Home
/
RELIGION & LIBERTY ONLINE
/
Resolve this New Year to visit Billy Wilder’s The Apartment
Resolve this New Year to visit Billy Wilder’s The Apartment
Apr 4, 2026 9:32 AM

The Big City can be a great place to lose yourself among a crowd, and too often lose your soul. Only love of another can help you find yourself again.

Read More…

Christmas movies tend to be sentimental, to emphasize the struggles that define our society and our souls, but ultimately they are hopeful and even joyful. Humanity triumphs at the end of the story—for evidence, read my series of essays on The Bishop’s Wife, The Shop Around the Corner, Christmas in Connecticut, and Miracle on 34th Street. New Year’s movies paratively depressing; they break our hearts by insisting on our failures—they are wistful. However festive New Year’s Eve, with “Auld Lang Syne” playing, we’re haunted by our mortality.

This is especially true of the best New Year’s movie, The Apartment (1960). It was nominated for 10 Oscars and won five—three of them went to Billy Wilder: Best Screenplay, Director, and Picture—the culmination of two astonishing decades in Hollywood. He made one more great movie, One Two Three (1961), but a career was ending whose highlights we still love: Sunset Boulevard (1950) and Double Indemnity (1944), Some Like It Hot (1959) and Sabrina (1954), and Witness for the Prosecution (1957).

Wilder was a Jewish immigrant, and his success in Hollywood shows how interested in America he was and how perceptive—after all, he was a writer, he had things to say, and for a generation, the audience agreed with him. edies were somewhat more immoral than was usual in Hollywood at that time and his dramas somewhat more revealing of ugliness—that’s the European touch.

Wilder was wonderfully witty, and there was such joy in edies, but also quite a lot of cynicism, which also endeared him to American audiences. His movies admitted life ain’t great, even at the postwar peak of American confidence. The Apartment especially shows that, for the regular guy, national greatness might be a burden—the ambition to succeed in this brave new world can lead to debasement. The size of the new America dwarfs mere humans.

Jack Lemmon, the sorriest, most hangdog-looking actor ever to have achieved celebrity, plays said regular guy—C.C. Baxter, a corporate accountant who moved to New York City to work for a life insurance corporation he says is larger than the regular American city. He says there are 8,042,783 people in New York; you can imagine how lonely it gets among so many strangers. Our America, where individualism reaches extremes, is presaged in this story.

Baxter is torn between his ambition to succeed in corporate America and his love for an elevator girl at his workplace—either way, he’s trying to go up in the American hierarchy, symbolized by the skyscraper. To get a promotion, he lends his apartment to four different men above him in the corporation so they can indulge in their somewhat childish adulteries after work. So he spends his evenings alone in parks, waiting for his apartment to be available again, while his neighbors think him a playboy. He fears for his reputation, so he cannot admit he’s merely a kind of Airbnb for others’ vices. American respectability is strange, a mix of piety and vice that traps his bosses, too: America has not turned adultery into an art, unlike in Europe, where mistresses are famous.

Meanwhile, Baxter dreams of Fran Kubelik, played by Shirley MacLaine, the actress who best embodied the moral irresponsibility of the ’60s—not vice, but weakness. America was ing prosperous, mobile, and full of all sorts of freedom, one more confusing than the next. Fran is both idealistic and cynical, beautiful and depressive. Like Baxter, she’s a victim of city glamour, and of the powerful men behind it. Today she’d be a #metoo story.

Fran’s an elevator girl, which means she always sees people passing her by and takes them where they want to go. They have real jobs, something to do with their lives; she’s pany for the ride there. The helplessness of her situation enables her to see the dark side of American mobility—there’s niceness but little real virtue among strangers. This crushes idealists and romantics because they’re hardly capable of pursuing self-interest in the first place.

Enter Sheldrake, the corporate boss, played by Fred MacMurray, the champion of an immoral version of self-interest. Baxter’s promotion depends on servility to Sheldrake, as does Fran’s future. Sheldrake has seduced Fran, although he’s married. Baxter can enjoy his promotion by giving his apartment over to Sheldrake, but he’s unwittingly helping damn the woman he loves. Fran’s too weak to break up with an adulterous man, and her weakness has also robbed her of hope.

