda until his death in 1961.

Roland Young does an excellent job as a common man in an extraordinary circumstance. He has a slightly confused, vulnerable quality.

Wells was prescient in many things, and his ideas always thought- provoking. "The Man Who Could Work Miracles" is no exception. Exceptional special effects for its time and an intriguing story make this film something to see.

A good old classic movie.

[jugrin · 7/10 · 29 October 2001]

I first saw this movie when I was a kid in the fifties. The movie stands out in my mind just as if I saw it yesterday (in fact I am going to see it in the next few days, whenever I can find a place that rents it.) It was interesting and entertaining just as most movies based on H. G. Wells stories are.

Everyman Has His day

[BaronBl00d · 6/10 · 30 March 2008]

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 whimsical pessimism of H.G. Wells

[mjneu59 · 9/10 · 4 December 2010]

H.G. Wells' lighthearted fantasy about an unassuming draperies assistant granted the ability to make his every dream come true might be the best film never made by Frank Capra. Normally a very sober thinker, Wells found the perfect balance between philosophy and whimsy for this original screenplay, in which a trio of cosmic gods conduct an experiment to see how the selfish inhabitants of this trifling world might cope with the possibility of total wish fulfillment. Astounded by his unexpected gift (which he believes to be a simple matter of will power), the meek and mild Mr. George McWirter Fotheringay soon finds himself besieged by friends and strangers offering opinions, advice, and partnership offers in lucrative business ventures. Should he use his miracle making for strictly personal gain, or for the benefit of all mankind? There are, of course, unexpected pitfalls to even the best intentions, but the consequences, while hardly optimistic, are never less than entertaining.

It beats watching paint dry.

[ferulebezel · 6/10 · 8 May 2022]

This is typical H. G. Wells patchiness. I wonder if he is where Roddenberry got it. The patchiness ruined the story. That, and it was just a variation of the Monkey's Fist parable.

What saved it was the effects, which were excellent for the time, especially when one considers the other physical aspects of the filming. The sound was noisy and the film grainy, which seems to be an issue with most British films of the era.

"As I want it, so it will be!"

[utgard14 · 8/10 · 15 June 2015]

An unassuming Englishman named Fotheringay (Roland Young) is given miraculous powers by celestial beings (perhaps gods, the film never says). He doesn't know where he got the powers from or why and, at first, he doesn't use them for anything more than simple tricks. Gradually he starts to realize the gift he's been given and decides to use his power for the greater good. But he isn't sure how to do this so he consults several respected men in the community and gets wildly different suggestions.

A delightful fantasy comedy with a script co-written by H.G. Wells, adapted from one of his short stories. It's leisurely-paced and well-directed. Amazing special effects for the time, particularly when you consider this wasn't a Hollywood production. Roland Young (wearing a toupee) is perfectly cast. I can't imagine another actor from this time playing this part so well. The rest of the cast is terrific with a few recognizable faces in the mix, including Ernest Thesiger and, in a small role, George Zucco. Ralph Richardson steals the show as a blowhard colonel quite put out by Fotheringay's miracles. A shirtless George Sanders plays one of the 'gods.' One of my favorite scenes is when Fotheringay tells a policeman to "go to blazes" and winds up sending the man to Hell! The policeman's reaction while there and Fotheringay's subsequent attempt to fix the situation are hilarious.

Reportedly Wells intended the film to be more preachy, like his script for Things to Come the year before. But thankfully director Lothar Mendes and co-screenwriter Lajos Biró chose to focus more on the comedy and getting the points across that way. The result is a funny movie but with some big ideas that gives you a lot to think about.

