East of Shanghai (1931) User Reviews

Rich? not really, but certainly strange, and a bit humorous

[mstomaso · 6/10 · 7 April 2007]

Rich and Strange or East of Shanghai, is a British romantic comedy dating from the transitional period between silent and sonic film. It was not very popular at the box office, but remains one of the director's (Alfred Hitchcock) favorite works from the period. The reasons seem obvious enough. Unlike the classic Hitchcock thriller/mystery/comedy "The Lady Vanishes" released several years later, Rich and Strange was an adaptation of a semi-comedic novel which was not plot-heavy but did rely on equally strong characterization. Hitchcock took the change of pace for a ride, and played with visual experiments, jokes and even visual metaphors which, if you notice them and think about them, actually enhance character development.

Some reviewers have complained about the use of placecards - actually I think this was intended to enhance the comedic aspect of the film. Take a look back two years at Hitccock's "Blackmail" for comparison. This film was originally intended and partially shot silent. Hitchcock neither used placecards nor did he need them to convey his points in Blackmail.

There are some classic bits of Hitchcock camera-work here. During meaningless conversations, meaningless framing is used seemingly to mock the action of the film itself. The classic example of this is a pair of symmetrically arranged scenes where two of the main characters are walking to and from a social event on a cruise ship, blathering away, while the camera follows their feet and Emily's (Joan Barry) dragging dress. Jarring, yet humorous!

Joan Barry's stunning and adorable portrayal of Emily -our protagonist- is a bit of a perverse male fantasy - she is beautiful, intelligent (when she needs to be) and undervalues herself terribly - so her loyalty to a husband deserving of much much less is a bit exasperating. She is married to a whining, opportunistic, bore named Fred, and becomes romantically attracted to the charming Commander Gordon. The story boils down to this: Emly and Fred lead a life which causes Fred to whine (but this, it becomes clear later, is genetic and part of the fiber of his being).

One night, they receive an early inheritance and decide to take a cruise around world and live the good life. Fred, however, remains the miserable lout he was at the beginning, but adds to his follies alcoholism, philandering, and seasickness. Money does not cure everything - a bit of cliché, but, with Rich and Strange, it doesn't end there.

All of the acting is quite good, though as some have noted, it is sometimes over-the-top (perfectly appropriate for a comedy, IMO).

Curiously quirky Hitchcock

[bennyp81 · 7/10 · 25 April 2002]

What an unusual Hitchcock film this is! For one thing, in this film, he doesn't focus on themes of murder and suspense as he is well remembered for. Instead, he takes a satirical look at the complexities of marriage and fidelity, with rich, quirky, and even disturbing humor. (It's interesting to note that Elsie Randolph returned in another twisted Hitchcock "comedy", "Frenzy", forty years after this film.) The editing is a bit crude by today's standards, although you just have to appreciate the mix of titles and audible dialogue to represent the transition from silent films to "talkies". Still, it's a funny film you can enjoy, with numerous Hitchcock elements clearly evident. Enjoy!

A strange movie.

[TexMetal4JC · 7/10 · 10 July 2001]

RICH AND STRANGE is certainly nothing like stereotypical Hitchcock. Even early movies like The Lodger -- which was some five years older than this one -- contained some sort of crime or mystery. Even his comedies -- The Trouble With Harry, for example -- revolved around murder and mayhem. But not this movie.

It's old and it's a comedy, but its title really says it all. Rich and very, very strange. Hitchcock's sense of humor is very plain here, and there are several laugh-out-loud scenes (when Fred Hill tries to set his watch, and later when he tries to get into bed, for example). But as the movie goes on, they become less frequent.

The action stops focusing on the comedic aspect of this young couple's acquiring a great sum of money and spending it on a world cruise. Instead it focuses on the serious aspects of their dual extra-marital affairs on the ship, and later their actions when it wrecks and sinks.

And once there, the movie is hardly comedic at all. Hitchcock's darker side comes out when a sailer drowns while his comrades watch on in fascination, and the scene with the rescued black cat is especially disturbing.

So what to say about Rich and Strange? The acting is fine, Hitchcock's directing is up to par (especially with the silent opening scenes), and the plot is engaging. But the movie goes from screwball hilarity to morbid survival, and then ends where it began so abruptly that the viewer is left wondering when he or she dozed off and missed the last half of the movie.

It's not stereotypical Hitchcock at all, but by no means does this make it a bad movie. The film is quite good but hard to stomach on account that it is so bizarre.

7/10

Quite Interesting

[Snow Leopard · 24 July 2001]

This change-of-pace from Hitchcock is quite an interesting film, often pleasantly witty and at other times a bit unsettling in its observations on human nature. It won't appeal to those looking for Hitchcock-style suspense (although there is one such sequence), but it is worth watching for some other reasons.

