planktonrules

This film was made by Fox Studio's British branch. In fact, all the major US studios had British studios in order to get around a British law mandating that a certain percentage of the films shown in their theaters must be domestically produced.

When Mary (Judy Gunn) is made the head of the laboratory where she works, the sexist men are upset. The only one who doesn't seem bent out of shape is John (Louis Hayward). This is because he knows she's a darned good scientist and has earned this promotion. Regardless, the men decide the way to deal with her is to distract her so much that she'll be demoted or fired...and they want someone to distract her by wooing her. John volunteers to do this because it's not an onerous task...he already likes her. But when she starts taking care of her appearance and turns out to be a lovely woman, one of the sexist is interested as well. And, that man ends up being a REAL weasel! Will this jerk get his comeuppance or will he lead to the failure of Mary as head of the lab?

While this film about sexism and equality could have been done is a totally sexist way, the writer managed to do a very good job promoting women in the workplace. It also is a darned good script and I was surprised how much I enjoyed this film. Well worth seeing.

Jim Martin (James Mason) wants to cover his first story for the newspaper where he works. However, his boss keeps promising to give him a chance...eventually. Well, Martin wanders into the middle of a big story. It seems a cop was killed and a bank robbed...and the 'suicide' victim Martin discovers is part of that case. But Martin took along a female reporter who is, frankly, a dummy. Janet meets a woman who obviously is involved...and yet she promises the woman not to involve her. Why? I guess she's just psychic and knows the woman is innocent. Regardless, it makes you wonder how this dunderhead expects to be a reporter, as soon bad guys will realize that she'll bury a story if they ask her to!

So is this a terrible movie? No...just this part of it...and it simply makes no sense. If you can ignore much of the time she's in the story, it works a lot better! Plus, there's a cheap bit about a stutterer that's supposed to be funny...but it just seems cruel and it was a relatively common trope during the 1930s and 40s.

By the way, while I was not super-impressed by this film, it was James Mason's first screen appearance...and a starring one as well. He's good and worth seeing.

It's very difficult to remake a famous film, particularly one by such a famous director as Alfred Hitchcock. But in 1978 that's exactly what they did...make a TV version of the famous 1935 film. And, as it turns out, the author of the original story, John Buchan, actually loved this third version as it was closer to his novel. A fourth version came out in 2008.

A plus for this production is the cast. John Mills, George Baker, Eric Porter, and David Warner all appear in the movie. Robert Powell, who plays lead, is fine.

The story is set in 1914, just before the outbreak of the First World War. It begins with two assassinations and a retired British agent (Mills) thinks he understands what's going on...and the German spies are out to stop him. They do manage to kill him...but poor Hannay (Powell) is there and folks think he did it...though he's completely innocent. He is arrested...but soon manages to escape...and most of the film consists of Hannay on the run, Germans on his tail, and the British government eventually realizing what's going on and they give chase as well!

It's hard for me to compare this to the Hitchcock version simply because I haven't seen that movie in many years. I found it very enjoyable and well made. My only complaint is the same one I had about the Hitchcock version...that the lady assumes he's innocent for no reason other than he 'looks innocent'...a plot problem indeed. But still, it is enjoyable and worth a look.