User reviews

A young James Mason does a fine job in this film. The story is set a few years before the start of WW II. Mason is a guest at a quiet resort hotel in France. His camera is accidentally used by a German spy who has an identical one. When Mason takes a roll of film to be developed, the roll contains several pictures of top secret French aircraft and facilities. The police question Mason and are able to determine that he is innocent in the matter. But, they use the charges against him as leverage to get him to assist them in finding out which of the other hotel guests is the spy. How he succeeds makes for a most interesting and tension filled story.

One wonders what this movie would have become if Hitchcock had gotten his hands on it. Would he have revved up the plot, tightened up the script, recast some of the characters, put in a highway chase over the countryside interrupted by sheep, added a more appealing female interest for Mason? The climb up to the roof at the end, the strong lighting and direct closeups, the art and photographic direction(seemingly uncredited to one of the directors),as well as the music score and the general "look" of the film, not to mention James Mason's compelling presence all had the ingredients for a potential Hitchcockian thriller, but something is missing here. The plot's not that complicated (certainly not like "The Lady Vanishes") and there seems not to be enough risk or sense of danger (certainly not like "The 39 Steps")to Mason's life, although there is suspense and surprise along the way. One big weakness is the supporting cast. The young lady's character (can't even remember her name) isn't developed enough, nor does she have sufficient charm or sex appeal, as a Hitchcockian heroine would.

Still one watches it for Mason, before he has developed any overt mannerisms or been sadly type-cast as a villain. He seems to have made a number of these not-quite-up-to-snuff pictures in his career. Was he hard up? why didn't Hitchcock cast him and why didn't he ever accept a Powell & Pressburger offer? His presence on any number of these "grade-b" films, including the brief appearance in "Madame Bovary" (with Jenifer Jones), for example, or in the disappointing "Mayerling," adds a sense of gravitas to any of the proceedings in which he appeared, but the scripts and directors fail him, if not the cast.

Fortunately, he can be remembered for his appearance as Captain Nemo in "Twenty Thousand Leagues under the Sea," and Sir Randolph Nettleby in "Shooting Party," both of which tapped his natural dignity and aristocratic bearing and surrounded him with a worthy cast. See those for Mason at his best.

Of four stars****, two and a half.

JAMES MASON finds himself in a very Alfred Hitchcock situation in HOTEL RESERVE, that of an innocent man suspected of being a spy and having to prove his innocence by cooperating with the authorities to nab the real espionage agent. Sound familiar? Hitchcock used the same sort of innocent man frame-up in many films, most notably NORTH BY NORTHWEST.

But what's missing here, as others have commented, is that Hitch's expert touch is missing from the direction. The plot even has an exciting ending where hero and villain are atop a tall building and we know which one is going to meet his demise--but it's rather well done, except that Hitchcock would have thrown in some added touches for an even tighter bit of suspense.

Mason is very good in the leading role as the man caught in what appears to be a trap, while staying at the Hotel Reserve, where he must survey all the other guests to determine which one may have gotten their hands on his camera by mistake. The plot never becomes too overburdened with subplots (as some of these thrillers do), so it's all told in a brief hour and nineteen minutes.

HERBERT LOM is effectively cast as the hot-headed villain, with PATRICIA MEDINA not having much to do as his docile wife, and LUCIE MANNHEIM makes almost no impression at all as Mason's love interest, providing little more than a pretty face and a blank stare.

The improbable entrapment of the killer by police is a minor quibble, as is his method of temporary escape--but other than that, it's an acceptable spy thriller.

Summing up: Taut and tense with occasional bits of humor, it establishes why James Mason became a favorite with British and American audiences.

Hotel Reserve is an interesting little thriller set before World War 2 and I taped this when BBC2 screened it one afternoon.

A medical student on holiday in France is arrested for spying when some photos are developed showing something to do with the Army or Navy. To clear is name, the police release him and he has to find the actual person who took these with his camera. It has to be on of his fellow guests at Hotel Reserve...

The cast includes James Mason and Herbert Lom, both of whom went on to play Captain Nemo, Mason in 20,000 Leagues Under the Sea and Lom in Mysterious Island. With Patricia Medina.

Hotel Reserve is quite a tense movie and is worth catching.

Rating: 3 stars out of 5.

