<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: The 39 Steps</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.thefifiorganization.net/janus/the-39-steps/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.thefifiorganization.net/janus/the-39-steps/</link>
	<description></description>
	<lastBuildDate>Sat, 14 Aug 2010 13:34:24 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.0.1</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: Matt</title>
		<link>http://www.thefifiorganization.net/janus/the-39-steps/comment-page-1/#comment-773</link>
		<dc:creator>Matt</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 19 Oct 2009 17:06:05 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.thefifiorganization.net/?p=1789#comment-773</guid>
		<description>I know what the 39 steps are.  I&#039;ve seen the remake of the &quot;39 Steps&quot; from the mid 70&#039;s or something.  So you don&#039;t need to be telling me what the big secret is...oh wait...
 
So, yeah, this is Hitchcock again and we&#039;re into the Hitchcock milieu (sic?).  Innocent man on the run, hot blond with him, moments of intrigue, moments of suspense, dead bodies, etc.  What&#039;s not to like?
 
Well...
 
Here&#039;s the story:  Robert Donat is a Canadian on vacation in London.  How do we know he&#039;s Canadian?  It&#039;s because he asks this &quot;memory man&quot; questions about Canada.  (note, he doesn&#039;t say &quot;aboot&quot; instead of &quot;about&quot; and he doesn&#039;t follow everything with &quot;eh&quot;)  When some bullets fly during the performance he retreats with a woman who admits she shot the bullets.  Hiding out in his room she comes up with some weird cock-and-bull story about a guy with half-a-pinky and you&#039;ve got to go to Scotland and figure out what is going on and spys are afoot!
 
When she ends up in his room with a knife in her back, he does what any sane person will do and that is...well...believe whole-heartedly in what she says and try to come up with what is going on.  Of course he doesn&#039;t want to be pinned to her murder so what else to do?????
 
This is not the only time that someone in this film doesn&#039;t make good decisions...but I digress.  On a train to Scotland we encounter rule #75 of film-making.  That&#039;s the rule that says:  &quot;If a person is on the run for murder the murder headline is on the front of the paper, above the fold, in the center with a photo of the criminal taken what is seemingly the day before.&quot;  Golly!  He&#039;s bound to be caught!
 
So he kisses a girl (the blond) and pretends he&#039;s her husband (or something) - but she rats him out and  he has to jump off the train to escape.  Good ol&#039; Canadian!
 
On the run he ends up at a farm house to stay the night.  For some reason (only really to move the story forward) the lady of the house takes a liking to our &quot;criminal&quot; and helps him escape.
 
When Robert shows up where he thinks he&#039;s safe he&#039;s confronted my Mr. Short Pinky.  (Now, remember folks, I&#039;ve seen &quot;39 Steps&quot; remake so I know what the 39 steps are.)  Our  hero gets shot but, lucky him, the coat he was given by the smitten housewife  had a hymnal in the pocket which saved his life (find religious significance if you will).  But all is OKAY because he&#039;s gone to the sheriff who acknowledges that he&#039;s surely innocent only to, moments later, give him up to the villain.  On the run you go!
 
He&#039;s soon discovered in the best scene in the film when he has to pretend he&#039;s someone he&#039;s not and do a rousing political speech.  Seems the bad guys have the blond, too, and within a few moments they&#039;re handcuffed together and escaping.  But she thinks he&#039;s a murderer and he uses her fear (and a cigar pipe in the pocket trick) to his advantage.
 
After an uncomfortable night in a hotel she wiggles free of the handcuffs and goes to escape only to hear some cryptic talking of the two henchmen downstairs.  She assumes that Robert is telling the truth and time to high-tail it back to London and figure out the 39 steps (which, of course, I already know - &#039;cause I&#039;ve seen the remake).

Once they arrive back in London they go to the Palladium and wouldn&#039;t you know it...but the &quot;memory man&quot; is there, along with half-pinky guy and before you can say &quot;tea and crumpets&quot; they&#039;ve figured out the deal and what the 39 steps are...and the film is over.
 
But wait?  What about the remake?  I KNOW where the 39 steps are!  Uh...uh...?  Hello?
 
WHAT I LIKED ABOUT THE FILM:
 
Robert Donat is good as is everyone in the film.  The acting is fine and the Hitchcock set pieces are well done.  There are a couple good moments.
 
WHAT I DISLIKED ABOUT THE FILM:
 
Sadly...I never really connected with Donat (though he&#039;s good).  In a lot of ways I didn&#039;t care.  The fact that people do things with very little question or thought seemed illogical and disingenuous to me to the point that I really didn&#039;t &quot;buy&quot; the goods being sold to me.
 
The other thing is that Hitchcock in this film uses the same scenarios as in other films (such as &quot;The Man Who Knew Too Much&quot;) so those moments seemed derivative to me (though these came first).
 
The film also did not have the same amount of humor as the other Hitchcock film we&#039;ve seen in this collection.
 