The story is about Fred and Emily Hill, an average couple living a routine middle class life. The opening sequence, which is very nicely done using many of Hitchcock's silent film skills, immediately makes you feel the boredom and shallowness of Fred's world, while being amusing as well. Suddenly Fred receives word that a rich relative is giving him a large sum of money so that he can see the world, and the Hills are off on an extended trip to several foreign countries. The substance of the movie is in the ways that their new-found wealth and the many unfamiliar environments affect them and their marriage. Their new world is one of a couple of possible meanings of the title "Rich and Strange", in addition to the Shakespeare allusion.

The cast is very small, and consists of actors little known today, but they are generally good and make their characters believable. As the Hills encounter hazards, temptations, and adventure, the question is whether they have really changed or learned anything from their experiences - the amusing last scene gives one possible answer, and along the way there are a lot of other subtle points.

While not at all like Hitchcock's more famous films, in a different sense it is all Hitchcock - a distinctive movie, and carefully crafted. While only a minor effort among his many masterpieces, it is still worth a look for those who enjoy older comedies.

Purest Expression of Hitchcock's Romance Formula

[tvsterling · 6/10 · 18 September 2004]

This movie is interesting to me because of it's concentrating on Hitchcock's romance formula which runs through most of his films. In this film it IS the story. Hitch's recurring theme of romance is the partnership of man & woman; the way that partnership is formed, renewed & nurtured. I have always liked his concept of love & romance. It greatly enriches his films. It is a truer & nobler view of this part of life than is usually seen. I like to think that it mirrors the relationship of him & his wife (billed in the titles as Alma Reville; her maiden name). There is certainly more than a hint of things to come. The hero obsesses in much the way as the master did over several of the women he made stars of. I would imagine that Alma had to play much the same role as Joan Barry at some point. Oh well, Hitch was Hitch. He was supposed to be a cruel practical joker too. The movie starts out way too slow for modern audiences. Hang in there or fast forward if you can't stand it. The structure is quite interesting in that it is a hybrid of the silent & sound movie. The first sequence is silent & music is cleverly used in the bit with the umbrellas. All thru the movie portions are silent with faux sync or other tricks. Sometimes the sound quality is awful but bear in mind that getting ANY sound at all was a technical feat in those days. Could probably be cleaned up with Cakewalk (sound program) or similar. Somebody should make the effort. The film lab work too is less than stellar. I have worked the film labs & I really think some of the footage was developed in strong British tea. All in all a quirky & somewhat dated film but good for those who are studying the master.

"Are you satisfied with your present circumstances?"

[classicsoncall · 6/10 · 8 February 2006]

Like Hitchcock's earlier film "Blackmail", "Rich and Strange" contains elements of silent film as a holdover from an earlier era. It features extended scenes uninterrupted by voice, and the use of inter title cards from time to time. Considering the lack of a murder victim, the movie plays out interestingly as it follows the infidelities of a married couple on board a round the world cruise. Some of it works, and some of it doesn't.

What I enjoy in the early Hitchcock films is the experimentation with themes that will become a hallmark of the director's style in later years. The use of humor is abundant in the early going, starting out with the choreographed umbrella routine in an early scene. There's also the three shipboard friends that appear from time to time that walk and gesture in unison. Elsie Randolph's running gag as the Old Maid is also a frequent comedic break, that just about runs it's course by the story's end.

The troubled marriage at the heart of the story is believable enough, as Fred Hill (Henry Kendall) and wife Emily (Joan Barry) find comfort in the arms of shipboard strangers. It's when The Princess (Betty Amann) ditches Fred and absconds with his money that he's finally confronted with the sham and phoniness of his life by Emily. Why Emily goes back to him is a question mark though, that's not explored sufficiently, especially since she found her own soul mate aboard ship in Commander Gordon (Percy Marmont). Maybe it was Gordon's age, he appeared to have about twenty years on the disarmingly attractive Emily.

I don't know about you, but I would have certainly made more of an effort to escape my cabin once I realized the cruise ship was sinking. Fred and Emily didn't strike me as being too panic stricken, with voices not much above normal. The black cat that passed by once they managed to escape was a nice touch, though the bad luck fell on the unlucky feline. I guess Chinese food had a reputation even back in the 1930's.

The first time I saw the upside down drowning technique used in a movie was in the 1970 spaghetti Western "Cry Blood, Apache", but here it's used some forty years earlier, and with no malice involved. However it seems to me that the crew of the Chinese junk might have made an effort to save their buddy. The trade off for a newborn baby was a redemptive moment.

If you watch the film again, pay attention to the Gordon photograph that Emily draws herself into with a marker. It's shown at three different times, and each time the drawing is slightly different. I wonder why they do that; was it a precaution against the possible loss of one of the pictures? A similar situation with an altered photo occurs in "Mr. Moto's Last Warning".