Still holds up

[hitchcockkelly · 7/10 · 29 January 2023]

I thought this was really good. It's briskly paced, and Roland Young is charming as the befuddled nobody who suddenly finds himself with virtually unlimited power. He consults businessmen, his co-workers, his vicar and a worldly soldier, but he finds their advice too complicated and contradictory. He relies on his own instincts to change the world, but he's no better at it than the powerful people he dislikes. Not only a good reflection on the nature of power, the film is an important reminder that neither the great or the near great, the weak or the strong, the smart or the stupid should have the power to make others bend to their will. As flawed and unjust as the world is, we can only proceed by free will and not force. "The Man Who Could Work Miracles" addressed questions which resonated throughout the 20th Century and are still relevant today.

The Common Man Raised to Temporary Omnipotence.

[theowinthrop · 10/10 · 14 September 2005]

Roland Young was a stage star in the 1920s and early 1930s. To us, he usually played an impeccable gentleman, usually of diffident, uncertain, and shy personality, but occasionally showing a roguish personality (as "Uncle Willy" in THE PHILADELPHIA STORY) or an unscrupulous, villainous one (as "Uriah Heep" in David COPPERFIELD) or even a murderous one (as in the killer in THE GREAT LOVER). His best remembered starring part was as the spooked banker "Cosmo Topper" in three movies, but his best performance may well have been as "George Fotheringay" in this film, THE MAN WHO COULD WORK MIRACLES. In this film he was the average little man - the man in the street, if you will, who is given extraordinary powers by the Gods and proceeds to demonstrate how human beings cannot handle great power.

H. G. Wells' amusing fantasy shows how power without wisdom or control is never a safe commodity. Young is the sort of person we meet everyday. He is harmless. He is acceptable. He is forgettable. In short he is one of us. He is unable to even make a dent with a girl he's interested in (Joan Gardner). But once he gets power, he can't succeed in doing much with it. He is able to frighten some friends in a pub, during a philosophical chat. He can cause personal amusement and enjoyment in his room, but it does annoy the landlady (particularly all of the animals he now has for pets). He tries to find a fast way of ending poverty by creating money out of the air - much to the dismay of the local banker (Laurence Hanray). He tries to rid the world of weapons, much to the anger of the local military man (Ralph Richardson, in heavy make-up). Richardson is also annoyed that his liquor is now juice or cider. In the end, stalked by Richardson and the others who find more to fear than to accept in Young's sudden powers, Young decides he has to protect himself. He makes himself master of the world, but when he decides to show himself as the center of the universe by stopping the earth's rotation, he nearly destroys the earth. Only sheer accident prevents total disaster.

The film is not flawless. When Young makes himself world dictator he tells off the rulers of the world (whom he has brought together at his new court) that they like the furs and feathers they wear. This is typical of Wells - he always thinks that the finery and trappings of power are the goals of powerful people, and not a side issue. It is even pushed to extremes in his other scripted film, THE SHAPE OF THINGS TO COME, when Ralph Richardson (as "the Boss") wears a costume of furs and feathers. Young also lacks real imagination, which is an odd lapse for Wells. His "common man" heroes, like Mr. Polly, do have a degree of imagination. Fotheringay's idea of economic curing is to wave his hand and out pops a ten pound note (to the dismay of the banker, who starts talking about inflation!). But he could do it on the sly, passing flawless cash around by mail without any problems. He's just not swift enough to do it quietly.

But that is a minor quibble. The film is (on the whole) a joy as fantasy and as a field day for Roland Young. I give it a 10 as an example of exciting cinema.

We Can All Work Miracles - If We Really Tried

[JeremyKay-1 · 6/10 · 30 December 2005]

Jeremy Kay's "MIRACLE MAN" Introduction to a New Screenplay based on H.G. Wells' 1936 Movie: MAN WHO COULD WORK MIRACLES. & The Man who Could Work Miracles (the 1895 Book)

MAN WHO COULD WORK MIRACLES (1936 Movie) and THINGS TO COME (1935 Movie) have long been stepchildren in studies of H.G. Wells. The Films have never been examined significantly beyond occasional plot summaries and production information. MAN WHO COULD WORK MIRACLES (the 1895 Book) has been out-of-print for decades and evaded scholarly attention to a surprising degree.

