Book Review: The Echoing Grove by Rosamond Lehmann

The Echoing Grove tells the story of two sisters spending their first night under the same roof in many years and then explores the intricacies of their estrangement. At the heart of this is Dinah's affair with Madeline's husband, Rickie, which fractured their lives and is recounted in lengthy flashbacks which include all three parties.

This is a tricky book to read. I was wondering whether I was the only one to find it difficult but then I read this excellent post at Miss Darcy's Library which articulates some of my problems with the novel. I really enjoyed the opening portion of the book. The brittle conversation between Dinah and Madeline is very intriguing and there's an exceptionally vivid scene with a rat that's haunted me since I finished reading. However, once the book begins toying with chronology, things become a little more difficult to follow. It doesn't help that you dip through one memory to another and get a little disorientated in the process.

The themes of the novel - adultery, marriage, family - are explored well and Lehmann's makes good use of the time period, particularly in the scenes set in the Blitz. However, I didn't find any of the three characters especially easy to like. Rickie, particularly, came across badly but that may be my feminist instincts kicking in. That said, all of them are very realistic and products of their time. In that sense, The Echoing Grove is an exceptionally skilful novel, but it's very dismal in tone. There's no way you can come out of this book feeling uplifted, though that's not necessarily a bad thing. 

I can't say that I'll reread this novel but I am glad I read it in the first place. I do also think I'll be reading more of Lehmann's work in the future. 

I was provided with a free copy of this book by the publisher in exchange for an honest review. 

Classic Film Review: From Here to Eternity (1953)

From Here to Eternity stars Montgomery Clift as Robert E. Lee Prewitt, a soldier who has taken a demotion to move to a new unit in Hawaii. His new colleagues, headed by Captain Dana Holmes (Philip Ober), want him to resume his boxing career to help them to glory but Prewitt steadfastly refuses and is subjected to vicious treatment because of it. He finds an ally in Angelo Maggio (Frank Sinatra), a hot-headed soldier who has also made himself an enemy in the form of Sergeant Judson (Ernest Borgnine). Sergeant Milton Warden (Burt Lancaster) has his own problems as he embarks on an affair with Captain Holmes' wife, Karen (Deborah Kerr). And, though none of them know it, the attack on Pearl Harbour is inching ever closer...

This is one of those classics that I really ought to have seen already but, while it lived up to its reputation, I don't think it's going down on my list of favourites - that may just be because of the after taste of the ending, I'm not sure. Certainly, Montgomery Clift gives an excellent performance as Prewitt, reaffirming my belief that he was one of the best actors of his generation. Similarly, Frank Sinatra's lobbying for the role of Maggio paid off, easily his best acting performance as far as I'm concerned. Where I struggled, I suppose, was with Burt Lancaster who, really, doesn't inspire much in me. Deborah Kerr, whilst effective in the second half of the film, was a struggle for me too. It wasn't because she was playing against type, perhaps just than I was far more interested in the Prewitt/Maggio aspects of the story and oould've dispensed with the Warden/Karen strand, famous kiss in the surf or not.

There are a few scenes that linger with me from this one. Prewitt's confession scene to Alma (Donna Reed), when he explains why he won't box any more, is particularly riveting, as are his scenes following the drama with Maggio and Judson. The stand-out, though, has to be his morning wake-up call to the troops that brought tears to my eyes. Sinatra almost steals every scene he's in but the drunken wandering stands out as one of his best moments, adding a little humour to a dire situation. The aerial battle scenes are also excellent and a fitting end to the film where Lancaster finally looks comfortable.

Classic Film Review: Foreign Correspondent (1940)

Foreign Correspondent stars Joel McCrea as John Jones, an American reporter who is sent over to get 'facts' about the impending war in Europe. He is tasked to get an interview with a Dutch diplomat, Van Meer (Albert Bassermann), but is at first unsuccessful and instead becomes friendly with the head of a peace organisation, Stephen Fisher (Herbert Marshall), and his daughter, Carol (Laraine Day). In Amsterdam, trying to obtain another interview with Van Meer, Jones sees the diplomat shot and he gives chase along with Carol and fellow journalist, ffoiliott (George Sanders). What Jones discovers after the chase is that Van Meer is actually alive. But who's behind this conspiracy and can Jones survive long enough to make sense of it?

An early Hitchcock, this is a cracking film. McCrea's quiet yet tough portrayal of Jones makes him a good hero, well coupled with Laraine Day's sassiness as Carol. The last time I saw Day (in Mr Lucky (1943), reviewed here) I enjoyed her as a society girl but not as a love interest. There were some similar problems here though, for the most part, she had more chemistry with McCrea than she had with Cary Grant. Equally, the father-daughter represented between Herbert Marshall and Day is very good. I've seen Marshall in a few things now, most recently Stage Struck (1958, reviewed here) and he's always good value. This role is no exception and I watched all his scenes intently. Also, George Sanders as ffoiliott is outstanding. One revelatory scene sticks in my mind but I can't explain it without ruining a part of the film so I'll just say that he played it perfectly.

