Secret Agent (1936) | Hitchcock Review #28 

it's okay.... not one of my favorites, even of that period. I love the 39 Steps and the Lady Vanishes, and of course Blackmail. However it's got Lorre so I watch it.

“Speaking English in cursive”. Superb.

i love you and your videos they always make me think of better times❤❤❤❤❤❤❤❤

Great review. I've seen most Hitchcock films but not this one. And I guess I should check out your previous reviews. (I'm still new here.) Enjoy your weekend.

I think it’s been so long since I saw this that I didn’t know who Gielgud was! So, that’s got to be maybe pre-1975? I’m really dating myself with that. I love your phrase, “speaking in cursive.”

I think that your review of this is fair, I'm a big Hitchcock fan so, I've seen this film, it's good and by any other Director probably would be considered as very good if not great, but comparing it to the vast catalogue and quality of work by Hitchcock it's really only fair. I've seen it once, would I watch it again? If it was a rainy afternoon and I had nothing else to do then, yes, but otherwise probably, no.

I have not seen this one . I am a big fan of Hitchcock , so I will definitely be giving this one a look . Thank you for the recommendation !

Have you ever reviewed 'Young And Innocent'? In my opinion, it is Alfred's third best British film.

Thanks for letting us know about this movie. This is one of those might or might not have seen movies for me. I'll have to keep it in mind if the opportunity comes.

I enjoyed “Secret Agent” despite it being considered one of Hitchcock’s less-refined films. I could not believe this was the same Peter Lorre from “M”. Although I should have expected the train sequence by now I was still taken back when it appeared.

Thanks for this neat movie review!

I enjoy Hitchcock movies and probably should watch them again. Thanks for the review.

Well I won't reveal the twist, because it it so long since I saw the film that I can't remember what the twist was. I think I saw it around about the same time that there was a British TV mini-series adapted from the same Somerset Maugham Ashenden books (I see that was in 1991). Both merge together in my memory as being rather melancholy experiences. Gielgud does not really convince as a romantic action hero, but I remember there being one or two typical Hitchcock set pieces which are always worth watching.

I may give this movie a curious look. As usual, Jerome, an interesting review.

I've seen this movie more than a couple of times and always enjoyed it. Of course is not as good as The 39 Steps (my favourite from his British period), The Lady Vanishes and even Young and Innocent (another favourite of mine), but it's not a bad film either, as you say. As for the ending, I remember who the villain is and they end but I don't remember anything about their motivation or convictions so I guess it's time for a rewatch 😊

Very good review JW. I agree with your assessment of the movie. Personally I love the Peter Lorre character. He is charming despite his less than savory habits. Gielgud and Carroll were the weakest part of the film. The twist was a bit clunky and random. But you could see flashes of what would become Hutch's later genius. Probably the best way to watch this is as part of a marathon where you start either The Lodger or Blackmail. It's easier to appreciate as part of the progression than on its own. Looking forward to your next Hitchcock review.

Early Hitchcock while he was still working on his skills. Thanks for the review.

Hey, another Hitchcock review. Sweet! Though this is one of many Hitch's films I have never seen, I enjoyed this review very much, J. Your Hitchcock reviews are always fun to watch. "Good evening." 🙂

Thanks for the video. Makes my weekend better with your reviews. I liked The Lady Vanishes, but didn't care for The 39 Steps film (but I loved the book). This film seems interesting and always interesting film when Peter Lorre is in a film.

I've watched 39 Hitchcock movies (one for each step!), and I have this ranked as #38, only above Topaz. Peter Lorre as a sexpest is ick, and I agree with you about the ending. But thanks for the review, and glad your back to talking about Hitchcock!

Watched this on tubi.Bargain basement,2 dollar dvd,foggy picture quality.The sound crackled like an old record. Enjoyed Secret Agent.Had one issue.How to put this?I don't really like it when fatal mistakes are made.Had a similar issue with Ice Station Zebra 1968.That type of plot turn always bugs me.Geilgud.Recognized him by voice. Peter Lorre gave a very Nicolas Cage performance.Decades before Cage.I can imagine that Cage is a fan of Lorre. Because,isn't everyone ?The sausage dog was good.Nice to see another Hitchcock review notch added to your belt. Thank you.