Who wrote the Screenplay? Film Credits state "scenario and Decalogue by H.G. Wells"; the Book is subtitled A Film by H.G. Wells. Film production reference works mention that Wells was assisted by Lajos Biro (1880-1948), a Hungarian / Hollywood Scriptwriter who served as scenarist for producer Alexander Korda. Wells never mentioned Biro in print, although he did referred contemptuously to William Cameron Menzies and Lothar Mendes, directors of his Films. MAN WHO COULD WORK MIRACLES was released shortly after THINGS TO COME. "It was directed by Lothar Mendes, a far worse director even than Menzies, dull beyond words" (H.G. Wells 213).

Korda's associates argued that the Script of MAN WHO COULD WORK MIRACLES was really not Wells' work: but was "Scripted by Lajos Biro, and that H.G. Wells interfered little with the development of the story" (167). Biographer, Karol Kulik, went further: "Since Wells's presence throughout the former Film's production (THINGS TO COME) had demanded constant patience, conciliation, and accommodation from the Film-maker, Korda kept Wells away from the Film as much as possible. Although Wells received sole screen credit for the Script, Lajos Biro was the responsible party."

As with the earlier THINGS TO COME, there was a basic disagreement between Korda and Wells, although their personal relationship seems to have been cordial. In MAN WHO COULD WORK MIRACLES, Korda was interested in comic situations, special effects and theater. It is significant that his working title for the Film was "The Miracle Maker". Wells was interested in social and political ideas "which weigh the Film down".

Wells, had less influence on MAN WHO COULD WORK MIRACLES than on THINGS TO COME (despite his thorough dissatisfaction), but he did try to make his presence felt, in spite of the attempts to bypass him: "...I shall go back to do MAN WHO COULD WORK MIRACLES cut and clean it up - for most of it is shot already. I'm a little disillusioned about Films (industry). They could be magnificent Art, but has to be learned..."

A second question, What is the text? The two versions, Film and Book, differ considerably. The Book contains much material omitted from the Film; and many changes of Scenes were shifted in place. So, was the Book closer to Wells's intention and the Film Script was Biro's?

Although Stover tries to force a theme between the original Short Story, "THE MAN WHO COULD WORK MIRACLES" (1898) and the Movie, MAN WHO COULD WORK MIRACLES (1937), ~ it is obvious the Short Story and the Script are enormously different in theme.

The Short Story was what Wells called a "single sitting" story. "It seems reasonable that the important "little possibility" in the Short Story was the Cataclysm resulting when the rotation of the world was stopped for an instant, with a little satire on religion.

The Book's title can be interpreted as indicating the new direction which Wells attempted to remake an old story. The Short-Story title calls attention to the actions of an individual in the Past. It might be restated as "The Man Who Was Able To Work Miracles and What He Did," with some emphasis on the protagonist. Restated again: "Mankind Could Work Miracles If It Really Tried." This is fortified by the optimistic last words of the Player, when the Elemental Powers argue about the Future of Mankind: "Come back here in an age or so and you shall see..."

No one has ever questioned that Wells' Elemental Powers at the Prologue are four, not three: the Master, the Observer, Indifference and the Player. Why are the "elemental powers" nude males, and why do they ride horses? Is this a theatrical image of Biro's making? What exactly did Wells mean by "Elemental"? Is he suggesting the traditional elements or occult elemental forces? Is there any principle behind the differences between the two texts, Film and Novel, beyond brevity?

There are so many major things wrong with this bad Book that it may seem nitpicking to call attention to minor examples of carelessness, but they should not be ignored: Wells, was not "in control of two Films". It is curious that in 2004 three major Hollywood Production companies announced their proposed re-make of this very unsuccessful project.

Copies of the out-of-print 1895 Book are available free on the Internet. Films are available on DVD.

