VividSimon Simply Perfect

SunnyHello Nice effects though.

Matialth Good concept, poorly executed.

Gurlyndrobb While it doesn't offer any answers, it both thrills and makes you think.

bkoganbing When it was originally presented on the London stage, Robert Morley starred and wrote Edward My Son and I believe he had Lord Beaverbrook in mind. If that is the case Edward My Son was as daring in its way as Sweet Smell of Success was in America taking dead aim at Walter Winchell.Lord Beaverbrook for those on this side of the Atlantic was a Canadian industrialist Max Aitken who settled in the UK and purchased a string of tabloid like newspapers. He was a very powerful force in the post World War I United Kingdom and served in the War Cabinet of Winston Churchill. He was every bit as cunning and as ruthless as we Sir Arnold Boult made out to be. And to accommodate Spencer Tracy's North American speech, Sir Arnold is made Canadian. That was making it more daring. Beaverbrook was not a man to cross.We never see Edward at any time in the film, the picture we form of him is through the eyes of the other characters. A kid spoiled rotten by his ever indulgent father. Boult, ruthless in business and finance, is just as ruthless at getting whatever for his son, giving him everything but a decent set of values to live by.Tracy's portrayal rings true for me because I actually knew someone like Arnold Boult in my life. He was a political person who spoiled his son absolutely rotten, used up favor after favor for him. When the son developed a drug problem he never tried to deal with it, but actually schemed to give him jobs he couldn't handle. I look at Tracy as Sir Arnold Boult and see this man staring right back at me.Deborah Kerr is Tracy's wife and Edward's mother and Leueen McGrath is his secretary and mistress. They are the major female roles in Edward My Son and both are captured well. Others to look for in the cast are Felix Aylmer as the prep schoolmaster, Mervyn Johns as Tracy's tragic former business partner, and Ian Hunter as Tracy's friend and eventual second husband to Kerr.Look at Tracy's methods in dealing with his personal and professional life and it's small wonder Edward turned out to be the spoiled brat he was.

sol- Some have commented that they felt that Spencer Tracy was miscast in this film, playing a character very different to the altruists that he typically plays, and being the only American among the principle cast. However, I believe that this perhaps is Tracy's strongest performance, partly because it is so different to his usual roles. Tracy plays a determined and unrelenting man with real strength, although as his wife, Deborah Kerr also has a number of strong scenes, particularly in the final half hour. The two lead performances are however the bulk of what makes this a good film. It is reasonably engaging, with gimmicks of the title character never on screen, and Tracy speaking to the viewer, to keep it interesting, but the plot is not too great in itself, and the story tires before the end. It is also a bit too stagy, which limits how involving it is to an extent. Nevertheless, despite any possible shortcomings, the powerhouse of acting, not only from Tracy and Kerr, but some of the supporting cast too, make this a film worth checking out.

MartinHafer I'm really not sure why Leonard Maltin was so hard on this movie. The acting and writing are great and the story has a lot to say about effective parenting that could help the viewers not to make the same mistake as the lead character.The movie is very odd in that although Edward is important to the picture, you never actually see the boy in the movie. The film is a series of flashbacks that show Edward's parents. Initially, they seem like decent folks, but over time, success and making something for his son becomes so important to the dad (Tracy) that he does the most ungodly things along the way. The descent into the evil abyss becomes worse and worse--all the while, the marriage becomes more and more shallow and indecent. The only thing holding this relationship together is their love for Edward. However, Tracy's ruthlessness begins to bear fruit in Edward. Although you are not shown it, you hear about his exploits and learn that he is becoming a monster--just like good old dad. When this lack of discipline ultimately destroys Edward, Tracy (true to the character) cannot allow himself to even consider accepting ANY blame for Edward's fall--it MUST be SOMEONE else's mistakes! This is SO realistic, as parents who create monsters are usually not the introspective types who question themselves about their possible role in the child's character.As a school teacher, I guess I really appreciate this because I have dealt with a few parents who have raised little monsters and who tend to blame EVERYONE (the school, society, other kids, etc.) for the shortcomings of their "angels".UPDATE: If you enjoyed this film, I would also like to recommend "A Modern Hero". It has a lot of similarities to "Edward My Son" and would make a great double feature!

bizweb Very sophisticated writing and restrained acting performances make for a compelling drama of a ruined father's dreams. Spencer Tracy plays the not very lovable father who's desire to protect and give "the best" to his son distorts his behavior with all those around him, including Deborah Kerr as his wife, his business partner, and ultimately his son himself, whose character is never allowed to develop. A nice conceit is that we never see the son, Edward, just his birthday cakes.