Some of the plot twists are predictable to a modern viewer but the last fifteen minutes or so is a spectacular alteration that I certainly didn't see coming. It may seem a little contrived and bizarre but, for me, it rounded off the film nicely and gave the main cast a chance to shine for a final time. Throughout the film is an undercurrent of war propaganda but this only really boils over in the last few minutes as Jones sends a broadcast back home and the American national anthem is played over the credits. Quite clearly a call to arms but it doesn't detract from the excellence of the film as a whole.

Classic Film Review: Tender Comrade (1943)

Tender Comrade stars Ginger Rogers as Jo Jones, a war factory worker whose husband Chris (Robert Ryan) is away serving in WWII. Jo decides to move in with a few other workers to save money until their husbands returns. Barbara (Ruth Hussey) is a little abrasive, seeing other men while her husband is away, while Helen (Patricia Collinge) is the mother of the group with both a husband and a son involved in the fighting. Newly-wed Doris (Kim Hunter) is the baby of the group, having married her new husband an hour before he left for battle. They are joined by housekeeper Manya Lodge (Mady Christians), a German with an American husband who wants to contribute to the war effort any way she can.

This film could've been so much better than it was. The major problem is that story and character are subservient to propaganda all the way through, understandable, I suppose, given the year of release. However, this propaganda sinks the film. It beings with a sentimental ten minute reunion between Jo and Chris before he's shipped off to war. Perhaps this scene would've been more bearable if it hadn't been accompanied by music that told you exactly how you should be feeling. The opening scenes indulged in cliché which probably would've been as familiar to the American public in 1943 as they are to us now. Cutting out Robert Ryan entirely and just having the character of Chris away all the time would've been a better option for the actual meat of the story which should have been solely the women struggling to cope but finding companionship in each other. That would've been a great film, especially with Rogers as the lead.

Other things that irked me about Tender Comrade included the flashbacks. In order to use Robert Ryan, there were lengthy flashback scenes inserted which gave details of their courtship and life before he went to war. Over-sentimentalised, they frequently reminded me that this wasn't a film, more like a propaganda newsreel. In addition, the lengthy scene at the end of the film, while managed well by Rogers, lost all of its emotional meaning by its exposition and the inevitability of the whole thing. Yes, it was making a political point but, somewhere in the midst of that, the writers forgot they should also be trying to entertain their audience.

It wasn't all bad. Once Jo was surrounded by the other women, the character came alive and was enjoyable to watch. The other female members of the cast were the same. There were a couple of excellent scenes, the most notable being when Jo reads Helen a letter from her husband about their son. While this could ostensibly be seen as more propaganda, it came more naturally, stemming from character and the understated emotion of Rogers and Collinge in this scene is worth more than all the tears Rogers sheds in the last five minutes.

If you can look past the propaganda and focus on the scenes between the women, this is a much more enjoyable film. Look out particularly for the scene when Doris's husband comes home and they try to feed him up.

Book Review: Restless by William Boyd

In 1976 single-mother Ruth is startled to find out that her mother was a British spy during WWII. Eva Delectorskaya tells her daughter the truth about her recruitment and involvement with Lucas Romer, her handler, with the intention of drawing her daughter into the one final assignment she needs to complete. The story is a dual time frame one with Eva's story being written as a manuscript.

I tried hard to enjoy this one but I'm afraid, for the most part, I couldn't. What threw me on every single point of view switch was the skewed way the story was told. If you're dealing with a written manuscript given by a mother to her daughter to read, you'd expect it to be in first-person, wouldn't you? No, it's in third so that Ruth's front-story can be in third person when, really, I don't see any real reason it needs to be. This jarred throughout. Equally, Ruth's own story is rather pointless. Her numerous interactions with people, her pupils etc, are redundant and offer nothing to the plot. The only interactions that are useful are those with her supervisor and colleague that end up aiding the 'real' plot. To be honest, this could easily have been a frame story with Eva's story taking up the bulk of the middle section and Ruth's experiences being condensed into the conclusion where the spy strand is finally wrapped up. As a dual time-frame story, it doesn't work and Ruth is a flat, boring character but perhaps this is just in comparison to her mother.

Eva's story, with the exception of the third-person mess, is much more successful. It simmers, exploding at several points, and it was intriguing to witness the spy tricks she put into practice. My complaint about this is that the preparation takes a long time from recruitment to actual danger but, again, this was an overall structural problem. The tension in the last quarter of the spy narrative made up for the glacial speed of the rest. It was only when I hit this point that I stopped thinking about the niggles I had in terms of structure and began enjoying the anxiety of the plot.

