Design for Living (1933) | How Woke Is It?

Our VerdictNot Woke

15%

Design for Living1933

In a free society the right to critique art is essential and protected speech. These reviews reflect personal opinions and not statements of fact.

What We Think

For its era, "Design for Living" is playful and cheeky, not preachy or agenda-driven. It lightly tweaks traditional values but stops well short of modern "wokeness." Anyone wary of heavy-handed ideology can relax; this one’s more interested in laughs than lectures.

Score Breakdown

Compromised:Narrative Integrity

Not Woke

What is this?

For 1933, "Design for Living" is surprisingly modern in some subject matter, but it still puts strong character and story ahead of any ideological messaging. There’s no evidence of shoehorned diversity for its time, and the plot is driven by character choices and witty banter, not social agendas.

Compromised:Cultural Foundations

Mildly Woke

What is this?

The film pushes the envelope on traditional relationships with its ménage à trois theme, which would have been quite controversial in its day. Yet, it does not outright attack marriage, family, or traditional morality, it simply sidesteps them, using risqué comedy rather than open subversion.

Compromised:Ideological Monoculture

Not Woke

What is this?

The characters operate outside traditional norms, but the film isn’t militant about its worldview. It contends with the moral questions it raises and even pokes fun at its own central arrangement, which keeps it from falling into a rigid ideological rut.

User Reviews

No user reviews received yet.

Please leave a review and let the world know what you think.
Your review will be kept completely anonymous.

Your Review

Comments

Users Also Viewed

Movie poster for Invitation to Happiness

Movie poster for The Trail of the Lonesome Pine

Movie poster for The Fresh Vegetable Mystery

Disclaimer: In a free society the right to critique art is essential and protected as a form of free speech and freedom of expression. The reviews and commentary on this site represent personal opinions and interpretations. They are not statements of fact and should not be taken as factual claims about any individual, company, or creative work.