21 Days

You'll get hooked on this right away but then annoyed at the way it takes so long to get to the point. Director, Basil Dean's lugubrious pace and humourless direction tries too hard to build tension rather than developing the story or making us get to know his cast.

According to Mr Dean he was not entirely to blame. Studio boss Alexander Korda was so underwhelmed by Dean's direction that he started to re-shoot and rewrite scenes himself. This conflict gives the picture a disjointed feel but the main issue is that the balance is really wrong. About half the film is taken up by the (anti) climatic court case which is meant to get you on the edge of your seat. It achieves that ambition but only because you're yelling "get on with it!" This is one of the dullest court room scenes I've seen - where is William Powell or a Barrymore brother when you need them ? What's sacrificed for this pseudo-arty tension trope is that we don't get time to know the characters straight away. More time should have been devoted to that because it takes too long to draw you in.

On the plus side, it looks good, it's full of mood, clever lighting and the inevitable 1930s London fog - the camerawork also is pretty impressive. The acting, as you'd expect from this lot is first rate but it's the story which doesn't grab you. Such a tale about abuse, murder, deception and blackmail handled by another director could have been the most exciting thing since sliced bread but this is actually less exciting than that aforementioned piece of bread.

What does eventually makes you sit up and take notice is the brilliant cameo from Hay Petrie as a down and out ex-vicar. You then wish you'd been paying more attention earlier! That's what happens with this - once you've started you really want to find out what happens next but your brain keeps trying to switch off.

Despite what some reviewers have said, this is not a bad film - it's just frustrating because you know that it could have been made better. For example, had Hitchcock been in the chair this might have been a classic. As it stands it's just ok.

One interesting thing to see is Mr Olivier not playing the alpha male - as the weak willed looser, the unsuccessful brother, he's remarkably believable. That's until you realise that this young actor has, just a few weeks earlier married probably the most beautiful woman in the world.

Although released in 1940 this picture was made in 1937, well before Leigh and Olivier were married. Producer Alexander Korda intended it as a career-boosting role for Leigh but, for whatever reasons, it was put-aside. Columbia bought the property in 1939 and released it after Leigh's success in "Gone with the wind".

The 1937 date explains what must seem to be an anomaly for modern audiences - the sympathetic treatment of the "Axis" characters, ie the German landlord and the Italian grocer.

Well-worth watching - the depth of talent in the supporting roles (Francis L Sullivan, Hay Petrie, Robert Newton etc) is notable.

Apparently this is one of those Galsworthy dilemma stories. In it Olivier, early in his career inadvertently kills a man, the estranged husband of his new love. He is faced with the considerable struggle with conscience because a man has been blamed for the act and will face the music. What to do. What to do. We are put in the position of hoping all will somehow work out. I won't spoil the ending, but I will say that Olivier's character could have been sent to the gallows for terminal boredom. At no point did I really care one way or the other. He is selfish in many ways and rather cowardly. While the victim is made to have no redeeming qualities, his death really serves nothing other than that of a plot element. I suppose there is some of that stiff upper lip stuff going on, but at no time did I sit on the edge of my seat. Contrast this to the pain of Jean Valjean who faces a similar question. In that we all need to look inward. This just didn't ask much of me, and I was also greatly disappointed with the conclusion.

I was disappointed in this film, but it's my own fault. I went into it thinking it was some marvelous mystery or noir.

"21 Days Together" has an interesting history. Released in 1940, it was actually made in 1937 but for some reason not released. After Gone with the Wind, I suppose there was a lot of interest in Leigh and the film was released.

The Leigh role was to be played by Vera Zorina, but obviously she didn't do it and Leigh won the role.

The story concerns a young couple in love, but the woman, Wanda (Leigh) is married but not living with her husband. He shows up and attempts blackmail, but gets into a fight with her lover Larry (Olivier) who accidentally kills him.

A man who stole something off of the body is arrested for murder and found guilty. The couple has three weeks together before Larry must give himself up or let an innocent man hang. His brother, who is up for a judgeship, is determined that Larry not admit to the crime.

This film was not close-captioned and, as I am a little hard of hearing, it was difficult to understand some of the dialogue.

I found this an okay drama, well acted for the most part.

Leigh and Olivier made a beautiful couple, and it's always nice to see them together, young and in love. Makes you sad about how it ended.

Graham Greene here made an inauspicious entry into film writing converting a John Galsworthy story he himself considered "peculiarly unsuited to film adaptation" into "the worst and least successful of Korda's productions".

Olivier and Leigh, the gilded young lovers of the Old Vic, had yet to learn how to act before the cameras in this overwrought melodrama with a noisy score by John Greenwood which spent two years on the shelf before eventually slipping quietly into cinemas only after both leads had hit it big in Hollywood.

There are compensations, however, in the graceful work of it's Czech cameraman, some vivid shots of London as it looked in 1937, and above all a moving performance - twelfth in the cast list - by Hay Petrie, who Greene himself declared "enriches every picture in which he appears.