The love of an older, powerful man is attractive—power is reassuring in itself, as is paternal authority, but it also testifies to beauty’s power. Thirty thousand employees depend on Sheldrake—Fran gets to call him Jeff. He orders everyone around, but has to plead for her time. They may serve him—but he serves her, when the wife and kids are vacationing. This works because marriage law, though perhaps sacred, goes unenforced.

Fran’s not evil, merely narrow-minded, sentimental. Since she’s never seen Sheldrake’s wife and kids, she doesn’t think of them. Since she’s young, she finds it difficult to believe actions have consequences—much less catastrophic consequences. Even law-breaking means nothing to her, because she didn’t mean to, and after all, men do it, too. e to modernity, where we replace innocence with irresponsibility.

Sheldrake is not too different, only more powerful. He begs Fran to love him, but he cares about respectability more. This makes him cruel—he disgraces women, then bribes or intimidates them into silence. It’s no accident that the clueless and the astute are trapped in the same sordid mess. They playact morality and lack principles. The job doesn’t require them. A future is aborning where people are debased with their consent. He would be a #metoo story, too.

Wilder, like most masters, liked to cast stars against type. As in Double Indemnity, he has perpetual nice guy MacMurray play the cad. Indeed, both movies are about life insurance, the business that shows how we deal with our fear of death and our moral uncertainties. We bet on our lives and hope to make money. Much es of this—peace of mind, but not virtue.

Everyone in the story is admittedly a coward, which is unusual for edy. Billy Wilder, however, was a humanist. He extends a certain hope, that Baxter and Fran can learn to love each other. They have suffered similar wounds and can understand each other, including their weaknesses. Moreover, they understand what it means to lose much, to even lose hope, to be tempted by death. It takes strength e back from that.

But they are Americans, too. As Tocqueville says, even if reason fails, the will does not fail in America, and so they pick themselves, and each other, up again. The entire drama is supposed to teach them self-reliance, inasmuch as they can learn it together. They do for each other things they wouldn’t have the confidence and perseverance to do for themselves. Self-interest means little to them, but love proves lifesaving.

Our nature loves nobility and beauty, yet our society systematically denies us. Wilder understood this would e everyone’s problem, hence his Everyman protagonists. Indeed, the drama of young men and women who seem perpetual adolescents, whose weakness leads them to misery, has e our American crisis. Wilder proved a prophet—nowadays, most young people are just like Baxter and Fran, unable to get married, stuck in apartments rather than homes, and exposed to a shame so deep that it corrupts the soul.

ic, sentimental look at Baxter and Fran is supposed to teach us that moralism is not going to fix our problems. We cannot change our society by snapping fingers. The young go to cities chasing after dreams and often find sordid things instead. Wilder isn’t a reformer, political or religious, but he hopes to show us how to understand this weakness and how it might be dealt with gently, even with love.

Between Christmas and New Year, these two failures discover love. I won’t spoil their ups and downs, because the charm of the movie is in showing how two people could deal with the entire social problem I’ve articulated in this essay. That is by itself an important lesson—in a way, we’re all helpless in the face of a vast continent-spanning nation—but in another way, we each can do well enough.

This is a edy, but it has high aspirations—for love is a matter of life and death. Come New Year’s, as I said, we’re haunted by our mortality. Our defense is love, which puts the beautiful and the good together, and reconciles us to our limits by offering us pleteness greater than ourselves, which depends not on our own will but on another person. The Apartment’s a New Year movie intended to get us through the new year.

