Skip to main content

Every other night it’s steak and kidney pudding.

Rich and Strange 
aka East of Shanghai
(1931)

(SPOILERS) Hitchcock experimented with a number of ill-fitting genres during his early sound period. As with the melodrama of The Skin Game, one senses that broad, or even “straight”, comedy was never quite his wheelhouse (The Trouble with Harry is a later example, and remains a very minor work, even as it has more traditional “thriller” elements around the fringes). Alma adapted Rich and Strange, based on Dale Collins’ novel, in which a married couple, stuck in a middle-class routine, seize the opportunity to cut loose on an expenses-paid cruise. These freedoms don’t turn out to be necessarily for the best.

So yes, there’s more of The Skin Game’s morality play aspect here (“I suppose we were happy enough in our own quiet little way until we came on this trip”). The picture, rather than focussing on the hijinks such adventuring might bring, concentrates on the romantic diversions encountered by Fred (Henry Kendall) and Emily (Joan Barry) as each is distracted by a much more exotic partner and each eventually has their illusions shattered.

Fred, holed up with seasickness, is out of the picture, leaving the dashing and charming Commander Gordon (Percy Marmont, later to appear in Secret Agent and Young and Innocent) to impress himself upon Emily. When Fred is back on his feet, he in turn falls for an alluring (fake) princess (Betty Amann). There is much canoodling and temptation before the benefits of each other’s comforting arms win out. Still, this feels like a quite daringly “explicit” experiment on their part and for the film, since both couples are evidently embarking upon much more than innocent flirtation.

Kendall and Barry are likeable leads, one unabashedly playing up “a great big coward” and the other flourishing a sweetly pretty act (Barry can be counted as an early Hitchcock blonde, but without any accompanying guile). They’re not really much more than that, though, contributing to the feeling that the picture itself is very slight, despite the rather self-important The Tempest quote that furnishes its title.

Hitchcock vouched for Young and Innocent in his discussions with Truffaut, perhaps surprisingly so, given how dismissive he could be of his work during this period. He said “I liked the picture; it should have been more successful” and felt “it had lots of ideas”. He’s sporadically quite sharp in his approach and has some interesting ideas, treating much of the proceedings as if this is a relic of the silent era. There’s much use of title cards, usually to ironic rather than explanatory effect (“Fred had met his princess”). Montage is also abundant, as one might expect of a travelogue.

And he clearly relishes the mordant, monotonous routine that opens the picture: Fred amid a sea of umbrellas, unable to open his; stifled on the Tube, which is stuffed full of people eating disgusting sandwiches in a disgusting fashion and offers no room to read a newspaper without lamping someone; coming home to yet another serving of steak and kidney pudding. “I want some life! Life, I tell you!” he tells Emily, before opining “The best place for us is the gas oven”.

The subsequent flirtations really aren’t very engaging, however. Although I suggested it wasn’t his forte, Hitch probably does better with the broad comedy, whether it’s Fred drunkenly attempting to adjust the time on his watch to the elevator dial, or the eleventh hour sinking of the ship that turns out to be a derelict rather than doomed. His cruel streak is also abundantly clear, with a running gag of animal-based humour that won’t sit well with any cat lovers (myself included). Early on, Fred is mean to the family feline; come the climax, the couple discover that the crew of the Chinese junk who saved them also fed them the ship’s cat (again, he waxed warmly over the scene when talking to Truffaut).

Notably, the couple must have burnt through quite a lot of money (a benign uncle advances Fred the cash against his future inheritance). The princess is said to have made off with a thousand pounds (equivalent of about £68,000), which Fred says he can claim went down with the ship. Thus, having boasted “And having developed the taste for champagne, what’s the use of trying to stick to water?” it seems likely that they will have to stick to just that. And steak and kidney pudding.

While earned, the restoration of tepid-but-happy domesticity at Rich and Strange's conclusion would likely have been more effective if the prior proceedings had a pacier, more screwball approach. Also notable for thirty-year-old Elsie Randolph as “the Old Maid”; forty years later she’d reunite with Hitch for Frenzy.


Comments

Popular posts from this blog

We live in a twilight world.

Tenet (2020)
(SPOILERS) I’ve endured a fair few confusingly-executed action sequences in movies – more than enough, actually – but I don’t think I’ve previously had the odd experience of being on the edge of my seat during one while simultaneously failing to understand its objectives and how those objectives are being attempted. Which happened a few times during Tenet. If I stroll over to the Wiki page and read the plot synopsis, it is fairly explicable (fairly) but as a first dive into this Christopher Nolan film, I frequently found it, if not impenetrable, then most definitely opaque.

She was addicted to Tums for a while.

Marriage Story (2019)
(SPOILERS) I don’t tend to fall heavily for Noah Baumbach fare. He’s undoubtedly a distinctive voice – even if his collaborations with Wes Anderson are the least of that director’s efforts – but his devotion to an exclusive, rarefied New York bubble becomes ever more off-putting with each new project. And ever more identifiable as being a lesser chronicler of the city’s privileged quirks than his now disinherited forbear Woody Allen, who at his peak mastered a balancing act between the insightful, hilarious and self-effacing. Marriage Story finds Baumbach going yet again where Woody went before, this time brushing up against the director’s Ingmar Bergman fixation.

