The struggle to keep afloat

Rating: 7/10 (26 April 2017)

This is one of the disappointing Hitchcock films. It is not that it is bad, it is just that it is not particularly good. It proudly proclaims that it was written by the then famous American author John Steinbeck. However, several other fingers were in that pie, and not all of them were called Steinbeck. (Never believe what you see on credits.) The story is simple, and there was only one set. Of course, all the cast got repeatedly drenched, because they were in a lifeboat and passed through storms, pulled themselves out of the water, etc. It was no fun for the actors to make. This film is the only Hitchcock film of which I knew the star very well personally. Of course I did not know her at the time, because this film was made before I was born. I am referring to Tallulah Bankhead, whom I knew well in the 1960s when I was in my teens and she took me under her wing for a while. This is the only film Tallulah made in her 'middle period' between being a glamorous Paramount starlet in several thirties films and making some when she was older. Tallulah dominates this film, just as she dominates the lifeboat. That was what she was like. It is important to know that she did not dominate situations for egotistical or narcissistic reasons at all. To assume that would be to misunderstand her. She did so simply from the overwhelming force and energy of her personality. She was like a human hurricane, and she could not be turned off like a fan or an air conditioner, she was simply on all the time. But she had that droll manner where she could deliver a one-liner put-down spontaneously upon any occasion, and she needed no script for her raucous life. Her close friendships with such writers as Noel Coward and Tennessee Williams were based not just upon her liveliness but upon her scintillating intelligence, razor sharp wit, gift for repartee, wide-ranging knowledge of people and events, and superb dry humour. I cannot imagine her and Hitchcock becoming friends under any circumstances. To describe them as chalk and cheese or oil and water is to underestimate the difference between them. He was essentially a neurotic, closed personality, whereas Tallulah was as open as a shattered French window. If he had let her get close to him, she would have let him know in no time that she thought he was a cowering wimp. She could be withering, but she was never cruel, and often kept her devastating appraisals of other people to herself so as not to hurt their feelings. She was really the perfect choice to dominate a lifeboat on the Atlantic Ocean in the middle of World War Two. Any German encountering her had better be worried. There is a patriotic tinge to this film, with disparaging remarks of the Nazis emphasized in a proud and flag-flying manner. In wartime it is hard to resist beating a few drums, which can throw subtlety overboard sometimes, and not just from lifeboats. The story cannot avoid being rather corny, nor is it realistic. I hesitate to call attention to what are tactfully called natural functions, but when and how did they take place over the many days in that lifeboat? What did they do with William Bendix's leg which had to be amputated? And how did they mop up all the blood? Things like that. Also, why are they all so unconcerned about getting seriously sunburned? But the film was never intended to be realistic, because Alfred Hitchcock was not Roberto Rossellini, and you went to a Hitchcock film knowing that you would get a Hitchcock film, and you always did. And this is one of them that has some holes in the curtain and is not as good as many of the others which sweep you away with his vision-of-the-day. Some of the cast are better than others. Tallulah is the best, of course. Walter Slezak is superb as the German U-boat captain whom they pick up. Henry Hull is excellent as H. J. Rittenhouse (as in the Philadelphia square), a charming multi-millionaire who has thousands of employees but cannot command a lifeboat. John Hodiak as 'the hunk' overacts and clearly suffered from Hitchcock's usual lack of directions to his actors. Canada Lee as the black man has a thankless task, since his role is to stand off to the side and take no part in decisions or events. In the script this was doubtless meant to highlight his oppressed social status, but in the film it merely comes across as his being feeble. No acting challenge there, as all he had to do was stand in the background looking powerless. Two unconvincing romances blossom during the time the cast are stuck on the lifeboat, but it is impossible to believe in either of them. Why Hume Cronyn should suddenly fall in love at the most unlikely time could not possibly be contrived, could it? This film is essentially a 'concept film' which fails its 'proof of concept' test. However, it has its moments.