"Cheaper By the Dozen", based on the real-life story of the Gilbreth family, follows them from Providence, Rhode Island to Montclair, New Jersey, and details the amusing anecdotes found in ...
See full summary »
When a widower with 10 children marries a widow with 8, can the 20 of them ever come together as one big happy family? From finding a house big enough for all of them and learning to make ... See full summary »
Abby McClure, a widow with three sons, and Jake Iverson, a widower with a teen-age daughter, get fixed up. They start dating and decide to get married. They're not prepared for the hostile ... See full summary »
Drama critic Larry McKay, his wife Kay, and their four sons move from their crowded Manhattan apartment to an old house in the country. While housewife Kay settles into suburban life, Larry... See full summary »
Little Martha Jane, aka Little Miss Marker (Temple) is left with the bookmaker Sorrowful Jones by her dad as part of a bet on a horserace. Sorrowful (Menjou) and his group of fellow bookies... See full summary »
"Cheaper By the Dozen", based on the real-life story of the Gilbreth family, follows them from Providence, Rhode Island to Montclair, New Jersey, and details the amusing anecdotes found in large families. Frank Gilbreth, Sr., was a pioneer in the field of motion study, and often used his family as guinea pigs (with amusing and sometimes embarrassing results). He resisted popular culture,railing against his daughters' desires for bobbed hair and cosmetics. Written by
Becki Bozart <firstname.lastname@example.org>
In the movie, the last child born is a boy named "Robert". But in real life, the last Gilbreth child was a girl named "Jane". There was a son named Robert, but he was the second-to-last child born. See more »
Near the end of the film when Frank Sr. is getting in his car to head for Europe, he tosses his hat on the seat with his coat on top of it. After saying goodbye to his family, he gets into the car and the hat is on top of the coat. See more »
[while escorting Ann out of the house on her first date]
I know its not your fault Lilly, but things would have been a whole lot easier if you'd taken my advice and had all boys.
Mrs. Lillian Gilbreth:
I'm sorry, dear. I'll try to be more careful with the next dozen.
See more »
I saw this movie on our local PBS station last night. I had never seen it before, and sat there sorta wondering why on earth I wasn't changing the channel. As I watched the characters develop, and the continued background scenery of spacious houses and country that looked much different than what we see now - I understood why I couldn't change the channel. This film makes you think. It makes you realize how spoon-fed we are. We are spoon-fed movies, plots, stories, violence, sex, etc.
A film such as this allows us to stop being spoon-fed, and lets us pick and choose what we want from the story, from the film.
It is amusing to me that most of the posts against this fine film appear to be posted while watching the film through 2004-style glasses. It isn't a pretty thing, but women weren't held in the same position that they are today - and the film portrayed this wonderfully. Did it make the wife in the film any less admirable? I think it showed the inner strength that women had to have, making a remarkable statement about women of the era - that even though they might not be able to be out in the forefront - they had every bit as much (if not more) strength then the men. Even the father couldn't handle all the children
but the mother could -WHILE having a profession to boot!!
While the father wasn't necessarily warm, and you didn't get that fuzzy feeling modern movies give us - I believe the character was very true to life when put in the context of the 1920s. I have spoken a great deal with many people I know, that had lived through that time period. I can tell you now, that many people in the early 1900s never experienced the type of love and closeness we feel today. Survival wasn't a near-guarantee back then, and harshness, crassness, and distance from others was more common. Children died at an alarming rate . . . adults too.
History is what it is - and it is NOT subject to change, regardless of the nature of today's political attempts. Slavery happened, women weren't seen as equals, people were lynched by mobs of overzealous citizens, people starved, the dust bowl occurred. None of these events are wonderful, but they are our history, and there should be no shame in discussing - or accurately portraying / conveying these topics. I think this film is what it is too - a look at the life of an average family (perhaps an above average number of children - but even that wasn't all that rare).
Enjoy this film - but please, be prepared to leave your glasses smudged with 2004 politics and standards behind - this is a treasure where we can get a glimpse of the type of characters that lived with our grand parents, great grand parents, and the like. If you like to be spoon-fed, please DON'T watch this movie.
56 of 68 people found this review helpful.
Was this review helpful to you?