CommentsXp Best movie ever!

Dotbankey A lot of fun.

AnhartLinkin This story has more twists and turns than a second-rate soap opera.

Zandra The movie turns out to be a little better than the average. Starting from a romantic formula often seen in the cinema, it ends in the most predictable (and somewhat bland) way.

bbmtwist THE SKIN GAME is a superbly written Galsworthy play, pitting the landed gentry against the unscrupulous and upcoming entrepreneur, both fighting over a piece of land and its future.Except for a handful of clever camera and editing tricks (Hitchcock's trademark thus far in his career), this is for the most part a very crudely photographed and amateurishly edited sound film. There is no tension and interest in the proceedings is purely academic, when the audience should be gripped from beginning to end.Acting honors go to stage veteran Helen Haye as the matriarch, Amy Hillcrist, and Edmund Gwenn, as Hornblower, the grasping factory owner. Watching them lock horns is like watching Clinton and Trump fighting for their own highly diverse ways of life.Jill Esmond is of interest mainly due to her being Olivier's first wife (before Vivien Leigh) and rarely seen by USA audiences. Her performance is a bit mannered and she hasn't much to do as the ingénue. (Oddly enough Leigh was a bit player, visible in one scene, in Hitch's next film, RICH AND STRANGE.)The clever bits: contrasting the two young heirs with back to back shots depicting their arrivals home, she on horseback down an avenue of trees, he in a motor car towards a modern home; a montage of sound and close-ups, using overlapping dialogue and dog barking; the attempted foreclosure being sound alone, as we stand outside the cottage; pullback from the land in question as it becomes a photograph (a technique Hitch used previously in CHAMPAGNE), the boring auction details being read so softly as to be inaudible; the continuous movement of the camera during the auction as a point of view uninterrupted by cuts; the accusing face repeatedly zooming forward from the crowd.My print ran 1:18:35, while IMDb variously times it at 78 and 85 minutes.To sum up, an excellent play, for the most part flatly presented with a few cinematic tricks. Hardly top drawer film making, but for the most part enjoyable.

ConsistentlyFalconer This early talkie suffers from the fact Hitchcock was rather hemmed in by the John Galsworthy play it's adapted from. He wasn't allowed to influence the script it as much as he was later in his career, and so it's not quite as human as you'd expect. And of course some of the characters' attitudes (especially towards women) are very much of their time.As a grim drama, it's not bad at all. It's a decent story with a good old-fashioned moral at the end of it. Edmund Gwenn is an actor I would loved to have seen on stage in his heyday, and his performance is excellent here - it's just a shame it's all-but-ruined by his horrendous Generic Middle Class Industrialist Regional Accent, which seems to be half Yorkshire and half Brummie. There are a couple of interesting moments in terms of filmmaking - the hectic market scene; a cut from what we think is a view out of the window to a poster on a wall; and of course the rather daring (for the time) whip pans in the auction scene. Hitchcock also chooses to have several large chunks of dialogue delivered off screen, too, another in the long list of Voyeuristic Hitchcock Moments.Verdict: If you're looking for classic Hitchcock, look elsewhere. yetanotherfilmreviewblog.tumblr.com

kidboots John Galsworthy was one of the most popular British novelists of the early twentieth century - his main claim to fame was "The Forsyth Saga" a long series of books following the fortunes of an extended family, principally the older son Soames and his obsession with wealth and property. He also wrote plays - most popular was "The Skin Game".The plot dealt with two families of differing social types in rural England just after the the First World War. The Hillcrists have lived in the same manor house for generations. They are "old money" and the shambling Squire can be seen as a representative of the type of aristocracy who actually caused the Great War. The Hornblowers, on the other hand, are "nouveau riche" and the single minded father (stunningly played by Edmund Gwenn), much to the Squire's disgust has just evicted family retainers, the Jackman's, and plans to surround the Hillcrist estate with factories. Even though Hornblower doesn't have "ancestors" he believes the future belongs to his kind and that the Hillcrists are an anachronism and obstruction to prosperity.To me there is not much attempt to bring the play out from it's stage origins and the only time Hitchcock puts his stamp on it was during the auction scene (but that was also a highlight of the stage play as well). The camera catches the excitement and frenzy of a bidding war during the auction of "The Sentry" - a residential parklike acreage that Hillcrist wants to preserve as the last bit of open land. Hornblower is eventually the winner but due to the shenanigans of Hillcrist, is forced to pay twice it's value and he is furious. The Hillcrists are also angry but plan to get even after hearing of the dark past of Chloe, who is married to Charles, Hornblower's son. Jill Hillcrist (Jill Edmonds) stands in the middle, drawn to Rolf (Frank Lawton) but hating what the family stands for.Chloe was once a professional co-respondent employed by a London agency and Mrs. Hillcrist and their unscrupulous agent Dawker plan to use it to the family's advantage, even though the Squire is above such muckraking. The play was similar to Galsworthy's "The Forsyth Saga" in that it was about social change and the breakdown of conventional class structure. Written at the beginning of the 1920s, an era which saw the rise of the middle class - in the film represented by the ambitious Dawker. Among the players - Jill Esmond, at the time married to Laurence Olivier, went to Hollywood with him but never seemed to photograph as youthful or engagingly as in this movie. Frank Lawton also went to Hollywood where he starred in "David Copperfield". Edmund Gwenn had a massive career in Hollywood but he quickly found a niche in "kindly old gentlemen" roles and never had the variety he did in his British movies. John Longden was in a few early Hitchcocks, went to Australia for a few years and appeared in the controversial "The Silence of Dean Maitland" (1934).

federovsky For Hitchcock scholars only. Image quality is murky and the extremely poor sound makes it quite hard to hear what is being said. The acting is rather turgid. Characters don't quite seem able to attain anything recognisably human - perhaps because of the theatrical origins of the piece, but mainly because Hitchcock hadn't yet unpicked the psychological key to making films.The stand-out thing is the auction scene where whip-pans flash around the room and there is a nice twist at the end of the bidding - ah, so it is Hitchcock. The rest of the film - a battle of wills between some landed gentry and an encroaching industrialist - is static and dreary and the only point of interest is the array of fascinating English accents now all but extinct.