Looks like RKO had a British productions unit that would explain the non-American cast, and perhaps also why the unusual number of three directors was used on a black and white programmer. Some of the sets are impressive, especially the tower used in the final scene. Also, Frederick Valt impresses as the sinister Schimler, along with a sparkling Clare Hamilton who's a dead ringer for her sister Maureen O'Hara and apparently just as talented; yet, this is her only screen appearance and I'm curious why.

Nonetheless, in my little book, the movie disappoints, mainly because it's set up as a suspense film, yet doesn't really manage much suspense. We're introduced to each of ten suspects, one of which is a Nazi agent. Ordinarily, the narrative would develop each so that the audience could sort through them, thereby heightening the suspense. That doesn't happen here. Instead, much time is given over to two unnecessarily long scenes with the intelligence chief and repeated episodes with the pompous Duclos who's really more annoying than amusing. In fact, the narrative meanders to the extent few suspects are developed, and when the agent is revealed, it's done in highly unsuspenseful, pedestrian fashion. The various parts simply don't gel, and I suspect it's due not only to a muddled adaptation of the Ambler novel, but also to each director having his own preoccupations.

It's also a different James Mason. Not the dark, brooding presence he is so good at. Instead, he's rather sunny and serene, even in tight spots. Frankly, his performance here could have been equaled by a dozen lesser actors and leading men. The movie does have its moments, particularly the seaside setting with the moody resort hotel. That, plus the premise of ten suspects, had me thinking of the 1945 Rene Clair mystery classic And Then There Were None. Unfortunately, the result here likely demonstrates that old adage about too many cooks.

HOTEL RESERVE is a film that hasn't dated very well since its release during WW2; I'm guessing wartime audiences would have had a more emotional reaction to the storyline. It's a spy mystery set in and around a hotel in France in the years immediately preceding WW2, and the erstwhile hero of the piece is a young and breezy James Mason, who's wrongly accused of being a spy and who is then blackmailed into figuring out which of the suspects staying at the hotel is the real Nazi.

Despite the intriguing set-up with its shades of Agatha Christie, this is largely a slice of hokum that goes nowhere. The running time feels at least twice as long as it actually is, and in terms of action, suspense and danger there's virtually zero to be found here. The director can just about muster up a relatively suspenseful scene at the climax, but up until that point the viewer is treated to endless scenes of talking, quasi-romance, and general boredom.

Mason is an able actor but he has little to do in his central role, a role which offers little depth for any actor. Herbert Lom is better as one of the suspects, as he's able to bring his trademark darkness to the part, but the rest of the cast seems to be populated by caricatures instead of real people. There's not much here at all for modern audiences to engage with.

Propaganda plays a key role in modern warfare, so between 1939 and 1945 the British cinema made an important contribution towards our war effort. Although "Hotel Reserve" is set during the pre-war period, it can nevertheless be regarded as a propaganda film as it is a spy thriller in which the Nazis are the villains and the good guys, apart from the French intelligence services, are Austrian and German anti-Nazi émigrés.

In the summer of 1938 Peter Vadassy, a young Austrian medical student studying in France, is on holiday at the Hotel Reserve in the south of France. Being a keen photographer, he takes a number of photographs and then takes the negatives to the local pharmacy to have them developed. When he tries to collect the prints, however, he is arrested by French intelligence. It turns out that some of the photographs are of the French naval base at Toulon. Michel Beguin, the intelligence officer who interrogates Peter, realises that he is not a spy, but nevertheless sends him back to the hotel with instructions to find the real culprit, under threat of expulsion from France. This would mean Peter's having to abandon his medical studies and, as he is opposed to the Nazi regime, has no desire to return to Austria. (Contrary to what is argued in the "goofs" section, the year must be 1938, not 1937).

As others have pointed out, the plot of "Hotel Reserve"- an innocent man caught up in international espionage- could be that of an Alfred Hitchcock film. It was one he used in, among others, the two versions of "The Man who Knew Too Much" and "North by North-West". (James Mason, who appears as Peter here, also appeared in "North by North-West", his only collaboration with Hitchcock, although in that case as the film's villain rather than its hero). By 1944, however, Hitch had left Britain for Hollywood, so was not available. The film was both directed and produced by a trio: Lance Comfort, Mutz Greenbaum (aka Max Greene) and Victor Hanbury.

