BootDigest Such a frustrating disappointment

Sexyloutak Absolutely the worst movie.

Dynamixor The performances transcend the film's tropes, grounding it in characters that feel more complete than this subgenre often produces.

Janae Milner Easily the biggest piece of Right wing non sense propaganda I ever saw.

MovieManChuck 2/4"You can't direct a Laughton picture. The best you can hope for is to referee."-Alfred HitchcockThis certainly rings true for this picture. Laughton owned the production company, funded the movie, and started as the villain. Hitchcock, at this stage, was just an on-call director who only got to carry out his visions to a certain extent.Due to Laughton having all of the power behind the scenes, he over acted as a silly antagonist and inconsistent with the mood of the story. While this played out very tounge-in-cheek, it turned our to be fairly entertaining.Laughton was reportedly so uncooperative with Hitchcock, that he eventually just gave up on the movie. This soiled the movie, as the twist was obvious after 10 minutes and some of the top-billed cast got next to no screen time in the midst of Laughton.After production was finished, Hitchcock left England for Hollywood, making Jamaica Inn his last British film. Whether this was purely coincidental or directly in retaliation to this movie is still unknown. While for Hitchcock, this is a pretty terrible movie, Laughton still entertains as one of early cinema's most memorable villains.

zkonedog As a huge fan of the film-making of Alfred Hitchcock, I began watching this long-ago film in hopes of capturing some of the old Hitch magic. Sadly, I only made it ten minutes into the endeavor.The problem? The quality of the production (or reproduction, I guess) of the film. Perhaps I am just spoiled by newer technology such as 1080p & Blu-Ray, but the visual disturbances were so explicit as to be distracting. It was as if someone took a handful of dust and sprinkled it across the picture at all times.The sound was even worse. There was a constant background hum, and the voices were not at all clear (and since this is a British film, the accents need clarity to be enjoyed/understood).Thus, I could not bring myself to watch a film that was in such bad shape, as I felt I would miss too much of Hitchcock's style, wit, and directorial genius. If a "digitally remastered" cut of "Jamaica Inn" ever comes out, count me in. Otherwise, it's in too bad of shape to warrant a serious viewing as-is.

bbmtwist An oddity in the Hitchcock UK oeuvre, JAMAICA INN is his only period piece, made just before departing for the USA. I read that he made this Daphne Du Maurier adaptation in preparation for his first USA film, REBECCA, also by Ms. Du Maurier. I also read she was not pleased with JAMAICA INN.It's an oddity not only in its setting, but that it is a departure from Hitch's string of six suspense/espionage/murder films (THE MAN WHO KNEW TOO MUCH, THE 39 STEPS, SECRET AGENT, SABOTAGE, YOUNG AND INNOCENT, THE LADY VANISHES) he had made one after another stretching from 1934 through 1938.JAMAICA INN is simply a melodrama, quite similar to DR. SYN, which starred George Arliss and proceeded it by two years, although the character of Sir Humphrey in JAMAICA INN is created, changed from the parson of the original novel and is, unlike Dr. Syn, out for no good.Laughton's appearance must have been a feather in Hitch's cap, as the actor was world- renowned at that point in time, having been nominated for two Best Actor Oscars and won one. JAMAICA INN would get noticed. The consummate actor steals the film away from its hero (Robert Newton playing an undercover policeman) and Maureen O'Hara (in her first film role playing the innocent ingénue). It boils down to the exposure of an undercover gang of smuggling cut-throats and the capture of its leader, and fits more into the genre of action/adventure. There are two timings given for the film, 98 minutes and 89 minutes. My print is of the latter, running 89:50 with an obvious and whacking great 8 minutes chopped out (the leads safely escape Jamaica Inn and arrive at Sir Humphrey's for shelter with a jump cut placing them back at the inn and at gun point from Sir Humphrey and the gang). I wonder if all prints are missing this section or only some. It accounts in any case for the two timings. My print also had poor sound and a bad hum/whine throughout, although the visual print was excellent.There are a few interesting bits: the opening montage of the shipwreck; the discussion of the proper way to hang an unconscious man; the cinematography and editing in the cutting of the rope to save him; the Dracula-like refusal of the coachman to deliver the heroine to Jamaica Inn; the surprise when the tied up Newton and Laughton proves to be an illusion; a long tracking shot among the captured men after the confession; the first pride and then terror of the fate of one of the prisoners – these are typical Hitchcock tricks played well.All in all, an interesting melodrama, of interest chiefly for Laughton and not Hitchcock.

jacobs-greenwood Even though it's based on Daphne Du Maurier's novel, and features a particularly evil character by Charles Laughton, this Alfred Hitchcock directed film is not a particularly engaging or satisfying drama. However, though it lacks much of the suspense and intrigue characteristics of most of the director's other films, I wouldn't label it a complete waste of time. Besides Laughton's performance, another plus for this picture is Maureen O'Hara, who plays the innocent, beautiful heroin. Most Hitchcock fans will find that, not only is the other "good guy" not up to the director's standards, its ending is rather convenient as well.With nowhere else to go upon her mother's death, Mary (O'Hara) must find her way to the titled Inn, which is owned by her aunt Patience (Marie Ney) and uncle Joss (Leslie Banks). What she doesn't know is the Inn's reputation, as a place for bandits, pirates, and other sorts of unsavory characters.On the road to finding the Inn, she gets some idea of it, and in fact will only be taken as far as Sir Humphrey's (Laughton), the elected official of the region and, in effect, its law officer. Sir Humphrey, who lives rather lavishly, is naturally impressed with her beauty and agrees to escort Mary to the Inn. It appears that Sir Humphrey is a perfect gentleman, but appearances can be deceiving.In fact, it is Sir Humphrey that gives the scallywags who reside at the Inn the information they need to cause ships to crash on the rocks below it, such that they can loot their treasures and kill all aboard. This bounty allows Sir Humphrey to live the way he does, but his greed causes him to take too much from those who perform the evil deeds on his behalf. The fact that they depend upon his position, which protects them as well as providing them the ship's cargo information, keeps the pirates at bay.Upset with these losses, an agent is sent to infiltrate the rogues to learn why they seem to know about the ships and when they are worth pirating. Naturally, there are conflicts between the evildoers themselves, and the agent, James Trehearne (Robert Newton), gets exposed. However, Mary is able to help him and, combined with help from Patience, who is finally overcome with guilt from her husband's complicity with Sir Humphrey, good eventually triumphs over evil, if unsatisfactorily.Screenplay co-written by Joan Harrison, who received Oscar nominations for both of Hitchcock's films released in 1940. Basil Radford appears in his last of three Hitchcock films.