I rather enjoyed "Rich and Strange", it's informative and fun to see the early work of a director of Alfred Hitchcock's stature. It's not often the title of a film also describes it's own action, this one is indeed both rich and strange.

Strange Hitchcock

[bkoganbing · 5/10 · 3 March 2007]

In this early Alfred Hitchcock film, some more production values were invested in Rich and Strange than you would normally find in an early British sound film for 1931. Hitchcock did actual location shooting in Port Said and in Marseilles in this travelogue of a movie.

Marrieds Henry Kendall and Joan Barry seem to have settled in a very comfortable rut in their marriage. Might have been different had they had some children, but apparently that was not to be the case. Certainly if a small legacy hadn't come their way they would not have invested it in a round the world cruise.

But spend it that way they did and it proves to be an adventure of sorts. Both go on some flirtatious flings and a shipwreck in the China seas manages to bring them both together.

One thing I did like was the special effects in handling the sinking of their ship, quite good for its time. The dramatic highlight of the film is Kendall and Barry who were left on the drifting hulk of the ship, there and later on the Chinese junk that rescues them. The Chinese are portrayed with unusual sensitivity in terms of Kendall and Barry recognizing that while they're different and appear strange, they've got no right interfering in their culture.

Still its not what you would expect from Hitchcock, no chases after the McGuffin, no intricate murder or spy plots. He's out of his element, but to be fair he wasn't big enough to be calling his own shots then.

Mainly for diehard Hitchock Fans

[marxsarx · 7/10 · 7 March 2003]

This 1931 movie is of interest simply because it is one of Alfred Hitchcock's early films that he made in Great Britain. It is also of interest because of the titles between sections of this film as though it were a silent film. That makes us very aware that silent movies had just been replace by 'talkies'. The copyright date is shown as 1931 on the film, not 1932 as IMDB has it listed. A man whose life has become mundane and tiresome is given money by a relative to enjoy life with. He and his wife set off on a cruise around the world. "Rich and Strange" begins well and certainly has its interesting moments. However, it bogs down after about the first half hour and doesn't recover until the last few minutes. Far too much time is spent aimlessly following the relationships outside the marriage by both the husband and wife of the couple. It seems that this part of the film is overblown. A highlight of the film is the spinster played by Elsie Randolph who is quite hilarious. Joan Barry is also very watchable as Emily. However, "Hitch" had not quite hit his stride yet and his best work was yet to come. This movie is mainly for diehard Hitchock fans.

Hitchcock's First Travel Advisory

[slokes · 3/10 · 15 October 2007]

I imagine when Hitchcock scholars and experts find themselves together, the talk is not of the Master's great films like "North By Northwest" or "Strangers On A Train", but a lesser-known effort like this one from 1931, obscure and seriously flawed, which showcases the great director in fledgling form.

Emily and Fred Hill (Joan Barry and Harry Kendall) are a middle-class London couple scrimping to stay ahead. He begrudges their lot; she accepts it. Change comes in the form of a letter from an uncle, saying he will set them up so they can enjoy a life of globetrotting luxury. They make plans for a world cruise. But their problems have only begun.

Just ask Richard Hannay, Roger O. Thornhill, or Marion Crane. Well, Marion's indisposed at the moment, but you get the idea. Travel and Hitchcock go together like moths and candlelight, setting one up for a perilous journey at best. This is perhaps Hitchcock's earliest foray into this theme, and not his most successful or memorable. Hitchcock tries to mix comedy with another element, in this case domestic drama rather than suspense, but the two do not cohere, at least not here.

The Hills are a dull, flat couple, with no chemistry or personality. When they find themselves at the Folies Bergère, in the form of cross-cutting with footage that looks ten years older than the rest of this film, they are abashed at the outfits of the female performers. "The curtain's gone up too soon!" gasps Emily. "They aren't dressed."

When the Hills drift away from each other on an ocean cruise, it seems a mercy killing more than a tragic thing, even if the people they partner off with are drips, too. Emily's man, Gordon (Percy Marmont) carries around photographs of himself sitting next to empty chairs, which he suggests be filled by Emily. Fred's girl "the Princess" (Betty Amann) has Clara Bow's eyes and Wallace Beery's five o'clock shadow. There's also an obnoxious fellow passenger, a dowdy spinster whom Hitchcock always introduces with a cartoonish horn cue. Subtlety was still to come.

Everything is shot in an abrupt manner, with confusing blocking and strained dialogue. Hitchcock tries for some early comedy with Fred and his umbrella that doesn't come off, and Kendall seems to aim for laughs while Berry plays for tears. When Fred and Emily break off, they are seen being jostled on a pair of wedged-together rickshaws, one of many clunky attempts at symbolism.