It is interesting to speculate what the film might have looked like had Hitchcock directed it. There would probably have been a more prominent leading role for Peter's love-interest Mary, who would doubtless have been played by a blonde. Hitch would also probably have maintained a greater level of suspense throughout; in the film as it exists the tension tends to slacken in the middle, although there is a very tense (and very Hitchcockian) final scene involving a rooftop cliff-hanger. This is a decent, but not outstanding, spy thriller, and mason made many better films in his long and distinguished career, but in 1944 it was doubtless appreciated. 6/10.

"Epitaph for a Spy" isn't Eric Ambler's best book, in my view, but it's quite a nice thoughtful thriller with a genuine "whodunnit" aspect.

This adaptation, sadly, bungles the latter by making many of the guest chracterisations too flimsy and fleeting to allow the viewer to seriously consider them as possible suspects. As such, the denoument, when it comes, feels rushed and based on inadequate evidence. More worryingly, someone clearly decided to attempt to have some of the characters played for laughs - which didn't work at all, in my view. (Maybe they felt they needed cheering up in wartime, which is understandable, but there were better ways, I'm sure.)

Herbert Lom is great and there are some other nice touches, but this doesn't really stand the test of time, I think.

I enjoyed this. It had an interesting plot, and yes, Hitchcock would probably have beefed it up and done it better, and some of the characters are clichés, but not a bad way to spend a rainy afternoon.

For a film over 75 years old it has stood the test of time quite well. It was a far better viewing experience than many current films I have watched recently.

James Mason, refugee from what was formerly Austria is now at a resort hotel on the French Riviera when he's picked up as a spy. Of course he's not our spy, however he's let go by the authorities and put under essentially house arrest at the hotel. Someone switched cameras there on him and he'd like to find out who is a real spy at the hotel.

He's got quite a few choices. Some he'd like not to think of as a spy others look like they could have come from central casting as sneaky and spy like. As a detective he's not very good and it is fortunate the authorities do have the situation closely monitored.

The object of all this is the French naval base at Toulon. It's been the home of their Mediterranean fleet since the middle ages. Still is.

The film is based on a novel by Eric Ambler and Mason himself didn't feel it was something that belonged in his best work. Still he's not bad as the Eric Ambler protagonist in this film.

This film is alright. Bunch of people in a hotel, at least one of them is a spy. Police get James Mason's character to investigate and hijinks ensue. This film handles it's premise fairly well and has solid performances all round. The story moves along at a good pace and the cinematography gets the job done. There really isn't all that much to say, it's a fine film but wouldn't appeal to everyone. If you like old mystery films set around WW2 then clearly this is a film for you. If the premise doesn't leap out at you then there are definitely better films to watch. 6/10.

James Mason is having an holiday in an hotel in France just before the outset of WWII. When he goes to collect some developed photographs he has taken, he is detained by the police who accuse him of illegally photographing sites around Toulon that might be of interest to the enemies of the Republic. It's pretty clear that the investigating officer believes his claims of innocence, but he is still sent back to keep tabs on the other guests at the hotel or face prison, deportation and quite possibly the Gestapo. The hotel has no shortage of likely suspects - Lucie Mannheim, Raymond Lovell and Herbert Lom to name but three, and he must try to find the would-be traitor without getting trapped in the web of intrigue that is clearly being spun around him. Mason engages us well, as does Lom and Frederick Valk and it's a bit like a game of Cluedo - there are plenty of clues and potential perpetrators and in the main, the story sustains quite decent degree of suspense before the villain is exposed and we are, sadly, delivered of a pretty flat conclusion. Still worth watching, though.

A small number of people are resident at the "Hotel Reserve" which is meant to be in France but is clearly on a studio set. It is up to one of the residents, Peter Vadassy (James Mason) to find out which guest is a Nazi spy.

The cast are split into 2 groups. First of all, there are the good actors who portray interesting characters - Emil Schimler (Frederick Valk) - bad/good guy with a secret?, the female hotel owner - bad/good girl?, Andrew Roux (Herbert Lom) - bad/innocent guy? and the main police inspector - a good guy that knows more than the audience/James Mason.

Set against this are the rest of the cast who are all buffoons, especially the Major (Anthony Shaw) and the fisherman (David Ward) who play their roles for laughs and who are never funny. There is also a pointless role for a French policeman who follows Vadassey around and he plays for humour. He is also not funny...............a mention must also go to Lucie Mannheim as the romantic interest for James Mason. She is dreadful and it is criminal that she is second-billed in this film. Neither her air-time nor her acting skills merit this lofty position.