Love your reviews. As a 47 year old Gen X'er, my media exposure spans from a childhood adoration of Harold Loyd, that was shown on British morning TV, through every decade of film and TV up to now. I actually feel kinda privileged to have that depth of exposure in my formative years. It's really cool to see other folks whose appreciation of the medium is equally deep and decade-spanning. You remind me to go back and check out some of these older films I never got round to.

Don't even remember this one, but I think I have watched it. Maybe I will give it a new try.

Hi Jerome! I haven't seen "Secret Agent" in a while, but I think your review is pretty right on the money. I remember liking it, but finding it not as good as some of Hitchcock's other gems from the period. I agree that it's definitely one step on the ladder of his perfecting his craft, as you mentioned. I'm still glad that it exists, though. : )

Watched this simply because of your review. I enjoyed it a bit more than i thought i would

I basically agree with Jerome's review. There are some first-rate sequences in the film and both Peter Lorre and Robert Young are very good, but, by the standards of Hitchcock, it is fairly disappointing. Every few years, when I do a Hitchcock marathon, I hope I will find some brilliance in the film that I'd previously missed, but my opinion of it remains the same. John Gielgud was miscast in this film. Possibly Olivier (who had recently worked on stage with Gielgud in Romeo and Juliet) would have been the best casting choice, if Hitch didn't want to use Robert Donat again so soon after 39 Steps.

Whoa! Another Hitchcock review!!! 👏👏👏 I watched every single one of his movies, including the silent ones, last summer, which was so fun for me, and I do remember liking this one. It's simple compared to his other famous films, but I still liked it. I believe there was a funny moment where I laughed out loud, but I'm not 100% sure.

You can't go wrong with Hitchcock! Or Jerome for that matter....Thanks again!

Thankyou, I love your reviews and your friendliness on camera, very welcoming and please keep it going! xo from David Newton in Sydney Australia

Thanks for bringing this to my attention. I am going straight to ebay to see if I can find a copy.

As a big Hitchcock fan, I've seen this film several times and I would say that your evaluation is on the nose. Hitchcock himself was disatisfied with it, saying that the problem was with the John Guilgud character, who is hesitant to carry out the assignment he has been given (to kill a man). He said that the audience needs to be able to root for the character, and the picture will fail with the audience if the main character does not have his heart in to what he is doing. You're right about the trip down the staircase. It is odd. First Guilgud and Lorre go down it two steps at a time, then the man chasing them takes it normally, then a larger group goes down with both feet on each step. It's a bit funny, but it makes you wonder why it is there. I think Hitchcock did things like that to keep himself interested during filming. I can hear him saying, "We're not going to go down these stairs the normal way...." Thank you for this excellent review! Hopefully you won't wait so long before your next Hitchcock review.

I was a fan of AH & the 3 Investigators & like only a few of his movies (Strangers, Psycho). I think his better work was in The Alfred Hitchcock Hour. Always an enjoyable review & pretty thumbnail. Thank you!

I think this is the only Hitchcock movie that I've only seen once (not counting The Mountain Eagle, of course). I remember enjoying it, but as you said, it's one of the weaker ones from his later English period. I loved Lorre in it, but then I'm a big fan of him. Thanks for the review - you've made me want to pull out this DVD and watch it again!

Probably every one of the 16 times that ive watched "Secret Agent" it was because i had forgotten that i had already watched it several times before. It just fails to make a mark in my memory even though i thoroughly enjoyed watching it every time.

What would I do on saturday nights without you. Hitchcock it is!

Love Jerome on Saturday afternoons! Great content as always

I need to see this one. Peter Lorre alone is a draw for me. Good to see you, Sister.

Love your reviews.

I also recommend the Somerset Maugham stories that gave rise to this! He's a very entertaining and genial writer, and the Ashenden stories give him a chance to have a good time with his craft.

Thanks for your SECRET AGENT review Jerome. I've never seen it; will now though! Speaking of "spy' movies and novels (and Peter Lorre), have you read any of Eric Ambler's novels, specifically 1939's A COFFIN for DIMITRIOS? (the title isn't a question; just questioning YOU if you've read it😊) Many of his novels involve espionage. I highly recommend it as well as it's 1944 movie adaptation, A MASK for DIMITRIOS, produced by Warner Brothers. Peter Lorre, Sydney Greenstreet, Faye Emerson, Victor Francen, and Steven Geray head the cast. Dimitrios is played by sleezy Zachary Scott; in fact Scott's degenerate character-trait allows for my misspelling 'sleazy' ! TCM shows it a few times a year. Other film adaptations of Ambler's novels include JOURNEY INTO FEAR, BACKGROUND TO DANGER, and TOPKAPI, to name a few. His 1938 novel EPITAPH for a SPY sound intriguing, as well as it's 1944 screen adaptation HOTEL RESERVE starring James Mason and Herbert Lom. Thanks for the heads-up on SA's poor sound quality. I'll look for a copy that has closed-captioning. boB