Emily's the only vaguely sympathetic character, in part because she really cares about her husband and agonizes over her affair with Gordon, but mostly because she's among the first of Hitchcock's many magnetic blondes, her platinum ringlets whipping around her face like a Botticelli aboard the open deck of a Chinese junk near the film's conclusion.

Matters conclude with a dangerous situation as set-piece for the protagonists to come to grips with, and presumably repair their relationship. Only they aren't active participants in the resolution, and except for the fate of a friendly cat, nothing about the ending resonates.

At least you get some enjoyable views of London in the early 1930s, and a chance to see Hitchcock when he was still working for food. "Rich And Strange" is Hitchcock paying his dues, and learning his trade, one for scholars but not casual film goers.

Joan Barry is gorgeous!

[1930s_Time_Machine · 7/10 · 2 November 2023]

Yes, Joan Barry - what a beautiful woman! That however isn't the only reason to watch this fabulous film. It's got a wickedly irreverent and genuinely funny sense humour throughout. Its story is thoroughly engaging and for 1932 it's remarkably well made.

The first five minutes is a montage of dreary office life in 1930s London - a superb homage to King Vidor's THE CROWD. This establishes the setting of a bored suburban young couple in want of excitement. Then they get it and to quote the old adage: be careful what you wish for because it might come true!

This is so different to most films of this period, certainly compared with American films in terms of story. Possibly because The Depression was so much worse in America, Hollywood pictures tended to be either uplifting aspirational stories or preachy sermons warning of the perils of ambition. In England, life in the 1930s was for most, actually a little better than it was in the 1920s so this picture isn't reacting to the shock of The Depression. In typical English style, this just laughs at those who think they're better than they are. At the time however it was seen as a little bit too cruel and unsympathetic which really harmed its box office appeal.

What makes this so enjoyable today (besides Joan Barry, whom I might have mentioned a few times is gorgeous!) is its glimpse into the life of normal, everyday people in 1932 and how remarkably similar it was to today - except for the weird accents of course! If however it was just a brilliant time capsule it would be interesting but because this is so well made, so naturalistically acted and filmed and edited with such energy it's thoroughly entertaining. Unlike a lot of early thirties pictures, it's not stagey, stationary or slow and the screenplay by Mr and Mrs Hitchcock, basing the characters a little on themselves makes Fred and Emily feel very real and genuine.

Although ultimately the truth that money doesn't buy you happiness is revealed, it's a warm, witty and charming film. It has a refreshingly different vibe to American films of the time with its topless showgirl, it's explicit adultery and disregard for received morality. It's quintessentially English, quaintly 1930s but somehow also feels quite modern......and Joan Barry is lovely!

Whiney Little People

[Hitchcoc · 5/10 · 8 September 2008]

As with most of the early Hitchcock, there are some wonderful images in this film. Unfortunately, the characters are so vapid and so stupid that it makes no difference. We have a spoiled guy and his loyal wife who suddenly come into money and decide to go on an ocean voyage. Of course, it's the old, don't wish for too much, you may get it. They each get involved in affairs and, of course, it's all about the reconciliation and realizing what you have. I was never able to believe it for a minute. The best part of the film is the first five minutes, when our hero battles the elements and the subway to return home with thoughts of "the gas pipe." The wife reminds him of how fortunate they are until the letter arrives. Anyway, it all takes on from there. She is quite prudish and innocent but turns too fast to another man. It didn't work for me.

correction

[nathan-47 · 8/10 · 9 July 1999]

A small discrepancy in the user review of this film I felt needed correction: the number 19 is the number of the con artists room and the number repeated several times, not 22 as stated. A good film and some really unsettling sexual politics that really astounded me considering this movie was released in 1932.

Certainly Strange and Disjointed

[scotty-37 · 6/10 · 13 February 2008]

This movie really doesn't hang together well and there is very little flow. The story is disjointed and you get the feeling that the script wasn't very good, that Hitchcock was a bit bored with the premise and experimented.

The beginning scenes in which Fred leaves work, the umbrellas, and the underground are all highly stylized. The umbrella sequence is like some choreographed chorus line. Very strange.

Fred, the husband, is insufferably boring and unsympathetic from about 2 minutes into the movie until the end. The actions on the subway are enough to make you cringe and think he's an idiotic lout from then and the loutishness pretty much continues the entire movie. Fred makes you feel uncomfortable and itchy on a number of occasions.

If you've looked at the other reviews you know the general outline of the movie. Fred is boring and bored. He gets some money from a rich uncle to take a cruise with his wife who is way out of his league. The cruise just makes the couple find other people to fall in love with.

The only people I felt any sympathy for were Emily Commander Gordon. Emily because she is somewhat pretty and the closest thing to vivacious in the movie, and Commander Gorden for being somewhat distinguished-looking and calling Emily on being a flirt ("are you pulling my leg?") and seeming to want to be decent to her while clearly aware that her husband is on the level of a slug and that Emily and Fred are horrible together.