You can’t climb a ladder, no. But you can skip like a goat into a bar.

Juno and the Paycock (1930)
(SPOILERS) Hitchcock’s second sound feature. Such was the lustre of this technological advance that a wordy play was picked. By Sean O’Casey, upon whom Hitchcock based the prophet of doom at the end of The Birds. Juno and the Paycock, set in 1922 during the Irish Civil War, begins as a broad comedy of domestic manners, but by the end has descended into full-blown Greek (or Catholic) tragedy. As such, it’s an uneven but still watchable affair, even if Hitch does nothing to disguise its stage origins.

Anything can happen in Little Storping. Anything at all.

The Avengers 2.22: Murdersville
Brian Clemens' witty take on village life gone bad is one of the highlights of the fifth season. Inspired by Bad Day at Black Rock, one wonders how much Murdersville's premise of unsettling impulses lurking beneath an idyllic surface were set to influence both Straw Dogs and The Wicker Mana few years later (one could also suggest it premeditates the brand of backwoods horrors soon to be found in American cinema from the likes of Wes Craven and Tobe Hooper).

James Bond. You appear with the tedious inevitability of an unloved season.

Moonraker (1979)
Depending upon your disposition, and quite possibly age, Moonraker is either the Bond film that finally jumped the shark or the one that is most gloriously redolent of Roger Moore’s knowing take on the character. Many Bond aficionados will no doubt utter its name with thinly disguised contempt, just as they will extol with gravity how Timothy Dalton represented a masterful return to the core values of the series. If you regard For Your Eyes Only as a refreshing return to basics after the excesses of the previous two entries, and particularly the space opera grandstanding of this one, it’s probably fair to say you don’t much like Roger Moore’s take on Bond.

Twenty dwarves took turns doing handstands on the carpet.

Bugsy (1991)
(SPOILERS) Bugsy is very much a Warren Beatty vanity project (aren’t they all, even the ones that don’t seem that way on the surface?), to the extent of his playing a title character a decade and a half younger than him. As such, it makes sense that producer Warren’s choice of director wouldn’t be inclined to overshadow star Warren, but the effect is to end up with a movie that, for all its considerable merits (including a script from James Toback chock full of incident), never really feels quite focussed, that it’s destined to lead anywhere, even if we know where it’s going.

My name is Dr. King Schultz, this is my valet, Django, and these are our horses, Fritz, and Tony.

Django Unchained (2012)
(MINOR SPOILERS) Since the painful misstep of Grindhouse/Death Proof, Quentin Tarantino has regained the higher ground like never before. Pulp Fiction, his previous commercial and critical peak, has been at very least equalled by the back-to-back hits of Inglourious Basterds and Django Unchained. Having been underwhelmed by his post Pulp Fiction efforts (albeit, I admired his technical advances as a director in Kill Bill), I was pleasantly surprised by Inglourious Basterds. It was no work of genius (so not Pulp Fiction) by any means, but there was a gleeful irreverence in its treatment of history and even to the nominal heroic status of its titular protagonists. Tonally, it was a good fit for the director’s “cool” aesthetic. As a purveyor of postmodern pastiche, where the surface level is the subtext, in some ways he was operating at his zenith. Django Unchained is a retreat from that position, the director caught in the tug between his all-important aesthetic pr…

He tasks me. He tasks me, and I shall have him.

Star Trek II: The Wrath of Khan
(1982)
(SPOILERS) I don’t love Star Trek, but I do love Star Trek II: The Wrath of Khan. That probably isn’t just me, but a common refrain of many a non-devotee of the series. Although, it used to apply to The Voyage Home (the funny one, with the whales, the Star Trek even the target audience for Three Men and a Baby could enjoy). Unfortunately, its high regard has also become the desperate, self-destructive, song-and-verse, be-all-and-end-all of the overlords of the franchise itself, in whichever iteration, it seems. This is understandable to an extent, as Khan is that rare movie sequel made to transcendent effect on almost every level, and one that stands the test of time every bit as well (better, even) as when it was first unveiled.

My dear, sweet brother Numsie!

The Golden Child (1986)
Post-Beverly Hills Cop, Eddie Murphy could have filmed himself washing the dishes and it would have been a huge hit. Which might not have been a bad idea, since he chose to make this misconceived stinker.

I mean, I am just a dumb bunny, but, we are good at multiplying.

Zootropolis (2016)
(SPOILERS) The key to Zootropolis’ creative success isn’t so much the conceit of its much-vaunted allegory regarding prejudice and equality, or – conversely – the fun to be had riffing on animal stereotypes (simultaneously clever and obvious), or even the appealing central duo voiced by Ginnifier Goodwin (as first rabbit cop Judy Hopps) and Jason Bateman (fox hustler Nick Wilde). Rather, it’s coming armed with that rarity for an animation; a well-sustained plot that doesn’t devolve into overblown set pieces or rest on the easy laurels of musical numbers and montages.