Left Out The One Who Makes Miracles Possible

[ccthemovieman-1 · 4/10 · 15 October 2006]

"Disappointing" is the word for this story, based on an H.G. Wells book, which had an interesting premise but the film was way too talky which made it difficult to maintain interest. It also was too secular in nature, but that is not surprising knowing Wells' lack of spirituality.

Roland Young is always fun to watch (see "Topper") but there isn't much humor in this....and there should and all of the advice Young received (yak, yak, yak) on how to use his new-found powers was pretty sad. Almost all of it was for monetary gain, which is not surprising. That's the world for you.

Only one person seemed to advise him t use his powers for healing. This story has an supernatural/spiritual base to it yet God is never mentioned as someone who has given the man his powers, or given thanks for giving him them, nor consulted on how best to use them. In other words, it's a typical "religious story" written by people who are clueless or have no use for religion.

At any rate, there were some special-effects scenes that were fun to watch, such as a clothing store being cleaned up in seconds and a tree suddenly sprouting in the street.

This movie COULD have been so good, it's a shame how it wound up.

Exploration of moral dilemmas

[alasdair7 · 26 January 2010]

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.

What will he do with the power to make miracles happen?

[SimonJack · 7/10 · 9 September 2021]

What would one do if he or she suddenly had the power to work miracles? By definition, a miracle is something so out of the ordinary that there's no logical or practical explanation for it, or precedence for it, so that it must be of divine origin or power. Well, discussion of that very sort happens in this film, as one common man suddenly has such powers.

The audience knows where the power comes from because the opening of this fantasy film has three celestial men of some power, looking down upon the earth - which the audience is spared from seeing. One of them is Player (played by Ivan Brandt), an angel or mythical god or other celestial being who wants to find out what would happen if men were given full powers to do whatever they wanted. Two other celestials confront him. A very young George Sanders portrays Indifference, with the attitude to match. But Observer, played by a very young Torin Thatcher, challenges Player to just give the power to one person as a test.

So, this fantasy comedy goes into high gear when the person Player endows with the power is George Fotheringay, played by Roland Young. Once discovered to have the power of miracles, George is advised, counseled, coaxed, cajoled and coerced to use his powers in every way imaginable. Will he create the perfect society where there will be no disease or illness or poverty? Will he heal all the sick and ailing? Will he eliminate the wants of all people? Will he make himself super rich and ruler of the world? And what will the world be like, and how will it affect all people, if he were to do any or each of these things?

Well, "The Man Who Could Work Miracles" does several small miracles while considering what negative effects any larger ones might have.. Then, he becomes crazed with his powers and stops the earth spinning in its rotation around the sun. As the world begins to crumble he desperately asks for a return to the night before he received any powers, and he is back.

This is a good comedy and social story about the goodness and acceptance of life as one finds it. And, of what power can do to a person. I didn't read the short story the film is based on, but understand that the author, H. G. Wells, himself worked on the expanded story for the screen version.

A number of fine British actors of the day join Young in this film. A young Joan Hickson plays Effie, and Ralph Richardson is very good as Colonel Winstanley. This is an early black and white fantasy film that many modern audiences may find too slow. But, movie buffs, readers and literary fans of H. G. Wells should enjoy it. Here are some very good segments of dialog.

Police Superintendent Smithells, "It's some more of it, sir." Col. Winstanley, "More what?" Smithells, "There's been a serious outbreak of miracles in the district, sir. What, beyond anyone's experiences." Colonel, "Miracles?" Smithells, "Yes, sir, miracles." Colonel, "There aren't such things." Smithells, "Not properly, sir, which makes it so disconcerting, sir."

Colonel Winstanley, "If you put an end to competition, make work unnecessary, give people more money than they know what to do with, then I ask you - what are people going to do?" George Fotheringay, "Well, I'm uh, I'm a bit puzzled about that myself. But Mr. Maydig... Maydig says we oughtta just go about loving one another." Colonel, "Go about loving one another. Go about loving one another? Are you... are you mad, sir? Are you human? Have you no sense of decency - the most private, the most sacred feelings." George, "Mr. Maydig seemed to feel so differently about it all."