Meanwhile, Fred falls for "The Princess." There is an intensely awkward and itchy-feeling scene in which Fred is trying to kiss the princess while wearing his ridiculous Arabian Knights outfit and he can't figure out how to get around the veil covering her mouth. This is a great scene that once again illustrates what an idiot Fred is. It made my skin crawl. This is a sort of comedy by making the audience extremely uncomfortable at just how pathetic a human can be.

Though not a sympathetic character, I had to agree with "The Princess" when she later tells Emily that she's stupid not to leave Fred for Commander Gordon.

The elevator and watch scene is outright comic.

Some scenes with Emily and Commander Gordon that show their feet while walking are just odd.

In the end, I was feeling it a bit of a tragedy that the couple stayed together at all. I wondered if Hitchcock really wanted people to be happy or annoyed that they ended up together in the end.

I actually felt there were many scenes that worked well at creating an odd atmosphere and tension with their experimental flavor. At times I was reminded of David Lynch's Eraserhead. For instance, in the scene where the two stay in their cabin while the boat is being abandoned, the loud thumping and running noises nearly drown out the dialog in both loudness and any attention being paid to it. It made me wonder how many of these odd touches were mistakes and how many were Hitchcock trying to do something interesting with a movie that was essentially not that interesting because of plot and character.

This is probably a movie that is worth watching for individual scenes and experiments, but doesn't further the assumed point of the movie. In fact in some ways, Hitchcock seems to try actively subverting any kind of morality-play aspects that might have been implied in the script.

It doesn't hold together as a whole, but there are plenty of interesting experiments to watch. If it's a train-wreck of a movie, at least it's an interesting wreck.

Not one of the better early Hitchcock films

[utgard14 · 5/10 · 12 July 2017]

Alfred Hitchcock-directed early talkie about a middle-class married couple (Henry Kendall, Joan Barry) who inherit a fortune and travel the world, meeting other people and having affairs. Started off like a comedy then got serious. Should've went with comedy. Some nice visuals and Hitch plays around with different techniques, which is always interesting to watch in his early films. But the story is unpleasant and the switch from light to dark left me feeling unsatisfied. On the plus side, Joan Barry is lovely and pretty much walks away with the picture unchallenged. The rest of the cast, including Henry Kendall, is kind of ho-hum. Worth a look for Hitchcock completists but really no great shakes.

London Life in 1931.

[JBC-2 · 25 December 1999]

For an early 'talking picture', this is an excellent film. Hitchcock fans will probably be disappointed, but I was not. Having been born in London in the 30's, I found the opening sequences fascinating and so well directed and edited. Anyone interested in Hitchcock should at least view the first 10 minutes or so of this film. One begins to see what a great director Hitch was - even without the mystery and horror.

"I want some of the good things of life... money."

[ackstasis · 6/10 · 26 November 2007]

Alfred Hitchcock, even though he was still an inexperienced director at the time, was a pioneer of British cinema, his 'Blackmail (1929)' being the first "talkie" produced by the local film industry. Thus, it's rather peculiar that, two years later, after adding a few more sound films to his filmography, the director would revert back to the style of the silent era. His relationship comedy, 'Rich and Strange (1931),' though a sound film, opens with a lengthy, entirely-silent comedy sequence, in which the film's leading man, Fred Hill (Henry Kendall), experiences the worst possible luck on his daily evening journey from work. The film is also interspersed with descriptive intertitles, a relic of the silent era that I haven't often noticed in any 1930s films {with the exception of Charles Chaplin's efforts}. 'Rich and Strange' tells the story of a young working-class married couple, Fred and Emily Hill (Joan Barry), who receive an unexpected inheritance, and so decide to live the high life on an expensive cruise to the Orient.

Rather than serving to bring them happiness, their extended vacation brings the couple's marriage to breaking-point, with Fred becoming smitten by a seductive, exotic adventuress (Betty Amann) and Emily falling in love with an older but noble bachelor, Commander Gordon (Percy Marmont). Much of the film in concerned with Fred and Emily's failing relationship in the face of these new players, and, though the romance in competently dealt with, there's not particularly much to keep the audience interested. A few fun moments are derived from Elsie Randolph, who plays a hopeless romantic who wishes to make acquaintance with every gentleman of the ship, oblivious to the fact that she is constantly making a fool of herself. The two leading actors do a fairly good job of bringing life to their respective roles: Kendall's Fred Hill is a clumsy, thoughtless fool, whilst Barry's Emily is one of Hitchcock's beautiful and innocent blondes, graced with such a simple elegance that you wonder why her husband would even look in the direction of another woman.

