I CAN GET IT FOR YOU WHOLESALE

US, 1951, 91 minutes, Black and white.
Susan Hayward, Dan Dailey, George Sanders, Sam Jaffe.
Directed by Michael Gordon.

I Can Get It For You Wholesale is a story of the New York rag trade in the early 1950s. It is a story of ambition and ruthlessness – with the touch of romance.

Susan Hayward does very well in another strong role, a model who is determined to succeed in design in New York. She is supported by manager J.F. Noble, played with his usual suave style by George Sanders, and she enlists the help of a salesman, the genial Dan Dailey. In the background is Sam Jaffe who has to act as her conscience and moral compass.

In many ways, the film is conventional in its material, but the themes are perennial and the cast gives it a very strong impact. The film was directed by Michael Gordon who had directed Cyrano de Bergerac the year before, winning an Oscar for Jose Ferrer as best actor. He made a number of standard films during the 50s and 60s but perhaps is best known for Pillow Talk with Rock Hudson and Doris Day and a succession of romantic films, For Love or Money, Move Over Darling.

This story was the basis for a Broadway musical in the early 1960s featuring Elliot Gould and making a star of Barbra Streisand.

1. The overtones of the title and its meaning in this film? The picture of New York as a jungle? The smart world
of fashion? The music background for smart sophistication etc? How did this all prepare for the film?

2. Impressions of the garment industry? How realistically was it presented? The factories, the shows, the dealer, the false comradeship etc? The throat-cutting?

3. What did this film have to say about values and ethics? What stance on right add wrong did it take? What attitudes in the audience did it presuppose?

4. How vivid a picture of personal ambitions did the film give? Of ambition and drive overriding all else? How unattractive was this? Why?

5. How was Harriett Boyd the central character in this film? What motivated and drove her? How well had she worked to achieve her position? How much genius and talent did she have? How much insight into people's characters did she have? How did she exploit her family? Teddy? J.F.Noble? Was it inevitable that she herself would be going too far?

6. How interesting and intriguing was her following her plan? The truth told by her mother? Her using of her sister and manipulating them? The fact that she used others and yet wanted to remain independent? How typical was she in her behaviour?

7. Did you like Teddy? How easy going a person was he? good qualities? His capacity and talent for work? How well did he love Harriet? Which sequences illustrated this best? the argument in the restaurant? Why did he join Harriet? Why could he make little impression on her? How had she crushed real love and appreciation of this for her ambition? How hurt was Teddy because of her double dealing? Did he take the right stance? What else could he have done?

8. How sympathetic a character was Sam Cooper? In giving up his role in the factory to help Harriet? His relationship with his wife? His daughter helping him? His wise insight into the situation, his support of Teddy and Harriet? The nobility of his going bankrupt at the end?

9. What contribution did J.F. Noble make to the film? As representing the higher echelons of the garment industry? As the peak of ambition for Harriet? The irony at the dinner and the stealing of partners? Her relationship with Noble? His use of her genius and his reliance an her? her using him for ambitions?

10. What did the minor characters contribute to the film? The salesmen and the buyers? The models eg in enduring Harriet’s tantrums? The people at the garment dinner? The secretary? The young man who was ambitious? Did these give a more realistic tone to the film?

11. Impressions of Harriet's final double-dealing: her tantrums to get out of her contract? Her deals about gowns and dresses? Her disregard for Teddy's and Sam's feelings?

12. Was the final choice made clear in the film? that she chose to go back to Teddy and Sam? Was this presented convincingly in terms of human motivation? How?

13. How valuable are films like this in giving insight into human behaviour, ambitions? The drive for money and power? As a picture of morals in the ordinary world?