George Fotheringay, "Well, wh, wh, why do we wanna borrow money? What do you say, if you debenture... Mr. Bamfylde, the banker, "You must have the thing on a sound, financial basis." George, "Ah, we've gotta make money by it?" Major Grigsby, "Solvency, sir, is the test of service." George, "Mmm. If we want money, why don't we make it right away?" Bamfylde: "Yyyyyou can't do that without disastrous results."

Mr. Bamfylde, "People must want money." Major Grigsby, "And they must want commodities." George Fotheringay, "But if I can give them everything they want, the...."

Mr. Bamfylde, the banker, "Mr. Fotheringay, I can assure you I have studied these questions - many profound questions, before you were born. Human society is based on want. Life is based on want. Wild-eyed visionaries - I name no names, may dream of a world without need. Cloud cuckoo-land. It couldn't be done." George, "It hasn't been tried, has it?"

George. Fotheringay, "No, I'm all for more and better change."

Colonel Winstanley, "I tell you; this measly little draper's assistant is the most dangerous lunatic loose."

George Fotheringay, "Maggie, there's something frightening about this miracle-working." Maggie Hooper, "I, I told you to get advice about it." George, "I get nothing but advice; but it's all different. I don't know where I am. I'm all full of wonder, and I, I daren't let 'em loose. I, I get thinking of things, and wanting things. I can't tell you. I, I got a bad imagination, Maggie. I got a dangerous imagination." Maggie, "Well, what'd I tell you? You go and see Mr. Maydig."

Overlooked classic, and why it is had never been redone...

[A_Different_Drummer · 10/10 · 20 November 2013]

Every time somebody somewhere publishes one of their 100 BEST FILMS OF ALL TIME, I look hopefully to see if this film made the list - finally? -- and have been disappointed so often that I no longer try. The good news? The production team took an HG WELLS classic -- a very tricky writer to bring to the screen, if you consider how many times they have fumbled his time machine story -- and nailed it the very first time. Yes, I know, it is Black and White, and the Special Effects are the best you can do for 1931, and the only real "name" is Richardson's, but PSHAW I say. These criticisms are trivial. The script, the adaption, is nothing short of brilliant. The direction is brilliant, bringing a sort of friendly whimsy to a story which on its surface more properly belongs in an AGENT OF SHIELD episode. After all, this is about a normal everyday man granted ABSOLUTE POWER. The acting is superb, Roland Young fit the bill perfectly. He was known for playing meek characters and through his career the only other major role that cinephiles remember him for is Topper. In case you have NOT seen this, I don't want to spoil it for you other than to say that this may be be the only chance you will ever get to enjoy this wonderfully presented morality tale in its purest form. The reason for this caution is that, to the best of my information, the Wells family has, over the years, consistently refused to sell the rights, no matter how much money was thrown at them. It appears they belong to the school of thought which suggests, if something is done right first time, there is no need to do it again. The scene in particular where Young's character becomes so befuddled dealing with the quirks of the world's leaders that he literally stops the planet from spinning is priceless and unforgettable. And BTW the way Young's character deals with his secret crush (Joan Gardner playing Ada Price) would be as irksome to the fairer sex today as it no doubt was then. The only difference is that, today, it is easier to voice your complaints. One of the best films ever done of one of the best stories ever written.

H.G. Wells' timeless parable on power and the human condition

[robertguttman · 10/10 · 2 November 2009]

I have to admit to a soft spot for this film, which is very probably the best movie version of an H.G. Wells story ever done. Not surprisingly, the writer was still around when it was made and was involved in the production.

Today many people regard Wells as a "science-fiction" writer, but he was also a historian and philosopher. "The Man Who Could Work Miracles" is more of a fantasy/parable on the subject of power and the human condition than it is science fiction. Nevertheless, Alexander Korda had his production company go all out in the depiction of the film's "miracles". They are still effective despite the fact that this film dates from 1936.