The way you express yourself in English tells me (as a devotee of the English language) that you are well read and have more than a dalliance in classical English literature. Keep up the good work.!!!!!!!! Love your movie reviews!!

Always enjoy your reviews… thank you…

Sorry to have taken so long to reply, but I had almost no audio for many days. As with so many fictions, the book usually beats the other media. My father hooked me on W. Somerset Maugham's Ashenden tales, and they are a ton of fun. Thx, Rome, and owl be seeing (and hearing!) you.

Peter Lorre perfected the art of playing a sociopath. He could portray a bad person as purely evil or make him sympathetic or even likable. I think he’s at his best in a role like this one as the General. He’s funny and at the same time unnerving and he certainly has the best lines in the film. I too kept forgetting that was John Gielgud in the film.

Nicely reviewed and described. I chose the one with the color thumbnail (but not colorized) and it was pretty much as you said. At first I thought someone had sped up the movie based on the fast delivery, but that must have been the style then. And the visuals were a bit odd; at one point two cars moving down a street looked like animation. I'm glad I saw this, makes me curious about the others from this period. I didn't catch the Hitchcock cameo this time, wonder where he was - maybe the casino. The dog with a sixth sense was a nice touch. Thanks for this J., well done.

I appreciate your thoughtful overview of Secret Agent. The title seems to be 30 years ahead of its time. In the '60's it would of course come to represent a movie and TV craze. I have always admired Peter Lorre as a completely unique cinematic presence. As you note, his participation elevated any vehicle he inhabited. This was especially true in a 1954 live television presentation of Casino Royale in which he was cast as the villain Le Chiffre. His contribution is the saving grace of what is otherwise a routine hash job of a promising novel. The James Bond in this one is American and played by Barry Nelson who does his best in an awkward situation. Lorre's Le Chiffre makes one wonder how he might have done as a Bond villain in one of the Sean Connery. He brilliantly break out of the blurry black and white to fascinate the viewer.

I hadn't heard of this movie. Thanks for bringing it to my attention. In his autobiography, Roger Moore has some very funny stories about John Gielgud. Apparently he had the most extraordinary ability for putting his foot into his mouth. Keep up the good work Miss W. 🌟🌟🌟🌟🌟

Hitchcock....best director ever! [In my opinion]

Great video, JW...👍

Hi, JW! I really enjoyed your review of this old Hitchcock film, which I had never seen. You inspired me to seek it out, so I watched the version they have on Prime. It was a pretty good copy, and was very enjoyable to watch. Like you said, it wasn't quite up there with the best of his early films, but it was definitely worth watching. I already liked Peter Lorre and Robert Young, but the only Gielgud performance I could recall is from Arthur. But he did a good job in this. I'll be checking out your other videos. Thanks for making them!

While looking out my rear window I see you're reviewing an early Hitchcock movie. I had my suspicion that it might be for the birds, but after watching I'd say only a psycho wouldn't appreciate this one! And no matter which direction I go, east, south or north by northwest, you're still the best reviewer around!😊

Yes Jerome, you've been very negligent in covering the great Hitch - only 27 prior to this one! Shame on you! haha. I definitely haven't seen this one, much to my surprise. Great review of this lesser known early film of the master.