I fully concede this was probably a matter of personal preference. I prefer more characterisation - even in thrillers - and once I'd realised how irritating the viewpoint problem was to me it was difficult to shake it off. I do wonder if there's something profound I'm missing, having looked at all the glowing reviews, but I'll just chalk it up to bad experience and say this was a book I didn't get on with.

Book Review: Valentine Grey by Sandi Toksvig

Valentine Grey tells the story of a girl who has been raised in India but returns to England for a visit and is forced to stay when her father dies. She moves in with her father's brother, Charles, and his wife, Caroline, but struggles to adapt. When Reggie, her cousin, comes home she finally has someone on her wavelength but Uncle Charles wants his son to volunteer for the Boer War. Reggie is gay and knows full well he wouldn't survive the battlefield and, besides, he wants to stay with his actor lover, Frank so Valentine secretly goes in his place.

I was surprised how much Toksvig crammed into this book. Not only do we get a proper picture of Valentine's attempts to acclimatise to London life but the war itself is vividly evoked, from the journey over there to the actual battles themselves. Nevertheless, the reader isn't overwhelmed with detail. Toksvig is economical and it seems to be the best approach.

Valentine is an excellent protagonist and certainly one who develops over time. Her reasons for going to war are much more complex than I thought they would be and the relationships with her fellow soldiers are intriguing for the layers to them as they obviously believe she's a man. There are several scenes of pure horror, not just related to battle, and one loathsome character who lingers long after you put the book down. The plot goes to places I didn't anticipate, showing various facets to war and dealing far more in reality than idealism.

Something that also surprised me was that Toksvig kept one foot in London with Reggie and Frank. This created an entirely different strand of the novel that I wasn't expecting and worked as a good contrast at times, though at others being in battle seemed preferable. Reggie's characterisation - and his fears - were both real and imagined and I think I actually preferred him to Valentine most of the time, possibly because Valentine was having to pretend to be someone else throughout.

While I won't spoil it, the novel builds to a good yet melancholy conclusion. The lessons I took from the final pages could easily have been lessons from the last fifteen years in the modern world.

Classic Film Review: The Captive Heart (1946)

The Captive Heart tells the story of a Czech man (Michael Redgrave) who escapes from a concentration camp only to be captured again by the Nazis. Having stolen a British officer's uniform, he takes on the identity of Captain Geoffrey Mitchell. Once a prisoner-of-war, though, he is forced to keep up appearances by writing home to Mitchell's wife, Celia (Rachel Kempson). Through their correspondence, Celia believes she's fallen in love with her estranged husband again and 'Geoffrey' begins to fantasise about a life with her. However, the threat of recognition from a senior German officer is imminent and the rest of the men in camp must risk their lives to get the wanted man to safety.

This is a wide-ranging film, not solely focused on the Mitchell saga. The opening highlights the important characters: Private Evans (Mervyn Johns) and his wife (Rachel Thomas) who were desperate for children but it never happened, Corporal Horsfall (Jack Warner) and his wife (Gladys Henson), blinded Scottish soldier Lieutenant Lennox (Gordon Jackson) and his sweetheart, Elspeth (Margot Fitzsimons) and Lieutenant Stephen Harley (Derek Bond) who married Caroline (Jane Barrett) just before leaving but now suspects infidelity. Joining them are a couple of other officers but these don't have any corresponding home life to speak of.

The purpose of all this is to show both sides of the coin, the camp life and the way people dealt with it at home. However, it does come across as too crowded at times with too many characters to recall and not enough time to do their individual stories justice. It also saps a little from the 'main' story which is ostensibly 'Geoffrey's' wooing of Celia. Their letters, narrated over scenes occasionally, do create a good backdrop to the film but this is much more an ensemble piece than anything else. That's why the more notable reunions at the end are of one solider with the daughter he has never met and the blinded solider's reunion with the woman he wanted to give up as a point of honour. The 'Geoffrey'/Celia ending is a little tame in comparison, not done in person which dilutes the effect somewhat.

The Captive Heart is a powerful film with some solid performances. There are stories of loss, redemption and rejuvenation within in and, although careful to show a spectrum of life, it becomes a film that represents the prisoner-of-war experience.

Classic Film Review: Mr Lucky (1943)

Mr Lucky stars Cary Grant as Joe Adams, a gambler who has appropriated the name of a dead gangster in order to escape the army. He plans to con a war charity by affixing a gambling den to their function and siphoning off the profits. Volunteer and society girl, Dorothy Bryant (Laraine Day), suspects he's trying to con them but they gradually fall for each other. What they don't know is that Joe's former partner Zepp (Paul Stewart) is plotting against them. If Joe does have a change of heart, it won't be simple.