The story of what happens when an anonymous nobody is suddenly given absolute power to do anything still resonates. The setting may be 1930s England, but the attitudes of the sort of characters with whom the protagonist interacts would probably be little different today. After all, businessmen still think like businessmen, bankers like bankers, clergymen like clergymen, policemen like policemen, and soldiers like soldiers. In that regard the world hasn't really changed all that much, a fact that would have come as little surprise to Wells.

Considering the plethora of special effects, it seems somewhat surprising that this film has never been re-made. That's not to say that this production could probably be bettered. Roland Young is spot on as the "common vulgar fellow" upon whom absolute power is suddenly and randomly bestowed. The only possible complaint with casting him in the part is that he may perhaps have been a bit too to play someone the other characters are constantly addressing as "Young Man". The other members of the cast are likewise excellent, particularly Ralph Richardson in a hilarious turn as "Colonel Winstanley", the character who inspired cartoonist David Low's "Colonel Blimp".

To anyone who has never seen this movie, I can only recommend that you take the first opportunity that presents itself to see it. Despite the passing of years since it was produced, "The Man Who Could Work Miracles" remains unique.

Social comment the fun way

[Igenlode Wordsmith · 8/10 · 22 May 2005]

After a somewhat stilted beginning, this cheerful little fantasy caught my imagination. The extended plot has been enlarged almost seamlessly from the original short story, and in very much the same wry spirit: this is recognisable as authentic H.G.Wells in a way that, say, the adaptations of 'The Time Machine' and 'The Invisible Man' are not... but despite being characteristically didactic, it is also amusing and thoroughly entertaining.

Roland Young, in the downtrodden role of the eponymous Everyman, is more or less required to carry the film singlehanded and makes an admirable job of it, his hesitant body language alone speaking volumes. He is entirely believable as the voice of puzzled common sense amid all the conflicting demands being made of him, but when the worm turns he is also a strangely formidable figure.

Of the special effects -- the 'miracles' themselves -- there is nothing more to be said and no higher praise than that after the first few minutes, by and large, one simply takes them for reality, accepting the logic within the story. Those footprints in the hearthrug are a little obviously fake, though!

This is no great classic of its era, but its ideas have worn well, and, more importantly, it still makes for an enjoyable night out. Its main flaw is the introduction of the framing 'godly powers' plot, which was evidently felt necessary to explain just what was going on, but today verges on the embarrassing; in my opinion, the story could have stood up perfectly well without it.

Power leads to destruction

[AAdaSC · 5/10 · 13 November 2010]

Fotheringay (Roland Young) is one day given the power to work miracles. He doesn't rush into things but asks different people what he should do with his new powers. He tries all sorts - he conjures up a rose bush in the middle of the road, he sends a policeman to hell, then has a change of heart and sends him to San Francisco instead, he changes the Colonel Winstanley's (Ralph Richardson) whiskey to water, makes himself invincible so that when Winstanley shoots him he doesn't die, etc. However he cannot make the woman he fancies love him. Eventually, he creates a palace filled with the celebrities of the day and orders them to change the world for him. However, this has disastrous consequences as he goes a step too far.

The film starts well and is quite amusing as Fotheringay discovers his powers and starts working a few miracles as described above. However, it loses it's pace and becomes quite wordy. We don't want all the chit-chat - we want to see more miracles. Also, the cast aren't very good. Roland Young is fine in the lead role but unfortunately, Ralph Richardson gives one of those obvious British twit performances as the Colonel and this makes the film drag. He's meant to be funny but provides no humour at all. The women are especially insipid in this film.

It starts well and even though it seems to go nowhere for a while, it's still ok. It will also leave you thinking what you would do if you had the powers to make anything happen.

Good But Not Great

[GManfred · 24 January 2017]

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.

