Jamaica Inn (C+ or 2/4 stars)
1939's 'Jamaica Inn' was Alfred Hitchcock's last film in England before bursting into Hollywood's studio system in the 1940s. While this film isn't some disaster and, while it has its strengths, it's too bad that he didn't leave England on a high note. Set along the Cornwall coast around 1800, 'Jamaica Inn' (loosely based on a Daphne Du Maurier costume adventure tale), the plot concerns a group of ruthless smugglers, led by 1/2-mad squire/justice of the peace Sir Humphrey Pengallon (ever-portly Charles Laughton). Pengallan & his ragtag crew prey on ships by blacking out warning signals. When said ships crash to their doom on the rocks, the nefarious group of cutthroats loots the remains & then kills the unknowing sailors! Into the fray enters Mary Yelland (Maureen O'Hara, her 1st major motion picture), a beautiful orphan who treks to visit her uncle Joss Merlyn (Leslie Banks) at a creepy hotel called - what else? - The Jamaica Inn, home of the gang of smugglers.
When a scared Mary is stranded on the road to the inn after the coachman refuses to stop by the inn, she is taken there by Pengallan. Innocent Mary doesn't realize that the Inn is the current headquarters of the killers, nor does she realize that Uncle Joss is one of them. Meanwhile, Lloyd's of London sends one of their best, Jem Trahearne (Robert Newton), to investigate the many recurring shipwrecks. Trahearne checks-in to the Jamaica Inn undercover and, when the evil smugglers discover who he is, they capture & attempt to kill him. But feisty Mary comes to his aid. Thrown together into dire circumstances, the 2 fall for each other. All the while, all the shenanigans occurring at the Jamaica Inn seem to be driving Pengallon more insane than he already is. Drama ensues.
'Jamaica Inn' was a weird one for me. I didn't hate it. I didn't love it. The proceedings have an unpleasantly bizarre feel to them. There's an unevenness (and even an erratic nature) to the unwieldy script. Parts of the film draggggg. I could go on. And yet, I can't completely damn the movie because its individual components slightly outweigh the not-so-hot feel I have for it, overall. Charles Laughton is as colorful in this villain role as ever -- he just plays sinister so well. Obsessive, greedy, cheerfully ruthless ... these are just a handful of terms I throw out to describe him, here. Laughton is never less than compelling and, his final moments onscreen are as bonkers as you'd hope for. Gorgeous redhead Maureen O'Hara was given the lead role here after Laughton was impressed with her eyes during a screen test. He liked her so much that he made sure she co-star in their next venture, The Hunchback of Notre Dame; a much superior piece of work (also from '39).
There's nothing blatantly wrong with Hitchcock's direction, here -- I simply don't think this was his best work. The black-&-white cinematography is nice to look at {including a few moments of visual flare}. The 1800s seacoast/moor sets are rich with atmosphere {even if it's clear that we're looking AT sets, and not real locales}. The costumes are impressive; ditto the music. It's all fine. But again, there's little to take away from this aside from Laughton's BIG acting & the fact that this was O'Hara's 1st film. 'Jamaica Inn' is a lurid, violent, implausible melodrama that, despite its strengths, makes me pause in giving it a recommendation. This was the 1st of 3 Daphne Du Maurier adaptations that Hitchcock directed (The other 2 being Rebecca (1940) & The Birds, in 1963). This film is the least impressive of the 3.
When a scared Mary is stranded on the road to the inn after the coachman refuses to stop by the inn, she is taken there by Pengallan. Innocent Mary doesn't realize that the Inn is the current headquarters of the killers, nor does she realize that Uncle Joss is one of them. Meanwhile, Lloyd's of London sends one of their best, Jem Trahearne (Robert Newton), to investigate the many recurring shipwrecks. Trahearne checks-in to the Jamaica Inn undercover and, when the evil smugglers discover who he is, they capture & attempt to kill him. But feisty Mary comes to his aid. Thrown together into dire circumstances, the 2 fall for each other. All the while, all the shenanigans occurring at the Jamaica Inn seem to be driving Pengallon more insane than he already is. Drama ensues.
'Jamaica Inn' was a weird one for me. I didn't hate it. I didn't love it. The proceedings have an unpleasantly bizarre feel to them. There's an unevenness (and even an erratic nature) to the unwieldy script. Parts of the film draggggg. I could go on. And yet, I can't completely damn the movie because its individual components slightly outweigh the not-so-hot feel I have for it, overall. Charles Laughton is as colorful in this villain role as ever -- he just plays sinister so well. Obsessive, greedy, cheerfully ruthless ... these are just a handful of terms I throw out to describe him, here. Laughton is never less than compelling and, his final moments onscreen are as bonkers as you'd hope for. Gorgeous redhead Maureen O'Hara was given the lead role here after Laughton was impressed with her eyes during a screen test. He liked her so much that he made sure she co-star in their next venture, The Hunchback of Notre Dame; a much superior piece of work (also from '39).
There's nothing blatantly wrong with Hitchcock's direction, here -- I simply don't think this was his best work. The black-&-white cinematography is nice to look at {including a few moments of visual flare}. The 1800s seacoast/moor sets are rich with atmosphere {even if it's clear that we're looking AT sets, and not real locales}. The costumes are impressive; ditto the music. It's all fine. But again, there's little to take away from this aside from Laughton's BIG acting & the fact that this was O'Hara's 1st film. 'Jamaica Inn' is a lurid, violent, implausible melodrama that, despite its strengths, makes me pause in giving it a recommendation. This was the 1st of 3 Daphne Du Maurier adaptations that Hitchcock directed (The other 2 being Rebecca (1940) & The Birds, in 1963). This film is the least impressive of the 3.