One of my issues with this film stems from the confusion about what it's meant to be. IMDB lists it as a comedy/romance while the television guide had it down as a drama. For me, it was all those things - a comedy in the first half with drama in the second and a romance string stretching through the piece. Cary Grant plays the charmer extremely well but once Joe begins to fall in love with Dorothy the humour necessarily disappears. There is one scene in a Greek church where he learns about the fate of his appropriated name's family at the hands of the Germans that signals a complete shift in tone and sets up the final half an hour.

Grant was good, though struggling with a script that kept information back from the audience in a rather sluggish manner. Laraine Day was excellent as the feisty society girl, less so as the romantic sap who falls for Joe. The supporting cast, with the exception of Gladys Cooper as Dorothy's boss, are mediocre with no depth. There are a few good comic moments, with Joe conning people on behalf of the charity and learning how to knit, but once the serious tone sets in, it becomes more run-of-the-mill.

I did enjoy it, for all the difficulties. It was an odd role to find Grant in and, on occasion, the romance aspect seemed completely implausible. That said, I wanted to see how it all ended, so it can't have been that disastrous a film.

Classic Film Review: Odette (1950)

Based on a true story, Odette is the story of Odette Sanson, a special agent sent undercover into France during WWII. Given the fact that the film is endorsed by the real Odette, it can be seen to be a fairly accurate representation of her time in France. Anna Neagle stars as Odette with Trevor Howard as Peter Churchill and Peter Ustinov as Alex Rabinovich.

I was astonished by Anna Neagle's performance in this film. Having only previously seen her in Irene (1940, reviewed here), I wasn't sure if this type of meaty dramatic role was for her. However, she really did the part justice from the moment Odette says goodbye to her children onwards. There are some exceptional scenes scattered throughout with only the slightest drifts into melodrama. The torture scenes were very well-handled and the snippets of time passing through the war and how Odette's life altered - or didn't - through the later months. One peculiarly affecting scene came towards the end when a Nazi guard is begging Odette to tell her what to do because the Americans are coming.

Trevor Howard is solid, not detracting from Neagle's central performance, but their romance feels shoehorned into it - despite the fact that Odette and Peter married in real life! The other star of this is Peter Ustinov as radio operator Alex. Although his is a relatively minor role, he instils it with much life, especially in the scene where he quietly demands to be sent back to France to help his friends. It's mentioned at the very beginning of the film that he was executed soon afterwards, captured as he parachuted back into France.

This is a bleak film which deserves credit for the unflinching representation of the conditions people such as Odette were kept in. It also looks authentic and the acting is near flawless. There are a few moments of humour peppered within the piece to lighten the tone occasionally but, for the most part, it is a difficult one to watch. What I was left with was an overwhelming sense of awe for what Odette went through during her time as a secret agent. From her portrayal, I think Anna Neagle felt this too. A delicate yet commanding performance from a talented woman.

Classic Film Review: The Adventures of Michael Strogoff (1937)

The Adventures of Michael Strogoff, also known as The Soldier and the Lady and based on a work by Jules Verne, stars Anton Walbrook as the title character, a Russain courier who has been tasked with getting a message to another Russian base about a Tartar uprising. However, he is being followed by the glamorous traitor, Zangarra (Margot Grahame), reporting to her lover and fellow traitor, Ivan Ogareff (Akim Tamiroff). On his travels, Strogoff encounters a young woman, Nadia (Elizabeth Allan), and is also forced to pretend that he doesn't know his own mother (Fay Bainter).

From reading a little about this film, I've learned it was a mish-mash of fresh footage and material from the original French version. While the footage is integrated nicely, that answers some of the questions I had about different approaches to filming throughout, particularly in the group scenes. However, as well integrated as the two versions were, they still couldn't make this film altogether satisfying.

There seemed to be a distinctive lack of emotion from all the main players, with the exception of Fay Bainter. In an attempt to make Strogoff stoic, Walbrook gives him almost no personality bar a few flashes and the 'rescue' of his mother. It makes him a difficult protagonist to like and follow. Far more complex is Zangarra, who is a slightly more successful character.

Special mention must go to the two characters designed to add a little light relief to the film - Eric Blore and Edward Brophy as the British and American newspapermen trying to report on the war zone. While both are stereotypes, at least they have a little presence, rendering their scenes more memorable than the stoic Strogoff or the stereotypically villanous Ogareff.

Television Review: Murder on the Home Front

Murder on the Home Front follows Molly Cooper (Tamzin Merchant) as she joins pathologist Dr Lennox Collins (Patrick Kennedy) in his investigation of a serial killer in war-torn London. The police think they've got their man but Collins is determined to use forensics to prove them wrong but the chase for the killer soon becomes dangerous for Molly. The cast also includes Emerald Fennell as photographer Issy Quennell, James Fleet as Professor Stephens and Richard Bremmer as mortuary assistant Charlie Maxton.

