Wednesday 2 September 2015

Alfred Hitchcock's 'Saboteur': The 'Wrong Man' Done Right


Employing the trope of the 'wrong man' on the run is, can all go awry if the stakes aren't high enough or conversely, too ridiculous to be taken seriously. It can feel too episodic if the plot and 'wrong man' drags themselves from one setting to another with no particular drive or purpose; or simply put, if our leads are just too bland or unlikable to even compel us to join them on this journey. One reason that there haven't been (insofar as my viewing catalogue is concerned) as many complete disasters in this genre may be that though easily mucked up, if a director/cast/production team plays by a certain set of rules regarding the structure of the plot, the filming of scenes, the development of character etc. then more often than not, you'll have for better or worse a 'Fugitive'-esque style thriller on your hands.

All I can say is, a whole lot of these productions owe an awful lot to Alfred Hitchcock, the ultimate master of the 'wrong man' staple. No one could make the pursuit of justice to right personal injustice as compelling as he did in the likes of 'The 39 Steps', 'North by Northwest', 'Frenzy', and of course, 'Saboteur', perhaps my favourite 'wrong man' thriller of them all. Well I'll get to all that in a bit; but firstly, I'd just like to take a look at why exactly Hitchcock's 'wrong man' thrillers worked as well as they did.

In 'The 39 Steps' he ensured that leading man Robert Donat's charm was not only everpresent, but also worked in accordance with the film's tone; Hitchcock understood that sometimes, simplicity was necessary in order for the actor's talent to shine through, and made use of often rather simple, yet effective and entertaining, little setpieces like the detour to the farm, or a hotel room rendezvous, to make the most of his leading man's comic timing and chemistry with Madelline Carrol. A similar tact was employed with the incredible quartet of the kings of suave Cary Grant and James Mason, an up-and-coming Martin Landau and perhaps the most underrated Oscar-winner of all-time Eve Marie Saint, in 'North by Northwest'; with a substantially bigger budget and a larger scope, there's much more frentic and very, very fun action going on throughout this very popular thriller, but like 'The 29 Steps' Hitchcock alway remembers to ground them with some quieter scenes where he relaxes his director's stronghold, and allows the acting and script to shine.

What I'm trying to say here, albeit rather meanderingly, is that above all Hitchcok's success with the 'wrong man' trope was that instead of focusing solely on what goes 'wrong', he never forgets the essence of the 'man', men, characters; and I think 'Saboteur', above all his other work (which I all like to love), exemplifies this best. It's a supremely underrated little gem of a film, one sadly oft forgotten due to being overshadowed amongst the throngs of his more 'serious' works. I can watch it over and over again and not only find something new to pick out each time, but also gain a finer appreciation for the elements of it I love already. Simply put, it's the Master of Suspense not only at his most suspenseful, but also unleashing all his tricks at the camera through various different modes.

Robert Cummings (right) and Priscilla Lane (left)
One of these modes is of course, the aforementioned charm of the leading man, namely Robert Cummings who plays Barry Kane, an airplane factory worker who's framed for the murder of his best friend in an act of fiery sabotage. Cummings also played, perhaps more famously, a straight man to Ray Milland's devious villain in 'Dial M for Murder', where he wasn't particularly bad but just a bit bland, more there to provide Milland with a straw man to devour. Now I have to admit that the role of Barry Kane is in a way not overly dissimilar to that role, insofar as Cummings acts here as a facilitator for the more flamboyant and colourful supporting players. The plot of 'Saboteur' is a particularly fast-paced one, and so it's vital for Cummings in particular to not only give the right sort of reactions to all the twist and turns around him, but to deal with the characterization of Kane on the go. Cummings does this all with a particularly unassuming style from the outset; it's telling that Hitchcock's original choice for the role was Gary Cooper as Kane is, while not necessarily a man of few words, a very reactive and understated sort of fellow who doesn't try to stand out too much. Cumming's Cooper-esque approach really does work very well in accentuating not only the Average Joe qualities of Kane, but also to give the right sort of grief and indignation at his friend's demise in a horrible fire 'accident', and accusation of his complicity in it by the authorities.

Kane is never overplayed, and Cummings never overacts these emotions, precisely because the script and direction never need him to. The opening of 'Saboteur' is patient and slow-burning (no pun intended), but never becomes dull because Cummings, as well as being properly realistic and grounded as Kane, also imbudes some of his natural charm and humour to avoid dragging the film down with too much unnecessary solemnity. I particularly like his very funny exchanges with a talkative truck driver (Murray Alper) that help lighten the overall mood and allows Cummings to just tap into some of his old fashioned leading man charm. Soon after all that we're introduced to Priscilla Lane's Patricia 'Pat' Martin, who becomes Kane's unwitting hostage, adversary and ultimately ally all in the course of one film! Lane to her credit, manages each and every one of these transitions rather well, and strikes up a suitably sweet, playful interplay with Cummings that adds to the film nicely, but never overstays its welcome. I should note that the writing of the character does help her a great deal, as Ms Martin is given substantially more to do than you'd expect from a 'wrong man' film. Hitchcock's first ever all-American cast fittingly has its female lead in a role most evocative of its 1940s setting: the fast-talking, Jean Arthur-esque snarky blonde with guts and brains may have become a bit of a caricature as the years go by, but here it's freshly handled by Lane.