James Mason is OK and the film is a time-passer. Nothing more.

"Hotel Reserve", a spy movie from the '40s, is thoroughly enjoyable, though it does have its faults.

The story deals with a vacationing medical student (a very young and good-looking James Mason) who is mistaken for an enemy spy by the French police. Realizing he is innocent, the police department send him back to his hotel with the mission of finding out which of the guests is really the spy.

Though a good film, the supporting cast is weak. Mr Mason is at his usual elegant standard, and I must say that I love the guy playing Duclos, but many of the other parts could have been better filled. I agree that it would have been interesting to see what Hitch would have done with it, but Alfred or no Alfred, "Hotel Reserve" is still very much worth seeing.

It's 1938 France. Austrian medical student Peter Vadassy (James Mason) is a guest at the Hotel Reserve. He's a refugee on the verge of gaining French citizenship. He is brought in by the police for suspicion of espionage. The evidence points to his innocence. Using threats of deportation, the police recruits him to find the real spy among the guests.

The basic structure is an old fashion mystery. Instead of a murder, it's a spy hunt. It works a bit better because the other characters do not suspect. I do like the construction of the premise although it's hard to buy that the spy wouldn't be gone. The issue is containment. A real hotel would have guests coming and going all the time. Once the photos are lost, the clock is ticking on the spy. I also thought a better twist is that the spy isn't one of the guests. All in all, this is fine. James Mason keeps the whole thing afloat.

James Mason is as pale as the script in this forties "thriller" that looks like it was performed and directed by a community theatre group. Mason is poorly miscast as a Austrian medical student accused of espionage while on vacation at a resort hotel in the south of France. The police threaten to turn him over to the Gestapo if he doesn't cooperate by uncovering the real spy among the hotel guests. With a group of arch characters, some casting sinister side glances, others acting buffoonish, a suspenseless game of Clue commences. In comparison the board game is more animated.

With the exception of Herbert Lom's fine sinister turn performances run from bad to ham to invisible. The set design is sparse, the lighting unimaginative and the photography flat. The editing is glaringly incompetent and the direction (three are given credit; talk about too many cooks) haphazard.

In an attempt to amp up the tension and showcase their matinée idol, the directors throw a trench coat on the pallid Mason and bring him along to vanquish the villain at the film's climax. It is a ridiculously contrived ending that in a way is wholly appropriate to a film that remains consistently bad from start to finish.

I only rated this 5/10 and would have expected it to be a 'B' feature before the big film, had I been in a cinema in 1944.As other reviewers have pointed out it looks like it was steered by a committee of directors to wit, Lance Comfort, Mutz Greenbaum (as Max Greene) and Victor Hanbury who fell over each other and got into a terrible mess.

My first criticism is the film was obviously studio bound and had a claustrophobic feel to it throughout, especially for a film which purported to be set in the south of France.I know it was war time but Cornwall in the summer would have made a good substitute location.In that same year 1944 "Love Story" was made on location in Cornwall and London which added to the reality of the story.Other reviewers mention Hitchcock who was partial to actual exterior locations when the film demanded it.I suppose the producers were constrained in wartime by budgets.

My second criticism was the unconvincing sets, never more noticeable than when James Mason climbs a ladder to a rooftop and you see what purports to be an iron ladder bend and sway - one for continuity.I do like a bit of the authentic language spoken, in this case French which was noticeable by its absence.A few "Messeur", "Mesdames" and "Merci" thrown in just will not do.In this regard the scriptwriters should have made a bigger part for Patricia Medina whose father was Spanish, hence her surname and as a linguist she could also speak French & Italian.I liked the eye candy of Lucy Mannheim (James Mason's German sounding girlfriend) but as stated by others she was not given enough of the script to establish her character.With a few deft opening scenes in "The 39 Steps" (1935) Hitchcock makes Lucy Mannheim's character much more memorable even after we have seen the charms of Madeleine Carroll.

My third main criticism is that for a thriller and "who-done-it" it was curiously lacking tension and excitement, which brings me back to my review title.It certainly did not lack a quality cast James Mason, Herbert Lom, Raymond Lovell, Lucy Mannheim etc. so I can only blame the scriptwriters and directors for its flat outcome.