This is based loosely on the memoirs of Molly Lefebure, which explains where the rather odd concept came from. Molly Cooper is headstrong, amusing and a little bit stubborn but there still seems to be something lacking about the character. Stepping into a real person's shoes has that effect on some actors in this kind of role. I liked Molly but I didn't love her. Dr Collins, however, is likely to become a favourite character of mine. His approach to pathology is very modern in a time that wasn't really ready for it and his clashes with Professor Stephens are a good demonstration of that. I also adore Issy, who seems like much more of a real person than Molly does.

The plot of this was reasonably good and I certainly didn't work out the truth before the protagonists. However, my enjoyment was tempered by the unnecessary CGI and gore that looked frankly juvenile. There was no need to have ridiculous bomb effects in the background every time Collins stood in his flat with his curtains open. They looked unreal and added nothing to the overall story. If they'd spent more time making the close-up shots of bomb effects and damage appear realistic, I would've been a lot happier. Instead of focusing on character and plot, they decided to make it 'look spectacular' and, when you try that hard, you invariably fail. I personally got fair more pleasure from Charlie's occasional comments than the London aerial views that were supposed to make me gape. Equally, the excessive comic-book type gore that was used in certain scenes was irritating. I got the feeling that the series didn't quite know what it wanted to be and who its audience was.

All that said, I think this series has potential. The central characters have a good rapport and the concept is a good one. If they cut out the unnecessary CGI and focus on characters and plot then they could have a hit on their hands. I will certainly watch if they make more episodes.

Television Review: The Village

The Village aims to tell the story of a single village throughout the twentieth century. This first series covers on the years 1914-1920 and we focus on the Middleton family - John (John Simm), Grace (Maxine Peake) and their sons, Joe (Nico Mirallegro) and Bert (Bill Jones). Other villagers of importance include the rich Allingham family, vicar's daughter Martha Lane (Charlie Murphy) and schoolteacher Gerard Eyre (Matt Stokoe).

One of main criticisms of this programme is that it is unfailingly grim. In the course of six episodes we had the outbreak of war, shell-shock, alleged desertion, rape by a doctor, suicide, mutilated cows, sick babies, dead children and Spanish flu. Those are only the ones I can remember off the top of my head. However, despite the dreariness, it's difficult to stop watching because it's so brilliantly acted. Maxine Peake has already established herself as one of Britain's most versatile actresses and her performance as Grace merely reiterates that. John Simm is excellent as John, an alcoholic who finds God but is still incredibly difficult to like. Bill Jones deserves praise as young Bert while Nico Mirallegro was heartbreaking in some of his final scenes as Joe. Equally the rest of the cast worked well, especially Juliet Stevenson as Clem Allingham and Augustus Prew as George Allingham.

One aspect of the series irritated me, however. The first five episodes take place over the course of two years but between the fifth and the sixth episode there is a four year jump. This was probably for continuity reasons (they wanted to introduce the next incarnation of Bert before the second series) but it jarred incredibly for me. All the emotion at the end of episode five was left unresolved and, frankly, I think we needed an episode just afterwards to deal with some of that. The cast were certainly up to it so why not? My guess is that apart from the Bert issue they wanted to resolve the war in the first series. Nevertheless, I did get the sensation while watching the sixth episode that I was viewing the first episode of the second series - the viewer was trying to catch-up far too much and scenes which would have been interesting to see (George's successful wooing of Martha, for instance) were ignored. For me, the series lost a little emotional resonance due to this choice.

Will I watch series two? Yes, because I'm invested in a few characters and occasionally there is a scene of absolute brilliance. However, I know several people who have had enough of the bleak atmosphere. I can't say I blame them but this is probably more historically accurate than most programmes set in this era. Finally, it's worth noting that the use of the Peak District scenery is excellent and the score for the series is beautiful. From the opening strains over the first episode I knew I'd carry on watching for the music alone.

Classic Film Review: The First of the Few (1942)

Also known as Spitfire, The First of the Few tells the story of R.J. Mitchell, the engineer best known for his development of the famous plane. It is half-fact and half-fiction, with some characters being amalgamated into one and some personal details changed. Released at the height of the war and approved by Winston Churchill, it was obviously a prime piece of British propaganda - but that doesn't stop it being a powerful film.

Leslie Howard, in his final film role, portrays R.J. Mitchell as a quintessentially British engineer, congenial but fiercely intelligent. He is joined by his friend and test-pilot Geoffrey Crisp (David Niven), who is a fictional character created from several real-life people. The film covers Mitchell's initial attempts to get a new competition plane off the ground then, after an encounter with Nazis in Germany, he devotes his life to creating a new type of war plane than will be effective enough to beat them in battle. The frame story is told by Crisp, meaning that an air battle can be shown at the end of the film - the natural result of Mitchell's work.