BOTTOM LINE:
 
Not that good.  Not that bad.  Still, a couple moments - but not enough to add up to a whole.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I know what the 39 steps are.  I&#8217;ve seen the remake of the &#8220;39 Steps&#8221; from the mid 70&#8242;s or something.  So you don&#8217;t need to be telling me what the big secret is&#8230;oh wait&#8230;</p>
<p>So, yeah, this is Hitchcock again and we&#8217;re into the Hitchcock milieu (sic?).  Innocent man on the run, hot blond with him, moments of intrigue, moments of suspense, dead bodies, etc.  What&#8217;s not to like?</p>
<p>Well&#8230;</p>
<p>Here&#8217;s the story:  Robert Donat is a Canadian on vacation in London.  How do we know he&#8217;s Canadian?  It&#8217;s because he asks this &#8220;memory man&#8221; questions about Canada.  (note, he doesn&#8217;t say &#8220;aboot&#8221; instead of &#8220;about&#8221; and he doesn&#8217;t follow everything with &#8220;eh&#8221;)  When some bullets fly during the performance he retreats with a woman who admits she shot the bullets.  Hiding out in his room she comes up with some weird cock-and-bull story about a guy with half-a-pinky and you&#8217;ve got to go to Scotland and figure out what is going on and spys are afoot!</p>
<p>When she ends up in his room with a knife in her back, he does what any sane person will do and that is&#8230;well&#8230;believe whole-heartedly in what she says and try to come up with what is going on.  Of course he doesn&#8217;t want to be pinned to her murder so what else to do?????</p>
<p>This is not the only time that someone in this film doesn&#8217;t make good decisions&#8230;but I digress.  On a train to Scotland we encounter rule #75 of film-making.  That&#8217;s the rule that says:  &#8220;If a person is on the run for murder the murder headline is on the front of the paper, above the fold, in the center with a photo of the criminal taken what is seemingly the day before.&#8221;  Golly!  He&#8217;s bound to be caught!</p>
<p>So he kisses a girl (the blond) and pretends he&#8217;s her husband (or something) &#8211; but she rats him out and  he has to jump off the train to escape.  Good ol&#8217; Canadian!</p>
<p>On the run he ends up at a farm house to stay the night.  For some reason (only really to move the story forward) the lady of the house takes a liking to our &#8220;criminal&#8221; and helps him escape.</p>
<p>When Robert shows up where he thinks he&#8217;s safe he&#8217;s confronted my Mr. Short Pinky.  (Now, remember folks, I&#8217;ve seen &#8220;39 Steps&#8221; remake so I know what the 39 steps are.)  Our  hero gets shot but, lucky him, the coat he was given by the smitten housewife  had a hymnal in the pocket which saved his life (find religious significance if you will).  But all is OKAY because he&#8217;s gone to the sheriff who acknowledges that he&#8217;s surely innocent only to, moments later, give him up to the villain.  On the run you go!</p>
<p>He&#8217;s soon discovered in the best scene in the film when he has to pretend he&#8217;s someone he&#8217;s not and do a rousing political speech.  Seems the bad guys have the blond, too, and within a few moments they&#8217;re handcuffed together and escaping.  But she thinks he&#8217;s a murderer and he uses her fear (and a cigar pipe in the pocket trick) to his advantage.</p>
<p>After an uncomfortable night in a hotel she wiggles free of the handcuffs and goes to escape only to hear some cryptic talking of the two henchmen downstairs.  She assumes that Robert is telling the truth and time to high-tail it back to London and figure out the 39 steps (which, of course, I already know &#8211; &#8217;cause I&#8217;ve seen the remake).</p>
<p>Once they arrive back in London they go to the Palladium and wouldn&#8217;t you know it&#8230;but the &#8220;memory man&#8221; is there, along with half-pinky guy and before you can say &#8220;tea and crumpets&#8221; they&#8217;ve figured out the deal and what the 39 steps are&#8230;and the film is over.</p>
<p>But wait?  What about the remake?  I KNOW where the 39 steps are!  Uh&#8230;uh&#8230;?  Hello?</p>
<p>WHAT I LIKED ABOUT THE FILM:</p>
<p>Robert Donat is good as is everyone in the film.  The acting is fine and the Hitchcock set pieces are well done.  There are a couple good moments.</p>
<p>WHAT I DISLIKED ABOUT THE FILM:</p>
<p>Sadly&#8230;I never really connected with Donat (though he&#8217;s good).  In a lot of ways I didn&#8217;t care.  The fact that people do things with very little question or thought seemed illogical and disingenuous to me to the point that I really didn&#8217;t &#8220;buy&#8221; the goods being sold to me.</p>
<p>The other thing is that Hitchcock in this film uses the same scenarios as in other films (such as &#8220;The Man Who Knew Too Much&#8221;) so those moments seemed derivative to me (though these came first).</p>
<p>The film also did not have the same amount of humor as the other Hitchcock film we&#8217;ve seen in this collection.</p>
<p>BOTTOM LINE:</p>
<p>Not that good.  Not that bad.  Still, a couple moments &#8211; but not enough to add up to a whole.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
<!-- WP Super Cache is installed but broken. The path to wp-cache-phase1.php in wp-content/advanced-cache.php must be fixed! -->