If you could only get all the world's leaders together to talk it over....

[fisherforrest · 9/10 · 31 March 2006]

Wells put a great deal of his hopeful philosophy as well as his despair into this fantasy. He seems to have expressed the hope more than once that if the world's VIPs could be assembled around a big table, peacefully, they could create the conditions for Utopia without too much trouble. In this tale, with Fotheringay's miracles, he shows that even if that could be achieved, there is inertia to contend with. Utopia cannot be achieved in an afternoon, so Fotheringay's impatience defeats him. To give the world leaders time to plan, he orders the Earth to stop rotating. Physical inertia, rather than figurative inertia, takes over, and you can understand the result of that. Fotheringay survives to put things back where they were before "the gods" gave him the power of miracles. Back in the bar where it all began, he sighs "I'll never get the chance (to improve the world), now". One of "the gods" thinks mankind can still achieve Utopia gradually. Even in a sort of despair, Wells was ever the optimist.

Roland Young creates a very believable Fotheringay, who gradually changes from a bumbler, with no real idea how his suddenly acquired miraculous power can be used for good, into a man determined to mold the world the way he wants it. Alas, he is a simple man without enough knowledge and must depend on others for advice. Of course, they let him down. Ralph Richardson's character, a retired colonel, now a magistrate, embodies those others. He can't imagine a world better than the one he is in. The cast work is excellent and believable special effects illustrate the "miracles". A few eyes may pop when shop-girl "Ada" is changed in a flash into "Cleopatra", like (Claudette Colbert) "in the movie" as Fotheringay orders.

"The Man Who Could Work Miracles", as Wells wrote it, is actually his attempt to encapsulate the gist of his monumental oeuvre "The Work, Wealth, and Happiness of Mankind" into a charming fantasy parable, that could reach the average person better than his immense tome on political economy. It always seemed to me that of the three great philosophers of political economy (the other two being Karl Marx and Adam Smith), Wells was the most "accessible" writer. The trouble was, I think, that because he often employed Science/Fantasy to reach the public, many did not take him seriously. Those three great writers trying to design a politico-economic Utopia all made the same mistake. All assumed that at bottom all human beings are decent and caring, if you just eliminate "want". They all overlooked the fact that the folks with the most drive and ambition, and the ability to put formulae into operation, are usually the ones with the least decency, honesty, integrity, and sense of public responsibility. I wonder what old Adam Smith would think of the Enron mess, for example, or old Karl Marx of the former Soviet Union and "comrade" Stalin. As for Wells, I don't know of any attempt to implement his essential "technocratic" Utopia, but no doubt the result would have been equal failure.

Fantastic movie

[terrymaustin · 10/10 · 27 March 2005]

I saw this movie a couple of years ago when I couldn't get to sleep. I stuck the TV on and this film was just starting.

It's about a guy who gets the power to do whatever he wants, except change peoples feelings or minds.

Think Bruce Almighty made in the 1930's.

I would give this movie a 10, but nothings perfect and the fact that it wouldn't appeal to a mass audience today has forced me to put an 8.

Please watch this film if you ever get the chance. HG wells does a brilliant job on writing this one, most of his stories were way before their time, and this is no different.

This film really captured my heart, and I really hope it gets a DVD release.

Wonderful, eye-opening, I loved it!

[fitzU2AT · 10/10 · 14 August 1999]

I WANT this movie! It made me realize that the grass is NEVER greener, and we need to be happy with what we have, or learn to achieve what we want, ourselves. We can't expect to have everything given to us! It was done in a hypnotizing way! We couldn't stop watching it. For the age of this classic, the special effects were amazing!! You will love it too!

Doesn't stand the test of time

[billsoccer · 5/10 · 27 June 2020]

I watched this because of it's connection to HG Wells. This might have been entertaining at the time, but doesn't hold up well now - the special effects are laughable, the acting more kin to the silent age (overacting), the story interesting, but better done since.