Because the story was so fresh, I'd imagine it was difficult for producers to delve completely into Mitchell's life. More to the point, they wouldn't have wanted to. That leaves the story a little light on motive and I think (I don't know) that the Germany scenes were included or enhanced to reflect this. There is more leeway with Crisp, who is a combination of people, and his frequent womanising provides some of the humour in what is essentially a dramatic film. His interactions with Mitchell's secretary, Miss Harper (Anne Firth), are very amusing. Rounding out the main cast as Diana Mitchell is Rosamund John and she fulfils the role of supportive wife very well.

The film jumps through time, as most biopics do, but it works as well as any of them. As a piece of wartime propaganda it is probably one of the best; as a dramatic film seen by a modern viewer it works almost as well. Niven is superb and this, as Howard's swansong, is a fitting remembrance.

Classic Film Review: The House on 92nd Street (1945)

The House on 92nd Street is based on a true story of a Nazi spy ring smashed by the FBI in the early 1940s. How loosely based the story is, I'm not sure, but the film presents itself as fact in an almost-documentary style. Adding to this illusion, many of the smaller roles were played by real-life FBI operatives. The case is this: graduate Bill Dietrich (William Eythe) is recruited by the Nazis but instead becomes a double agent for the FBI. He is assigned to be the go-between for Hamburg and a spy ring stealing secrets of a process involved in the atomic bomb. However, his identity is always under question and his attempts to locate the mysterious 'Mr Christopher' are crucial to his survival. Amongst the cast are Lloyd Nolan as Agent George Briggs, Signe Hasso as Elsa Gebhardt and Gene Lockhart as Charles Roper.

The voice-over narration takes a while to set up the story. For the first fifteen minutes the scene is set and, while it's necessary, it does feel too long. In addition, the adoration of the FBI throughout the film is fitting for the era but difficult to stomach as a modern viewer, although it is interesting to see the processes involved in 1940s detection. Once Dietrich is back in the US and working as a duplicitous agent, the pace picks up somewhat. His adventures are interesting but none of the characters - because they're based on real-life individuals - are really three-dimensional. Dietrich's motivations are never made clear, nor are the Nazi spys depicted as anything more than Nazi spies.

There are some moments of high tension, and the central mystery of 'Mr Christopher' is actually intriguing, but while this film is interesting on first viewing because of the propaganda, FBI representation and real-life subject matter, I don't think it would hold interest on a second viewing. It is a fascinating snapshot of American intelligence, though, and for that reason alone it is worth a try.

Classic Film Review: Once Upon a Honeymoon (1942)

Once Upon a Honeymoon stars Ginger Rogers as an American ex-burlesque dancer and social climber who is engaged to be married to Baron Von Luber (Walter Slezak) in Vienna. She currently goes by the name of Katherine Butt-Smith, though her real name is Kathie O'Hara. Fellow American Patrick O'Toole is a journalist interested in the baron's political ties to Hitler. He follows the couple, who marry shortly after leaving Vienna, across Europe and, finally, Kathie realises that her husband is a close ally of the Nazis and seeks refuge with O'Toole. They fake her death but continue to follow him, ending up in Paris where an undercover American spy has a task for Kathie that neither she nor O'Toole is going to like.

This is an odd film, blending tragedy with comedy and not always getting it right. The main plot of a love triangle often feels at odds with the serious nature of the war going on around them. Two really dark moments stick out in my mind: the moment when Kathie gives her passport to her Jewish maid to allow her to flee the country with her two children and puts them on the back of a van to travel to safety then when she and O'Toole are taken by the Nazis and read a notice on a door about forced sterilisation procedures. Moments like this are hard-hitting but do feel out of place in a film that begins with Cary Grant playing with a tape measure as he impersonates Kathie's dress-fitter.

The relationship between Kathie and O'Toole is well-developed enough not to feel rushed and Rogers and Grant play it well. I was less certain about Baron Von Luber's relationship with Kathie - while it was evident why she wanted to marry him, he was underdeveloped in that respect. Not to say that Slezak's performance as the duplicitous baron isn't excellent, it's just that the character isn't as developed as I would've liked. Again, this probably comes from the film being a cross between a comedy and a drama, where the requirements for the third character in a love triangle are somewhat different.

I really enjoyed this one, despite the irregularities in genre and pace. It does descend into propaganda at times but Rogers treats this lightly enough for it not to be too blatant. Her final scenes with Grant on the ship bring the film back to comedy when something incredibly dark has just happened - again, I'm not sure about the tone but I can't fault Rogers and Grant for playing the scene as it was written.

