The 39 Steps (2008) Reviews

• 39 pointless steps

  andrewinet2008-12-29

  ***SPOILER ALERT*** Hitchcock's 1935 version of 'The 39 Steps' played fast and loose with John Buchan's novel by introducing a plausible and intriguing love interest in a 1930s setting, a nerve-shredding escape on the Forth Rail Bridge and the quirky denouement of 'Mr Memory' at a Music Hall. These radical changes produced a fabulous movie, a pulsating chase thriller all played with great style and with real chemistry between the two leads, Robert Donat and Madeline Carroll. This expensive, handsome looking TV production reverted to a plot rather closer to the book but retained little of Buchan's original spirit, pace or derring-do. It did, however, steal the love interest idea from Hitchcock but rather than a haughty bystander who gets caught up in events she turns out to be a spy who deliberately hooks up with the hero, Hannay... oh, and her uncle is the traitor... who she cannot shoot at the crucial moment... but an apparently dead German who couldn't shoot straight when conscious rises from the dead to deliver one excellent shot to kill her off just as the two leads finally kiss and she falls into the freezing loch. But don't worry, folks! Feisty suffragette heroine spy woman inexplicably re-appears in a tacked-on coda, gazing enigmatically across at Hannay just as he sets off for the Western Front. Despite the fact they've both pledged undying love she doesn't bother she sends her dopey brother over rather than give her soul mate so much as a goodbye peck on the cheek. Then again, she's let him think she's dead for four months so why make a fuss now? Stiff upper lip and all that. Also, the guy from 'Spooks' who played Hannay was charmless and wooden. The whole thing looked sumptuous - pretty high production values and wonderful Scottish scenery make that difficult to blow - but the direction was uninspired and the pacing leaden. Drivel of the first order.

  More

• Right Steps for me!

  hebrown-42009-01-12

  I really, really enjoyed this. I thought it was light-hearted, entertaining, captured the spirit of the period without getting bogged down in pedantic detail and it fairly zipped along. It was a new version with its own contemporary axes to grind/boxes to tick and on that basis, it worked like a charm for me. And speaking of charm, I think Rupert Penry-Jones is grossly under-rated as an actor and here, he was just perfectly cast and wonderfully skilled in a role almost tailor-made for someone with a light touch and a bit of dash about him. I don't know where people get the idea RPJ is wooden and can't do comedy-his way of commenting with a straight face and a twinkle in his eye is just lovely. Too subtle for some, maybe. And charm? Even when the character was making a klutz of himself he had buckets of charm. Too many nicely detailed moments to count. As to the portrayal of the character of Richard Hannay, it seemed to me truer to the concept of the ordinary man caught up in great events than many others have been. He was presented right from the start as a man looking for something, a man uncertain of his place in the world who was thrown into a situation beyond his control but who did his best, who used what experience and skills he had acquired in life to get himself out of trouble. But he was also a fallible human being who did get out of his depth and who didn't have the perfect answer to everything. People either want an all-knowing, superman-type, one-bound-and-he-was-free hero or they don't. That doesn't make any alternative a wimp or a wet. Hannay here was a clever, talented and resourceful person but also bewildered, confused and scared. I wasn't mad about the addition of the Victoria character but she struck me as far more believable and attractive than any of the introduced love interests that went before. Madeleine Carroll was gorgeous but passive (a stock Hitchcock heroine, quelle surprise!) and the others are just forgettable. I liked the notion that they were both prejudiced and opinionated (a nod to some of the now unacceptable, though of-their-time, opinions stated in Buchan's original) but that they came round to each other as they saw what the other was capable of. And their sarky/comic exchanges were a treat! Of course it went for shameless audience pleasing and none the worse for that. It obviously succeeded on that score because it got excellent viewing figures-almost 7 and a half million. The romance was delightfully schmaltzy and of course it was sexed up. Hitchcock started that, after all, with his handcuffs and stockings. Big wow-sex did not begin in 1963 and in any case, the Edwardian era (OK, I know this was set in 1914 and George V's reign but it didn't disappear overnight!) wasn't exactly noted for its prudishness, from the top of the social scale down. This was a piece of escapist fiction, not an academic commentary on post-Edwardian, pre-World War One social mores. I loved this and I will love watching it again, so I have ordered the DVD to do just that. And I hope they hire Rupert Penry-Jones to do further Hannays, especially Greenmantle and Mr Standfast. So there!