(left to right) Cummings, Clem Bevans (Neilson), Alan Baxter (Freeman)
Alma Kruger (centre) as the amusingly haggard Nazi hostess
Norman Lloyd as Fry, a literal small fry
The fantastic Otto Kruger playing mastermind Nazi Tobin
And of course we have the villains. One of the knocks I have against 'The 39 Steps' was its lack of a memorable villain, indeed they almost appeared to be a footnote to the whole plot. This is a minor nitpick really as it doesn't hurt the film at all, but it's clear by the time 'North by Northwest' came around that Hitchcock had become quite fond of having a strong villain to counter the hero against on a regular basis. While James Mason and Martin Landau's performances as Cary Grant's adversaries are incredible in their own right, I have a sneaking suspicion both direction and performance of those characters, took a good deal of inspiration from 'Saboteur'. As Tobin, Mason's equivalent in 'Saboteur', Otto Kruger, a sterling character actor of the time who sort of resembled an even gaunter, more affable Clifton Webb, really digs his teeth into the role. He gives his character's megalomania the right doses of both wit and madness, and makes use of his relatively limited screentime to both entertain and haunt the plot.

As his co-workers, Clem Bevans, Alan Baxter and Alma Kruger are all rather good at just adding a bit more character to the film, but the highlight (and indeed, maybe my favourite performance in the whole film) is that of Norman Lloyd as Fry. Technically speaking, it's a bit of a throwaway role; despite being the 'culprit' of the film's titular sabotage, the script really doesn't spend all that much time with Fry as a character. Not to worry though--Lloyd makes for an absolutely splendid villain purely through his physical performance alone. There is no wasted gesture or glare Lloyd employs in just accentuating what an unfeeling bastard Fry is, and particularly in the final scenes, what a despicable and pathetic coward he becomes when pushed to his brink.

Vaughan Glaser as Pat Martin's blind grandfather

The excellent, heartfelt ensemble of circus performers
Of course, this being Hitchcock, he doesn't just go for the one-note. Villains and heroes aside, the most defining aspect of 'Saboteur' I feel, is how many heartwarming qualities it has for a spy thriller. Kane's refuge at a blind old man's residence for sanctuary, food and warmth is just a brilliantly realised scene. Carrying echoes of 'Frankenstein' (the man more sinned against than sinning, irrevocably excluded from society finding solace with a sightless, non-judgemental figure), it's just such a nice respite from all the running about, and Vaughan Glaser is just such a wonderfuly, endearing presence, firstly doing the kind grandfatherly act before taking it apart and revealing even more heartrending depths of selflessness and kindness. Later on, Kane and Martin run into another set of kindly figures, a bunch of circus performers. From the cojoined ladies to the bearded woman and their leader, a cordial thin man, they exude such simple humanity and kindness to their 'guests' with just the right amount of quirky and humour. It's a lovely little scene that plays around with Hitchcock's usual portrayal of 'freaks' as this time around, being ironically the most humane, sympathetic characters, and also gives Cummings and Lane that added bit of spark to their character's relationship, by the frissoning warmth of others (note: when watching the film, note Ms Lane's reaction shots to a particularly unnerving seat she sits upon in the train. It's a marvellously acted few seconds)



And of course, the big Hitchcock setpieces. Without spoiling too much, the above two pictures help encompass what makes 'Saboteur' not only the thrilling ride it is, but also one of the most meticulously constructed works of Hitchcock's. So much detail in every scene as they bounce from comedy to thriller to drama to romance; so much care put into how every scene is lighted and filmed whether it be the nicely expansive, playful camerawork of the ballroom scene or the tight-knit, tense work of the Statue of Liberty scene, you're eyes will be glued to the screen every second of it. And you'll love it.

filmfanatic.org
derekwinnert.blogspot
hitchcockproject.wordpress.com
cinemasparagus.blogspot.com
classicmovieman.blogspot.com
thedistractedglobe.com
filmsufi.com
pyxurz.blogspot.com
www.listal.com

4 comments:

  1. I find it odd that this film is not hailed among Hitchcock's best because it deserves to be. Even stranger is that it's rarely mentioned at all when there are discussions of his filmography. Well at least it's that very pleasant surprise for anyone going through Hitchcock's lesser known films.

    ReplyDelete
  2. Might be because:

    1. Robert Cummings was never a big star, and the cast doesn't really have any big names in it.

    2. Considered one of his 'lighter' pictures alongside the likes of 'The 39 Steps', 'The Lady Vanishes', 'Foreign Correspondent', in contrast to say 'Rebecca' and 'Shadow of a Doubt'

    3. Box office failure (although weren't Shadow of a Doubt and Vertigo flops too?)

    ReplyDelete
  3. 1. Valid although unfortunately these days Robert Donat and Michael Redgrave are often forgotten as well.

    2. True as strangely North By Northwest is his only "light" thriller frequently mentioned among his best, which is a shame.

    3. Not sure about Shadow, but that was the case for Vertigo. Vertigo though had a chance to recapture its audience so to speak with its well publicized re-release in the eighties.

    ReplyDelete
  4. Yup I'll take my first point back. Since for example, Strangers on a Train, and Psycho, are among his most acclaimed works nowadays, and yet Robert Walker, Farley Granger, Anthony Perkins and Janet Leigh were all never big stars, the 2 films being their defining roles.

    Yes, shame about those two. At least Redgrave still gets a bit of attention for his character work in the 1960s, and some of his stage work. Donat is strangely forgotten nowadays despite being an Oscar-winner, a two-time nominee and at the time, one of Britain's biggest stars.

    ReplyDelete