The most interesting segment of 'Rich and Strange' is undoubtedly the ending, which came as such a pleasant surprise that it greatly heightened my interest in the film. On their return to London, dejected and almost-broke, the couple's "tramp steamer" unexpectedly begins to sink. Trapped in their quarters as the other passengers evacuate, Fred and Emily find themselves alone aboard the floundering watercraft, in one of his most impressive early set-pieces {which involved the recreation of a full-sized ship in a water tank}. This portion of the film, at least, was handled brilliantly, and I would much preferred the film if it had dedicated more running time to the sinking ship, rather than focusing on the less-engaging romantic storyline. In any case, it seems that Hitchcock was opening a scenario that he would later extrapolate upon in his excellent 'Lifeboat (1944).' Also noticeable in 'Rich and Strange' is the director's distinctive brand of black humour, especially conspicuous when a surviving black cat is graciously taken aboard the Chinese rescue-boat.

I say, steady on, old man!

[rmax304823 · 7/10 · 13 August 2008]

This is an episodic, semi-comic, morality tale of a bored bourgeois London couple who adventitiously receive a gift of an around-the-world trip, (Henry Kendall and Joan Barry). It's the answer to Kendall's dreams. Joy reigns, for a few minutes anyway, until the trip starts. He gets sea sick on the cross-channel boat. They get drunk in Paris. Then, leurs malheurs, the ship out of Marseilles turns into a more serious business. He has an affair with a "princess" who turns out to be a fraud who milks him of his money. Kendal's wife and an honest, avuncular fellow fall for each other. The couple plan to part, but then Kendall discovers he's been had, and Barry realizes she can't leave Kendall because he's such an impractical wimp. They get together again, deserted by their lovers, in Singapore, almost penniless.

Their humble, outbound ship is involved in a collision and they are left alone aboard her as she slowly gurgles into the sea. Rescued by a Chinese junk manned by an indifferent crew, they find they've inadvertently eaten the ship's black cat. They finally reach London and begin arguing again.

I referred to it as a morality tale. I'm trying to think of how the moral might be most ergonomically expressed. "The grass is always greener on the other side of the fence"? "All that glitters is not gold"? "The end of all our exploring will be to arrive where we started"? "There's no place like home"? I think I know what Hitchcock was getting at in the title, "Rich and Strange." It's a quote from a song in Shakespeare's "The Tempest". In the play it tells us that a skeleton buried in the sea will undergo not corruption but an enrichment because of barnacles, sea anemones, and the attendant varicolored tropical fish. Hitchcock turns it upside down. The sea will not turn a dead thing (like a marriage) into something beautiful. It will just rot. I'm guessing at the irony, true, but I'm open to other less banal suggestions.

Anyway, it's quite a trip, not a trifling thing like some of Hitchcock's other early works (eg., "Champagne"). A comic spinster with thick glasses is introduced on the long voyage aboard the liner. At the costume party, she is dressed either as Margaret Mead or Big Bo Peep. And there is some genuine tension when their last crummy ship is sinking around them. The suspense is enhanced because the couple seem so extravagantly stupid. Here they are on an empty sea, alone on a ship that could turn end up and go down like a lead line at any moment and what do they do? They're in their night clothes, so they'd better find something to put on -- "in case somebody comes." Next step? "Perhaps we should find a raft or something." But, no. They step over a dead crew member and find a brandy bottle instead.

In some ways the most interesting episode is aboard the Chinese junk, the one on which they see a baby being born and roughly handled by the family, the one on which they eat the cat. None of the Chinese seem to celebrate the birth. They simply pour a bucket of cold sea water over the howling neonate. Barry's maternal instincts are aroused and she becomes indignant. "Leave them alone," advises Kendall, "The Chinese breed like devils anyway." (Not so much anymore, Hank.) The incident is interesting because Hitchcock was never big on babies OR family sentiment. There's a baby on the "Lifeboat", of course, but it's already past sentimentality.

Not to run out of space here. Joan Barry is a blond, pretty in a Mary Elizabeth Mastrantonio kind of way, with her eyes set wide apart, but with a thin, porcelain figure that might shatter if handled indelicately. Her role is that of the serious partner, and she fits the role. Henry Kendall is supposed to be itchier, edgier, less stable, funny, and he looks just about right as well. His features are basically a comic. Hitchcock deploys some directorial techniques that may seem humdrum now but were unquestionably more novel when he used them. They're simple enough. A drunk's point of view with the camera out of focus. A menu from which the items spring out at a nauseous man. If it's not among Hitchcock's best, it's certainly not one of his flops.