Classic Film Review: For Whom the Bell Tolls (1943)

Based on Ernest Hemingway's novel, For Whom the Bell Tolls tells the story of American Robert Jordan (Gary Cooper) who has joined the side of the Republicans in the Spanish Civil War and has been tasked to blow up a bridge at a crucial moment in time. He is sent into the mountains to hide in a cave with some allies until the correct moment. These allies are led by Pablo (Akim Tamiroff), a self-serving man whose interest in blowing the bridge for the Republicans is only piqued by the idea of it having some benefit to himself. However, the real leader in this place is Pilar (Katina Paxinou), a formidable woman who is far more intelligent and brave than Pablo. Also in the cave is Maria (Ingrid Bergman), taken in by Pilar after she was rescued from a train. Jordan is instantly taken by the short-haired Maria but tries to keep his mind on the task ahead as obstacles are thrown in his way.

While Cooper and Bergman are excellent in their roles, I was captivated by Katina Paxinou as Pilar. From her first scenes she is intriguing and fascinating to watch, stealing the limelight from the two leads. It's no wonder that she won the film's only Oscar for her role, as well as scooping the Golden Globe for best supporting actress. She is phenomenal and, actually, the character I cared most about as the film progressed. Not to say that Jordan and Maria are weak characters. Jordan is shadowy, almost unfathomable, and Maria's past has shaped her, both physically and mentally. There are some excellent moments between them, although I wasn't as taken with their final scene as I perhaps should have been.

This film is eventful, yes, but it trades as much on the potential duplicity of Pablo as it does the objective of blowing up the bridge. This undercurrent, along with Pilar's attitude, is the main strength of the film for me. While there are a few dramatic scenes - the gunfight on the hill, the bridge attempt - most of the tension comes within the cave and the difficult relationships enclosed within it.

Jordan as a hero is credible and Cooper plays his part perfectly. Equally, Bergman's performance is extremely good, especially when she relates what happened to her when her town was captured. Ultimately, Cooper, Bergman and the rest of the cast are thoroughly believable. I never get the sense of acting from any of them and that's due to a combination of an excellent script, empathetic direction and the skill of the actors themselves. It leaves you thinking about war, yes, but primarily about human beings - a profound topic for any film to tackle.

Classic Film Review: The Ghosts of Berkeley Square (1947)

The Ghosts of Berkeley Square is a rather odd little film about, you guessed it, two ghosts in the London square. Starring Robert Morley as General "Jumbo" Burlap and Felix Aylmer as Colonel "Bulldog" Kelsoe, it tells the story of two men who died in 1708 after a stunt gone wrong and cannot leave their house in Berkeley Square until reigning royalty visits. Through the years they have many close shaves but it's the unexpected that always wins the day.

With a supporting cast including Marie Lohr (who I liked in Went the Day Well? (1942), review here),Yvonne Arnaud and Wilfrid Hyde-White, this film manages to be eccentric and humorous utilising the fairly limited special effects of the time. However, that said, it is a little choppy, as over 200 years pass before the soldiers are finally allowed to leave the house. As a consequence, characters come and go quite rapidly and the fun mostly stems from wondering how they'll accidentally sabotage their latest efforts to be set free. My favourite of these was the Great Exhibition period where they become a spectacle so convincing that a scientific expert believes in them enough to recommend that Prince Albert does not visit the show - for fear of looking like a fool to his own society.

The Ghosts of Berkeley Square takes a liberal approach to haunting. The soldiers can materialise, blend into their surroundings, get into trouble with humans and make mischief throughout. Plus, a great number of the people they come into contact with are surprisingly unperturbed at the idea of ghosts. The film necessarily relies on the charisma and interplay between the two ghosts themselves and Morley and Aylmer bounce off each other fairly neatly throughout, even during the scene where it's revealed they haven't spoken for over half a century because of an argument. 

This isn't a spectacular film but it's amusing and very of its time with some flippant racist comments which make make the contemporary viewer cringe. Still worth a watch if it's on though. 

Classic Film Review: Murphy's War (1971)

Starring Peter O'Toole as the title character, Murphy's War tells the story of a WWII sailor whose ship is torpedoed by a German submarine in the dying days of the war. He sets out on a mission to destroy the submarine, angering his doctor on the island he's washed up on, Dr Hayden (Sian Phillips). He engages the help of Louis Brezan (Philippe Noiret) and his boat but his plans have disastrous consequences.

I found Murphy a difficult character to like. Although his Irish charm was probably supposed to help his appeal, I couldn't appreciate a character whose motivations were so opaque. Although he seeks revenge on the U-Boat, the only real reason given is because it sank his ship. I didn't get the impression that he had good relationships with his colleagues or that he felt national pride - it was just about getting his own back. Consequently, given the results of his first attempt on the U-Boat, I would've expected him to give up in shame for what he'd brought to the island but there is no hint of this. All in all, I found him a difficult character to care about. Much more appealing was the friendly Louis, particularly at the moment the worm turns and leaves Murphy to it.