  More

• Stepping up...

  Lejink2009-01-26

  Shades of Robert Donat, Kenneth More and Robert Powell hover over this festive production from the BBC of John Buchan's classic novel, heck I can't even get Michael Palin's brilliant "Ripping Yarns" spoof out of my head, but it entertained pretty much all the way by taking itself just seriously enough without reverting to knowing post-modern sarcasm or worse yet campness. This is a "Boy's Own Adventure" and can only ever work by playing it straight. Don't mess with the Buchan in other words! Rupert Penry-Jones makes a fine Hannay, good looking, muscular if oddly blonde (the perfect Aryan specimen, ironically enough!) and interacts well with Lydia Leonard as the resourceful suffragette-cum-spy Victoria. I really liked Eddie Marson as the rent collector in the BBC's recent "Little Dorrit" dramatisation and so felt a little short-changed with his early demise. Of course the story is one long chase stopping only long enough for the various action or suspense-punctuating set-pieces and I rather liked the fact that these were accomplished without SFX or CGEN tricks. I last read the book years and years ago so can't state for certain how faithful to source this was, (I only recall the political meeting episode from the novel if truth be told) but otherwise was perfectly happy to sit back, admire the glorious Scottish scenery, ancient cars period costumes and see True-Brit spunk and ingenuity triumph over the evil Bosche. The plot is of course wholly unbelievable and barely hangs together (including to top things off, a literally death-defying recovery by Victoria at the end to complete the happy ending), but just swallow an improbability pill beforehand and enjoy. There are a couple of respectful references to Hitchcock scattered about (there must be people out there who think the original Hannay was a Hitch original, so ingrained in the memory is the Robert Donat/Madeleine Carroll film prototype) although quite how "North By North-West's" crop-duster scene found its way in here I'm not sure and perhaps more could have been made of the handcuff-scene, treated much more cheekily by the Master 70 odd years ago. Nevertheless, I'll take this standard "Tally-Ho!" British fare over Indiana Jones any old day and hope there's a follow-up of sorts as I for one would welcome a revolt into style away from big-budget effects-fests in favour of more homespun dramas like this, tongue-in-cheek or not...

  More

• Pleasantly surprised

  barbie69820032010-03-03

  I was so prepared to not enjoy this, that when it was automatically recorded by my TiVo as part of the "Mystery" series, I very nearly deleted it without watching. I am a huge fan of Hitchcock, and have likely seen his version of "The 39 Steps" a hundred times. I had read the book years ago and remember thinking that the Hitchcock movie must not have been an adaptation. Out of boredom, I decided to watch the 2008 version, thinking that I would turn it off and delete it within the first few scenes. I was pleasantly surprised to find that it did indeed resemble - if not follow faithfully - the original book. It held it's own. The characters were likable and well played. I thoroughly enjoyed Lydia Leonard as Victoria. They took liberties with this character, but in a satisfying way. I will watch it again with my husband, whom I think will enjoy this as well. If you're expecting a remake of Hitchcock's movie, you'll be disappointed. Then again, I can see no reason to remake ANY of Hitchcock's films, so I was happy with this version of the book by John Buchan.

  More

• Disappointing update of a classic

  raye02742008-12-28

  I have to admit that having watched this tonight on BBC1 as part of their Christmas line-up I was incredibly disappointed. The story was changed dramatically from both the 1930s and the 1970s versions, the dynamic action that appeared in both previous well-known incarnations was lacking. They sexed the characters up (I would be the first to admit that I love Penry-Jones in almost everything and he certainly carries off a suit and a uniform extremely well) and in doing so managed to fit the story into 90 rather dull minutes that actually skipped the meaning of the 39 steps completely. Wouldn't recommend you watch this unless you are a fan of Penry-Jones or any of the rest of the cast, stick to the previous versions to get the excitement and drama of the original tale.

  More