Good Comedy, Bad Drama

[matthewssilverhammer · 5/10 · 16 September 2020]

Hitchcock's Rich and Strange has a decent premise: some sudden and unexpected wealth comedically makes a bored married couple lose their sense of right and wrong. It's a classic corruption-of-money fable that's only real issue is in the tone. Most of the time, it's a fairly straightforward screwball rom-com...except when it unceremoniously dips into extreme and unwanted drama. Still, when it's foot is firmly in the bumbling idiocy of the couple, it's a good time...and the shipwreck is surprising and cool.

Rich And Strange ***

[Bunuel1976 · 6/10 · 25 February 2006]

An atypical project for Hitchcock, this breezy and stylish (if quite dated) comedy-drama is actually reminiscent of the films of Ernst Lubitsch – though the light touch displayed here by the Master Of Suspense, unfortunately, comes off as heavy-handed on occasion (his reliance on intertitles for ironic counterpoint, for instance)! Still, Hitchcock manages a number of effective moments, notably the virtuoso opening 'rush hour' sequence and the shipwreck at the finale. The main cast consists of forgotten 'stars' but, looking at their filmography, I was surprised to discover that Henry Kendall appeared much later in the Hammer film THE SHADOW OF THE CAT (1961; which I recently watched on the big screen while in Hollywood!), Joan Barry had also featured in Hitchcock's first talkie BLACKMAIL (1929), whereas German actress Betty Amann (who plays a vamp here) was the star of Joe May's expressionist classic ASPHALT (1929; whose Region 2 DVD edition from the renowned "Masters Of Cinema" label I have just ordered!). While not the best early Hitchcock I've watched (even among the non-thrillers), for all kinds of reasons, RICH AND STRANGE survives as an interesting curiosity.

very un-Hitchcock

[km_dickson · 4/10 · 20 August 2005]

Yet another early film from Alfred Hitchcock which seems to have been done out of contractual obligation. As with Juno and the Paycock, you can tell that Hitchcock had little interest in this movie. There is almost no style or craft to it at all. The story revolves around Fred and Emily, a young married couple, who come into some money and go on a cruise which proves to be a test of their marriage. Emily is given a chance at a new life with a good hearted, wealthy man who falls in love with her, but chooses to take the high road and stay with her husband. This might seem more believable if Fred weren't made out to be a completely insensitive, pompous ass who jumps at the first opportunity he sees to leave his wife for another woman. The couple ends up staying together, but the movie lacks any real reconciliation scene. The third act goes in a completely different direction, with the couple stranded on an abandoned ship and rescued by an Asian fishing boat. Joan Barry does give a very stirring performance as the faithful wife of an unfaithful husband. That's about all you can say for this one.

Early Hitchcock - Out of Focus

[triplem33 · 6/10 · 8 September 2005]

I found this film wildly entertaining and not up to Hitchcock's other earlier works. First of all the story in awful and that is always a bad sign. Fred is a complete dud and you would wonder why anyone would have anything to do with him. Maybe that Hitch's point. I guess there are all sorts of men like Fred. Maybe I'm one and just don't know it but everyone around me does.

The story itseld has no focus, a series of incidents hung together by placecards. There are a couple of Hitckcock touches that I noticed that might be of interest to Hitchcock fans but no one else. This is a movie that I would probably have never watch if it did not have Hitch's name to it. It seemed to me that it started out as silent movie and then was changed to a talkie.

If you are a Hitch fan you might want to see this otherwise skip it and watch "The 39 Steps", "Young and Innocent" or "The Lady Vanished" instead.

A Tempest in a Teapot

[wes-connors · 3/10 · 21 August 2009]

Bored Londoners Henry Kendall and Joan Barry (as Fred and Emily Hill) receive an advance on an inheritance. They use the money go traveling. Their lives become more exciting as they begin relationships with exotic Betty Amann (for Mr. Kendall) and lonely Percy Marmont (for Ms. Barry). But, they remain as boring as they were before. Arguably bored director Alfred Hitchcock tries to liven up the well-titled (as quoted in the film, from Shakespeare's "The Tempest") "Rich and Strange" by ordering up some camera trickery. An opening homage to King Vidor's "The Crowd" is the highlight. The low point may be the couple dining on Chinese prepared cat.

*** Rich and Strange (12/10/31) Alfred Hitchcock ~ Henry Kendall, Joan Barry, Percy Marmont, Elsie Randolph

One of Hitchcock's best and a real treat!

[bijou-2 · 10/10 · 26 February 2006]

I have been a Hitchcock fan for years yet had never stumbled on this early classic. Although several posters have commented that this film can't keep to a genre and seems to be all over the place, I disagree. RICH AND STRANGE is strictly comedy, albeit quite dark at times. It is Hitch's most British of satires and with an adventure setting to boot.

A young couple goes off on a world trip after being advanced some inheritance money. The adventure starved office worker husband, seeking to sail the world, finds he can barely survive crossing the English channel and the subservient housewife willing to sacrifice all for her beloved quickly finds another when left alone for a few days.

