Kidnapped

Years ago, I read Stevenson's story, KIDNAPPED. When I watched this 1938 version of the story, I couldn't help but wonder if I was losing my mind, as so much of it seemed like it wasn't in the book--particularly the romantic subplot and quite a bit of the action. Well, when I later checked, I found that for once I wasn't losing my mind--the story was heavily re-worked and in many places it bore little similarity to the novel. Additionally, I was surprised that despite the story being set in Scotland, none of the characters sounded like Scots--having mostly American and a few English accents. In particular, I have always liked Warner Baxter as an actor, but here he sounds exactly the same as he did in practically all his films--like a nice but not particularly rugged American.

Yet despite all this, the story still was rather enjoyable and kept my attention throughout. Very nice looking sets and a basic story that is hard to screw up, it isn't surprising that the story still delivers. It's well worth a look, but considering that KIDNAPPED is such an easy read, I still recommend the book over this film.

A young Scotsman, on his way to becoming laird of his family property, instead finds himself in the very thick of his country's rebellion against the English, hunted & harried & in constant peril, after his evil uncle has him KIDNAPPED.

This is a fairly good adventure film which, now and again, actually includes some of the original plot as penned in the famous novel by Robert Louis Stevenson. Action scenes are well done, but the wholly unnecessary romantic subplot gets very much in the way.

Warner Baxter is completely miscast as the great literary hero, Alan Breck; he doesn't even attempt to act Scots and his accent is pure Yankee. One wonders what Fox Studio had in mind. In the supporting cast was a star from silent screen days, British actor Ralph Forbes, who could have given the role more authority & punch. Instead, Forbes is given a tiny part & disappears quickly.

Freddie Bartholomew does a fine job as young David Balfour and there is an excellent supporting cast of sterling character players of the period: John Carradine, Nigel Bruce, Mary Gordon, Halliwell Hobbes, E. E. Clive, Montague Love, H. B. Warner & Eily Maylon. Reginald Owen is especially good as an old rapscallion of a sea captain, while Sir C. Aubrey Smith scores as a wise old duke.

There are a number of screen adaptations of Robert Louis Stevenson's classic tale and a couple of very good ones. Sadly, this is not one of them which is a shame as with this quality cast I had been excited to see it and had been trying to track it down for some time. The trouble starts at the top of the cast list with the three stars Warner Baxter, Freddie Batholomew and Arleen Whelan, none of whom even attempt a Scots accent, which takes you out of the action more than somewhat. Baxter and Whelan are both miscast anyway with the former lacking charisma here and the latter guilty of demonstrating and posing rather than trying to inhabit her character. The adaptation also gives them a romantic subplot which does not exist in the original story and due to their shortcomings, is pointless anyway. The supporting cast, luckily, has a host of well known names and/or faces of the time; C Aubrey Smith brings gravitas as the Duke of Argyle, Reginald Owen is broad but enjoyable as a villainous ship's captain and Miles Mander is fun as the wretched and weaselly Ebenezer Balfour whose miserly ways and thunder stricken, tumble down castle are a highlight of the film. It is great to see Nigel Bruce and Mary Gordon, later to play in a number of films together as Dr Watson and Mrs Hudson in the Fox and Universal Sherlock Holmes series, as man and wife in this, though like John Carradine, they are criminally underused. Bruce, my main reason for tuning in, was in a number of classic novel to screen adaptations and fared a lot better in The Hound of the Baskervilles (1939) and Rebecca (1940).

For such a classic story, I've never seen a Kidnapped film adaptation that's really riveting. Of all the ones I've seen, though, I like the 1938 version the best. Freddie Bartholomew is adorable, and it's one of the last movies you can catch him in before he's all grown up. It's also one of the last swashbuckling roles you can see Warner Baxter in. He got replaced by Errol Flynn; but who's really complaining?

In this old black-and-white version, you'll see the very creepy introduction of Freddie to his uncle, Miles Mander. Freddie has just come into an inheritance, and Miles is desperate to take it away from him. "Your room is just up the stairs," he says, waiting down below for Freddie to fall to his death. But since the sweet little boy took first billing, it's a safe bet that he doesn't open the door and fall to his death.

If you like the famous book, or you've seen enough bad versions and are looking for a better one, check out the 1938 adaptation. It's not all bad, and there are some exciting sequences.

Based on a novel by Stevenson,at the time when the Scottish rebels were fighting against the English king and his tax collectors .

The hero is a young boy,who recalls Jim Hawkins ,David Copperfield as well as John Mohune ("Moonfleet" );as could be expected ,this young "laird" does not take a rebel stand ,he trusts his king and he already speaks like a little man ,a true noble.His "initiation rites " like those of the other characters I mention take him to adulthood.

Best moment is the arrival in the wicked uncle's (a Dickensian character,a cross between Murdstone and Uriah Heep)castle ,a place where you eat porridge (ungenerous portions)and where a horror movie could take place.

The first of at least five versions (including the MTV one which is twice as long as the others).Well acted.