
Hands Across the Table
1935

1945
ApprovedDirector
Robert Z. Leonard
Runtime
130 minutes
Average Rating
No ratings yetSynopsis
Anything can happen during a weekend at New York's Waldorf-Astoria: a glamorous movie star meets a world-weary war correspondent and mistakes him for a jewel thief; a soldier learns that without an operation he'll die and so looks for one last romance with a beautiful but ambitious stenographer; a cub reporter tries to get the goods on a shady man's dealing with a foreign potentate.
Overall Score
Minimal
Category Breakdown
LGBTQ+ Representation
The film operates strictly within a heteronormative framework. There are no narratives that challenge traditional courtship models or present non-cisnormative identities.
Gender Representation
Female characters include socialites and professionals, yet their agency remains tied to romantic pursuits. The narrative prioritizes marriageability over independent social or political drivers.
Racial & Ethnic Diversity
The cast and setting are predominantly white, focusing on an Anglo-centric view of New York high society. There is an absence of characters of color with significant agency.
Religious & Cultural Diversity
The story celebrates Western capitalist luxury and high-society prestige. It offers no subversion of traditional Western values, religion, or the existing socioeconomic order.
Disability Representation
There are no depictions of physical, sensory, or neurodivergent identities. Characters are presented through a lens of idealized physical beauty consistent with the MGM aesthetic.
Strengths
Areas for Improvement
AI Analysis
Week-End at the Waldorf is a quintessential piece of mid-1940s escapist cinema. It prioritizes romantic entanglement and high-society glamour over any form of social exploration or systemic critique. The film reinforces the traditional hierarchies and cultural norms of the post-war era. By focusing on a homogeneous view of the American upper class, it maintains the social boundaries of its time. Ultimately, the production functions as an aspirational tool rather than a medium for diversity. It meticulously preserves the status quo through its narrow narrative lens.

1935

1964

1945

1955
1935

1939

1931

1945

1942

1964

1950

1941
No reviews yet. Be the first to share your thoughts on this movie!
Use the rating form above to leave a star rating and optional review.