The ensuing travels shift the two from spectators in Paris to participants in the middle east to victims in the far east. It all proves they belong together. Among the classic Hitchcock touches of dark humour are the indignities of transportation and a cat who rightfully believes he belongs on the dining room table.

Some scenes contain primitive experimental camera techniques that are quite funny when you think about it. The "look left, look right" Paris travel montage, the drunken scenes and the play on the number 19 are quite unique and funny in their right.

I think steak and kidney pudding and a predictable life will do just fine from now on.

A strange early Hitchcock, but still interesting

[TheLittleSongbird · 6/10 · 26 June 2013]

While Alfred Hitchcock is my personal favourite director, he's not been without his disappointments. None of his films that I've seen are terrible, or even bad, but there are a few that have underwhelmed. Rich and Strange doesn't see him at his best(and for reasons other than it not been typical Hitchcock), nor does it see him at his worst. It is beautifully shot and has very evocative scenery and very well done special effects for the time. Hitchcock also does bring some great stylistic touches that does give a feeling that you're watching a Hitchcock film(something that I did not find with Juno and the Paycock, Jamaica Inn and Under Capricorn), and with the opening sequence, Paris travel montage and climax there are some strong moments. The music has a lushly orchestrated jauntiness that fits well with Rich and Strange's tone. Joan Barry is stunningly elegant and gives Emily a real likability. The story is disjointed though, with a darker-edged second half that doesn't bode entirely with the first, and is also very slight in structure, giving a rather tedious feel to some of the less eventful moments. The dialogue has some nice bits of subtle humour but did need a more playful touch and it got turgid in the scenes that weren't paced all that well. Of the characters, Emily is the only one who comes across as interesting or likable, the rest are too thinly sketched and emotionally detached for my tastes. Henry Kendall also seemed to me a little too sophisticated and trying too hard in his role, part of why his and Barry's chemistry didn't convince was that you never really see what it is that Emily sees in Fred in the first place. All in all, strange but still interesting. 6/10 Bethany Cox

Creaky Early Talky

[aramis-112-804880 · 5/10 · 6 September 2013]

I saw this movie under the title "Rich and Strange" and the last word certainly describes the movie.

Fred and Emily are a couple like most of us. Despite working all day, they never seem to be able to get ahead. They eat frugally and Emily makes her own clothes from patterns with cheap cloth.

Suddenly, out of the blue, a wealthy uncle (I wish I had a wealthy uncle out of the blue) decides not to make Fred and Emily wait until he dies. He gives them enough money to travel the world and, for a time, break Fred out of the dreary office routine (rich uncle, where are you?).

First, they go to Paris, where they live the high life. Then they ship off on a long cruise.

Fred is not a good sailor, and this leads to some excellent touches in the first half. While Emily enjoys herself on board, Hitchcock makes unexpected, and hilarious, jump-cuts to Fred ill in bed. A great moment in early Hitchcock is when the terribly seasick Fred is presented with the ship's menu. It lasts only a few seconds, but it's worth the wait.

The tension (in the movie and between Fred and Emily) builds when Emily meets a "Commander" who is smitten with her. Again, Hitchcock's humor shines through. The Commander always seems at a loss for words and Emily is forever interrupting him. Eventually she compliments him by telling him he's easy to talk to. After Fred finds his sea legs, he meets a Princess inexplicably smitten with him -- or is it his money? Fred's romance with the Princess is the silly side of infidelity; but when Emily begins returning the Commander's affection, it looks like coming into money destroyed Fred and Emily's marriage.

One charm of "Rich and Strange" is that, though it's a talkie all the way through, Hitchcock has inserted titles between the scenes, as in the silent movie days, making a droll running commentary on Fred and Emily's new life.

The problem is, about the half-way mark, "Rich and Strange" (sometimes going under the romantic alias "East of Shanghai") feels like it's stretching out. I don't know if Hitchcock got bored with it, but I certainly did. When Fred and Emily were stranded alone on a sinking ship I hoped they would go down with it. But even at that point, I had a lot of movie to go.

Hitchcock made few straight comedies. "Mr. and Mrs. Smith" (1941) is another wry take on marriage benefiting from the considerable talents of Carole Lombard and Robert Montgomery. The under-appreciated "The Trouble with Harry" is a romantic comedy with couples brought together by an inconveniently dead body. Despite having a great sense of humor that followed Hitchcock through his television show and right up to his last movie ("Family Plot"), his comedies (even "Harry") have soggy bottoms. Hitchcock is really at the top of his game when his dark comic sensibility creeps into movies of almost unbearable suspense. When "Rich and Strange" begins to sound melodramatic, I had a sense Hitchcock felt (pardon the pun) all at sea.

Nevertheless, for a Hitchcock completist, this film is a must. It has wonderful touches here and there.