Comments
Welcome to mreligion comments! Please keep conversations courteous and on-topic. To fosterproductive and respectful conversations, you may see comments from our Community Managers.
Sign up to post
Sort by
Show More Comments
RELIGION & LIBERTY ONLINE
2013 Calihan Lecture: ‘Second Thoughts on Newman: Newman, Constitutions, and Markets’
2013 Novak Award recipient David P. Deavel, Ph.D., will illuminate John Henry Cardinal Newman’s contributions to economic liberty in the ing 13th annual Calihan Lecture. The lecture will take place on October 30, 2013 at the University of St. Thomas in St. Paul, Minn., where the 2013 Novak Award will be presented by Rev. Robert A. Sirico, president and co-founder of the Acton Institute. Much of Deavel’s research and writing has been on topics related to the Catholic intellectual tradition,...
Property Rights, Rule of Law, and the Spark of the ‘Arab Spring’
Conversations about economic development often gravitate toward such topics as monetary policy, trade regulation, tax structures, infrastructure, etc. These are critical pieces of the puzzle indeed, but there exist even more ponents of prosperity that are often skipped over. In our interview with Samuel Gregg, director of research at the Acton Institute, he lists a few of the foundational elements of growth: Rule of law is essential if you want to have a functioning economy. You cannot have a functioning...
Letter from Rome: What Kind of Liberal is Pope Francis?
Kishore Jayabalan, Director of Istituto Acton in Rome, has issued his October letter. In it, he discusses the idea of Pope Francis as a “liberal,” especially in light of the pope’s recent interview inAmerica magazine: Much of the controversy over the Pope’s interview reminds me of several Gospel passages, where Jesus is criticized by the Pharisees for healing people on the Sabbath, dining with sinners, not condemning the adulteress, and so on, and especially of the parable of the prodigal...
Jim Wallis on the Shutdown: ‘It’s Unbiblical’
Christians are frequently accused of conflating politics and religion. And not surprisingly, Christians like me are often frustrated by such claims. Whenever I hear such slurs my first inclination is to push back by asking who exactly can rightfully be accused of such confusion. Can they name even one person who does that? And then I remember, “Oh yeah, there’s Jim Wallis.” In the 2004 presidential election season, Wallis’ group, Sojourners, put out a bumper sticker with these words: “God...
U.S. Conference Of Catholic Bishops Weighs In On Budget, Shutdown
Acting on behalf of the US Conference of Catholic Bishops (USCCB), Bishop Stephen E. Blaire of Stockton, Archbishop José H. Gomez of Los Angeles and Bishop Richard E. Pates of Des Moines have issued a letter to the US House of Representatives. The bishops state that they wish to “address the moral and human dimensions of the ongoing federal budget debate,’ saying that the choices facing American politicians have a moral dimension, as well as political and economic ones. The...
Curing What Ails Us: Obamacare
Sally C. Pipes, president of the Pacific Research Institute, is interviewed at National Review regarding her new book, The Cure For Obamacare. NRO’s Kathryn Jean Lopez interviews Pipes about what Obamacare means for the US, and whether or not there is a better way. KATHRYN JEAN LOPEZ: What’s the best answer to the question of what Obamacare means for the life of America? SALLY C. PIPES: Obamacare has just celebrated its three-and-a-half-year anniversary. This is the federal government’s largest entitlement...
Limiting Religious Freedom to Limit Religion’s Influence
Challenges to religious freedom are not only ing increasingly mon but are being based on a broader range of social, legal, and political arguments. The one unifying feature of these attacks, claims R.R. Reno, is the desire to limit the influence of religion over public life: In the world envisioned by Obama administration lawyers, churches will have freedom as “houses of worship,” but unless they accept the secular consensus they can’t inspire their adherents to form institutions to educate and...
Higher Education and Upward Mobility
Today at Public Discourse, I explore the dubious connection between educational attainment and upward e mobility, arguing instead that a focus on cultivating social capital would be far more effective than the conventional wisdom: “Stay out of trouble and stay in school.” Staying out of trouble is still a good idea, but staying in school — when es to higher education — is ing less and less effective on its own at predicting economic improvement. In addition, while I believe...
Who Are You Calling A Tea Party Catholic?
Catholic Vote interviewed Samuel Gregg, Director of Research at the Acton Institute and author of Tea Party Catholic: The Catholic Case for Limited Government, a Free Economy and Human Flourishing. The five question interview covers the historical Tea Party that the book discusses, Catholic social teaching, and virtuous citizenship, among other topics. Here is an excerpt: Among the Founders, you place a great deal of emphasis upon Charles Carroll of Carrollton. Who was he, and why does he figure so...
Little Sisters Join Big Fight for Religious Liberty
The Little Sisters of the Poor are an international congregation of Catholic women religious who serve the elderly poor in over 30 countries around the world. Because they provide health insurance for workers who help them in their cause, the Obama administration is forcing them to help provide their employees with free access to abortion-inducing drugs, sterilizations, and contraceptives. If they refuse, the government is threatening them with multi-million dollar fines. The Becket Fund for Religious Liberty has filed a...
Related Classification
Copyright 2023-2026 - www.mreligion.com All Rights Reserved