MovieChat Forums > The 39 Steps (2008) Discussion > Comments and Opinions... (contains SPOI...

Comments and Opinions... (contains SPOILERS!)


Hello,

As a fan of The 39 Steps, from the novel to all the adaptations, I thought I'd jot down a few comments and opinions on this new production...

1) Rupert Penry-Jones was badly miscast as Hannay. He was quite wooden throughout, and is too much in the obvious 'action hero' mould; good looking, muscular guy. Hannay is meant to be an everyman figure, an ordinary chap thrown into a situation he doesn't understand. Eddie Marsan, who played an Anglicised Scudder, was impressive though, and David Haig did well.

2) Victoria. All adaptations have featured a female sidekick, but this character was too unbelievable for me. As a previous poster has pointed out, she seemed to be written as the lead hero, rather than a supporting character. It was okay making her a fiesty suffragette, but many of her actions were just plain baffling.

3) The ending was quite good I felt, with the German U-boat being much more faithful to the book than any of the other adaptations. Though the film-makers relocated it to a Scottish loch, rather than the south coast of England, I was happy to see this ending rather than a rehash of the Mr. Memory idea. In this version, the meaning of the '39 steps' was very close to the original novel.

4) The scene where Hannay posed as the Liberal spokesman and had to deliver a speech was poorly written and filmed, I thought. There was no tension or humour in the scene, especially compared with the Donat and Powell versions.

5) The escape from the train - a classic element in all other adaptations - was largely a waste of time, especially that pointless interlude with the ventriloquist's dummy.

6) The filming of the Scottish Highlands was nicely done. Even in a poorly made film like this, the scenery was spectacular and more should have been made of it. The CGI filming of the U-Boat in the loch was quite nicely done.

7) The ending was a little confusing. Hannay thought Victoria had been killed by the Germans, only to discover four months later she was still alive. What does this mean? Either she wanted the Secret Service Bureau to think she was dead so she could escape from her life as a spy and lead a normal life (in that case, why keep Hannay in the dark all that time?) or the Service knew she was alive but wanted people to think she was dead so they could use her in undercover work? The message given to Hannay from Victoria (by Harry) at the train station was that she would see him after the war, perhaps indicating she was still in the employ of the Service...

8) Linking the plot to the real-life assassination of Arch Duke Franz Ferdinand, rather than the fictional Karolides from the novel and 1978 film), was quite nice, I thought. This placed the fictional story into more of a real-life context.


In conclusion, this adaptation was better, in my opinion, than the Kenneth More film (which was just too deriviative of the classic Donat version), but cannot hold a candle to the Donat and Powell versions. It's worth watching and stands up in its own right as decent entertainment, but pales in comparison to the earlier two films.

Sorry this was a long read...lol. Thanks for getting through it all (those of you who did!).

reply

I think you are far too kind.

reply

[deleted]

[deleted]

Thanks for your comments on my comments!! We seem to agree on quite a lot, save for Penry-Jones' casting!

reply


Stebsmeister - spot on!



Did anyone note that the biplane was firing its machine gun through its propeller? This did not come possible till 1916, a year after Buchan wrote the book. In the novel the plane is a monoplane, and it only 'spots' for the conspirators. Incidentally, in an era before two-way radio, I'm not sure how the pilot would be sure that he was shooting at Hannay, and not (say) some poor Scotsman running across a field while late for a Kirk meeting.

(Okay, I'll get my tartan anorak...)



I never loved your mind, Dewey Daniels, I never loved your mind!

reply

Kirk meetings were very serious in early 20th century Scotland, so, the aeroplane could easily have been on patrol for prayer dodgers and simply mistaken Hannay for such a felon. Support for your theory comes in the form of terrible shooting and aim. On the plus side, in the wake of Hannay I am looking foward to the BBC's forthcoming Passion Play this Easter that sees Jesus milling ineffectively about in the backgroud while Mary delivers the Sermon on the Mount and confronts Pilate (played by Dean Gaffney), fooling him with her photographic memory, thus leading to a happy ending for all (with a faked crucifixion along the way).

I've seen things you people wouldn't believe. A hat made of jelly, green jelly.

reply

Did anyone note that the biplane was firing its machine gun through its propeller?
Yes. I too am that sad. As soon as I saw the plane appear, I wondered if they'd fall into that trap, and they did. The bloke in the plane could have shot with a pistol out of the side of the plane.

reply

scarlet1881,

I agree with everything you said in your original post, and could add much more besides (and did so on another thread), except I think you are too kind to this version's producer and director and cinematographer.
Yes, the highlands looked spectacular. That's what they do, look spectacular. One really needs to be 100% useless to make them look anything else, and this lot were only 98% useless :)
They pretty much film themselves.
On the other hand, you need some talent to film the other aspects of 39 Steps, and this was in extremely short supply here (as I've said). To make such a hash of an escape by steam train ... (shudder).

reply

stebmeister: And the revelation of her true job just didn't make sense - too many holes in the plot here!
---------
I've been trying to figure it all out, and I'm wavering between two possibilities: (a) there were so many plot holes that it's pointless to even try to identify them, or (b) the plot is brilliant but so complicated that I wasn't able to catch it all in one viewing.

Here's one thought I had about a seemingly stupid action by Victoria: she stops the car to get them caught on purpose, so that she has a chance to hide the notebook and also because she wants to get taken to the German HQ. (And hey, skillful pickpocketing is not too unrealistic for a person that can apparently breathe underwater and/or become invisible.)

Well, 90 minutes featuring Rupert Penry-Jones is still enjoyable for me, even if the plot leaves something to be desired.

reply

[deleted]

The beeb had to be politically correct and make the women an all action spy

reply

I could go on for ages about the shortcomings of this incredulous production but I really can't be bothered. And not only is is correct to point out the anachronistic interrupter gear on the plane, it's also worth noting that the plane in question was an SE5a, therefore unlikely to be being flown in Scotland in 1914. Or anywhere else in the world for that matter. It was dreadful nonsense and thoroughly deserved to be switched off, as indeed it was. I like a romp. But it has to be a good one, which this definitely wasn't.

reply

Geez, now I am confused. I thought it was a comedy!

reply

[deleted]

Not so fast.

You've read many comments like this from Americans on the Persuasion (2007) board. I'm a lot less critical of 39 Steps because, as I noted in another thread on this board, John Buchan is no Jane Austen, and because I didn't have very high expectations going into it.

reply

"John Buchan is no Jane Austen"

You are so proud of saying this but you fail to realize that there is no comparison between the two. They are not from the same era nor are their works the same genre. They do, however, both write classics in their own genres.

It would like comparing Dashiell Hammett with Emily Bronte!


"Namu-myoho-renge-kyo"

reply

"The beeb had to be politically correct and make the women an all action spy"

Ironically, if you think about it, you could argue that they copped out by making her an actual spy, as opposed to just an everywoman who has skills, just as Hannay does, to survive. So if you wanted to complain about political incorrectness, you could say that they were implying that there was no way for a woman to have her abilities without being a trained spy!

reply