Come to: Columbus Moving Picture Show May 23 · This year's film program: THURSDAY 12:00 p.m. Spy Smasher (1942) parts 1-3 1:15 p.m. Moon Over Her Shoulder (1941) 2:30 p.m. Lady and Gent (1932) 4:10 p.m. East Side, West Side (1923) * 5:30 p.m. Richard Barrios's musical clips DINNER BREAK 8:00 p.m. Malice in the Palace (1949) introduced by Geoff Dale 8:30 p.m. Steamboat Bill Jr. (1928) * 9:45 p.m. The Blue Lagoon (1949) 11:30 p.m. Eyes Without a Face AKA The Horror Chamber of Dr. Faustus (1960) FRIDAY 9:00 a.m. Spy Smasher (1942) parts 4-6 10:00 a.m. Max Davidson Comedy Hour * (Flaming Fathers, Why Girls Say No, Jewish Prudence) 11:15 a.m. Green Grass of Wyoming (1948) introduced by James D'Arc LUNCH BREAK 2:15 p.m. Air Tight (1931) 2:35 p.m. Slightly French (1949) introduced by Michael Schlesinger 4:15 p.m. Hearts of the World (1918) * DINNER BREAK 8:00 p.m. comedy short 8:30 p.m. Shadows in the Night (1944) introduced by Dan van Neste 10:00 p.m. Why Girls Leave Home (1945) 11:15 p.m. Forgotten Women (1949) SATURDAY 9:00 a.m. Spy Smasher (1942) parts 7-9 10:00 a.m. Annual Animation Program 11:30 a.m. Angel's Holiday (1937) LUNCH BREAK 2:30 p.m. Charley Chase Comedy Hour * (Long Fliv the King, The Caretaker's Daughter, His Wooden Wedding) 3:45 p.m. State Penitentiary (1950) 5:00 p.m. Tumbleweeds (1925) * DINNER BREAK 8:30 p.m. comedy short 8:50 p.m. Naughty Cal (1932) 9:00 p.m. Take a Chance (1933) 10:40 p.m. Rogue Cop (1954) SUNDAY 9:00 a.m. Spy Smasher (1942) parts 10-12 10:00 a.m. Stand and Deliver (1928) * 11:15 a.m. Sing Another Chorus (1941) introduced by Michael Schlesinger LUNCH BREAK 1:45 p.m. The Enchanted Cottage (1924) * 3:05 p.m. Betrayal From the East (1945) 4:40 p.m. Snafu (1945) * silent films feature live piano accompaniment by David Drazin or Dr. Philip Carli +All films are presented in 16mm

along with Modern Times , the two best American films of 36

I probably have this in one of my MillCreek sets.

Speaking of W Somerset Maugham , have you ever reviewed the Razor's Edge?

Wadda ya mean skipping over the friction behind the scenes? Dish the dirt, cowgirl!

Jane Stop this crazy thing!"😅

Hi JW. I hope you're having a lovely day. I can't say that I'm a huge Hitchcock fan, but I have seen a lot of his movies over the years. (I watched TCM regularly back when I had cable.). So, I appreciate that you're going through his films and giving your opinion. Have you seen his work from the silent era? Those are interesting.

Good review, I'll have to watch it. Another movie i own but haven't yet watched (thrift shops, a blessing and a curse!). You said Gielgud was young, but really 32, not that young. You can take my word as a 63 year old, 32 is young.

I’ve seen Secret Agent a couple of times over the years but not for a while, I would’ve rewatched the film before commenting but couldn’t because one of my uncles passed away this week and I’ve had no time to think about anything else until tonight. My uncle was diagnosed with cancer just before Christmas and was given a year but took a turn for the worst on Valentine’s Day and was given his last rights, he was strong and lived another few days but passed early this week with us by his side, we had a wake, funeral and family gatherings all week so I apologise for leaving it late to comment. I have Secret Agent in a boxset somewhere so I may go Rex Harrison and start climbing on random objects trying to find it. From what I remember about the film I liked it but it’s not a favourite, I’d say my feelings about it are similar to yours. I remember liking Peter Lorre’s character and found him funny but also strangely sinister, there were moments when it would cut to him looking creepy as other characters were speaking, Gielgud’s Ashenden and Carroll’s Carrington in particular making it seem like he was planning on doing them in, perhaps it was intended to throw viewers off the trail but I felt it made the character seem like there was a character thread left incomplete. I’m with you also on Gielgud, it’s very odd seeing him young because he’s one of those actors that’s always been eternally old, perhaps it’s because the roles he’s most famous for tended to be older parts like in “Arthur”(1981) I also found the enemy spy reveal to be a little unsatisfying because it did feel like it came out of nowhere, I thought Robert Young was good though, he managed to be irritating and likeable at the same time lol. Hitchcock review 28! amazing! Having a couple of your videos to watch at the end of this particularly tough week feels like a warm blanket on a cold night. ~ Thank you Ms Weiselberry ~

Thx for this review. And he is 32 and "not that young"? Come on... how old are You? 😅