A Novelist’s Success and Alfred Hitchcock’s Disappointment

Maureen O’Hara is terrified of Charles Laughton’s eyebrows. Image: IMDb

Have you ever worked on a project that didn’t Pan Out?

Perhaps there were politics or other constraints that prevented you from doing what might have been Best for the project.

Well, nobody has a flawless record. Look at Alfred Hitchcock. His last pre-WWII, Made-In-England film, Jamaica Inn (1939), would prove to be one of his career disappointments. “Although it became a box-office hit, I’m still unhappy over it,” he said in a 1962 interview.¹

The film is, in our opinion, a bit of a Mess. It’s patchy and feels too long, even at 98 minutes.

Also: You have to squint hard to see Hitchcock’s fingerprints. He doesn’t even make his signature cameo appearance.

“By the time filming began,” writes Hitchcock biographer Patrick McGilligan, “Hitchcock felt he was in the clutches of a two-headed monster. It would be too strong to say he ceased to care, but he knew a futile struggle when he saw one, and he stepped back and let [producer] Erich Pommer and [star] Charles Laughton dominate.”²

It helps to not have High Expectations of this film going in. Yet, it’s still a testament to the power of a gripping story – in this case, the 1936 novel by Daphne du Maurier.

Don’t mess with the boss. Image: IMDb

Jamaica Inn is ghastly business. When a young woman (Maureen O’Hara) travels to Cornwall to live with her aunt, she discovers her uncle is the 1820’s version of a mobster.

Her uncle (Leslie Banks) and aunt (Marie Ney) operate an inn with shady characters Lurking About – specifically, a gang who cause shipwrecks for pillaging purposes. It’s organized crime, really, because Loot is counted and catalogued once it’s brought ashore. This is to ensure the thieves aren’t, you know, stealing.

If a thief is suspected of such, he is immediately strung up, and Let that be a Lesson to the Rest Of You.

Early in the film, we find Charles Laughton’s character to be suspect. He drops names, spends lavishly, and oozes slimy charm. Laughton, who, in this role, sports the strangest eyebrows on film, Chews The Scenery as best he can, and it is fabulous.

There is dark humour here and a few Hitchcockian trademarks, such as the suspicious woman (O’Hara) who ain’t easily bullied. In one scene, she hides in a cave with a fugitive thief (Robert Newton), and she has plenty o’ sass for any situation, fraught with Peril or no.

Newton: Trust me to land myself with a woman. On the other hand, of course, you did save my life.
O’Hara: I hope you make better use of it in the future.
Newton: That’s a tall order for a disparate character like me.
O’Hara: No doubt.

See that nerve? She doesn’t Skip A Beat.

A scene like that makes us a little melancholy, because it suggests this film could have been one of Hitchcock’s greats.

A young and saucy Daphne du Maurier. Image: Writers Write

Novelist Daphne du Maurier was 29 years old when she wrote Jamaica Inn, inspired, apparently, by a vacation at the actual inn. When the novel was released, she was married with a young child; however, she was not someone who squeezed in writing between jobs to feed her family. She came from Money.

According to her official website, “For a long time Daphne du Maurier was described as a romantic novelist. This is completely misleading as she wrote dark, often gothic and edgy novels and short stories, with unexpected twists or suspenseful endings.”³

She had been labelled reclusive, but there are many stories of her generosity. For example, British author Julie Myerson describes her own experience:

Back in 1974, I wrote Daphne a fan letter… Amazingly, she replied. Her address was printed on the reverse of the envelope, so how could I not write straight back? We corresponded for a couple of years, and that changed my life, making a Nottingham schoolgirl’s idea of growing up to be an author seem an actual possibility, rather than just a dream.4

Jamaica Inn has been adapted for stage, radio, and television, proving du Maurier’s story holds meaning for any generation – something Alfred Hitchcock undoubtedly knew.

Notes

Jamaica Inn: starring Charles Laughton, Leslie Banks, Maureen O’Hara. Directed by Alfred Hitchcock. Written by Sidney Gilliat and Joan Harrison. Mayflower Pictures Corporation, 1939, B&W, 98 mins.

Advertisements

39 comments

  1. Hitchcock made 2 war propaganda shorts in England in 1944. And returned to England in early 1970’s to make FRENZY.On dvd there is an extra about his return.

    Liked by 2 people

  2. I completely agree with your assessment that it’s a mess! I loved the book and, unfortunately, I thought this film did it no credit whatsoever. Great review and I loved the bit of du Maurier backstory.

    Liked by 1 person

  3. Wow I haven’t seen this film, despite taking a Hitchcock class in college! Sounds like a bit of a mess indeed. I do really love the story about a fan letter turning into a pen pal for a few years. What a sweet story! 🙂

    Liked by 1 person

  4. I’ve never seen this one, either, even though I’m also a huge Hitchcock fan. Too bad it’s a mess. I guess there was a reason Hitch didn’t make a cameo. 🙂

    That story about the author is awesome! 🙂

    Liked by 1 person

  5. I so enjoyed reading this. It’s such a pity as you say that this was such a missed opportunity. I have heard numerous stories about Laughton’s impossible demands during the making of this film and how Hitchcock couldn’t way for it to be over. I love the original novel, and so I hold out hope that a faithful adaptation will eventually be made. Thanks so much for contributing to my Blogathon!

    Liked by 1 person

  6. I love the book, so I was disappointed when I heard the movie was bad. But when I watched it–knowing that–I was still entertained by its campy quality. Laughton is so entertainingly weird in it, and O’Hara a good choice for Mary. It’s just not Du Maurier’s story. It reminds me of a bit of Beat the Devil, as my biggest reaction (there and here) was What IS this??

    Liked by 1 person

  7. I agree that it’s definitely one of Hitchcock’s lesser films. Robert Newton is never subtle, so his acting style seems contrary to the Hitchcock norm.

    Liked by 1 person

  8. I haven’t watched this film yet – one of the few Hitchcocks I missed – but of course I plan to. I just know that I shouldn’t have very high expectations. Also, nice info on Daphne’s kindness.
    Kisses!

    Liked by 1 person

  9. Frenzy is another of Hitchcock’s made in England films. It’s a powerful film, which can be hard to watch because of its depiction of violence toward women, but it’s very well made and return to form for the suspense thriller he made famous decades before this came out.

    Liked by 1 person

Start Singin', Mac!

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.