Another problem I had with this film were the lengthy sequences. Murphy has managed to fix the ship's plane but since he isn't really a pilot he has difficulty getting it off the water. What follows is a protracted scene, first of him attempting to getting it in the air and then of his flying aimlessly around the island - wasting fuel, I might add. Although it was supposed to be a spectacular 'will-he-won't-he' scene, I was bored. The same with the scene where he goes after the U-Boat in the plane: it just felt as though I was being told to watch something that I'd already seen - a man flying a plane with the same gormless expression on his face.

To be fair on this, there was a nice exploration of the German submarine attitudes after the war has ended but Murphy's own personal vendetta continues with, as I've said, no tangible reason for it. The ending is downbeat and about the only aspect of the film I appreciated.

Classic Film Review: Went The Day Well? (1942)

An Ealing Studios masterpiece, Went The Day Well? tells the story of a sleepy village which finds itself the prisoner of German soldiers in preparation for a big invasion. At first the villagers are fooled into thinking it's a British regiment billeted in their village but when the truth is uncovered it sparks a violent change in the German plans. Complicating matters is the fact that the local leader of the Home Guard Oliver Wilsford (Leslie Banks) is a German spy, putting the villagers on the back foot as he thwarts their attempts to seek help.

This is a gripping film, mainly because it takes the time to set the villagers up properly, giving the audience reason to care about them (aside from the obvious fact that they're British and fighting with the Germans). A few of the more significant characters are the post mistress Mrs Collins (Muriel George), sailor on leave Tom Sturry (Frank Lawton) and mother/daughter of the manor house, Nora (Valerie Taylor) and Mrs Fraser (Marie Lohr). Engagement with these characters help add tension to the film, especially when Nora is the first one to realise that the soldiers are German and she and her mother are the ones who uncover the treachery of Oliver Wilsford. Another main player is George (Harry Fowler) a boy who risks his life to get the message out.

In an era of propaganda the Germans are, of course, portrayed as brutes willing to murder a priest in cold blood but there are two good performances from Basil Sydney as Major Ortler and David Farrar as Lieutenant Jung. There are also many memorable incidents within the film, notably Mrs Phillips's act of resistance, Nora's final confrontation with Wilsford and Mrs Fraser's act of heroism when faced with a grenade.

I do, however, have a few criticisms. The framing technique, using the church warden at the beginning and end of the film to say that Germans are buried in the village, rather dilutes the effect of what could've been a very effective revelation during the story itself. I'd imagine this had propaganda considerations but it is a shame that more tension wasn't drawn from the aspect. Equally, I felt slightly cheated at the end with the speed in which the rescue was dispatched before the church warden finishes his tale. I would rather have had a few minutes of calm for the villagers to reunite and come to terms with their losses. As it is, Nora's big moment is not even mentioned by other characters and this feels like a rather large omission: instead of the villagers having a moment to comprehend the betrayal of one of their own, it's brushed over to be dealt with off-screen. While I understand that the producers wanted to finish on a note of triumph, it seems a little harsh to the viewers who have spent time hoping these characters would survive.

Nevertheless, this is an excellent film. Watch out for an appearance by a young Thora Hird armed with a gun!

Classic Film Review: Kiss Them For Me (1957)

Kiss Them For Me is the tale of three decorated Navy pilots who wangle some leave in San Francisco and try to make it last as long as possible by getting some other 'war work'. Crewson (Cary Grant), McCann (Ray Walston) and Mississip (Larry Blyden) are very different men but all are likeable in their own way. They come across various characters including Alice Kratzner (Jayne Mansfield) who has vowed to kiss every member of the forces she sees and Gwinneth Livingston (Suzy Parker), an engaged woman who Crewson likes the moment he sees.

Perhaps the main problem with this film is that it can't decide what it's supposed to be. On the one hand, it's a light comedy with the boys trying to avoid going back to war but, on the other, there are some deeper moments that depict the realities of war. Case in point: while out with Gwinneth, Crewson encounters an old friend he knew who was invalided out. The man's so thin and decrepit that Crewson doesn't recognise him and only has weeks to live. This scene doesn't sit well with the amusing ones that precede it - and it's not an isolated occurrence.

I have to say, Jayne Mansfield's character got a tad grating at times, though she was better when paired with Walston's married McCann, who is hoping to win an election and is in constant contact with his wife, than with Grant's Crewson. Equally, although Suzy Parker began the film in good form, she didn't work as the woman who speedily fell in love. The aloof persona she adopted so well in the early scenes (and the reason I warmed to her) disintegrates as she's forced to indulge in a typical Hollywood romance. My favourite performance ended up coming from Ray Walston (whose next film would be the excellent South Pacific) whose likeability shone through a difficult script.

This is not an excellent film, though I suspect it suffered from being badly adapted. However, there are several amusing moments (if you want to watch it on that level) and several more serious ones (if you want to watch it on another). Some of the dialogue feels preachy and some of it gets too slangy than necessary but, overall, a decent film to waste some time with.