This was much more enjoyable than Juno and the Paycock but it was still pretty poor. There were odd sequences where there were medium shots focusing on one actor who was having a conversation with others but instead of cutting between them it stuck with them. Not at all cinematic or dramatic. And a bit weird because they definitely had editing back then and according to Patrick McGilligan’s biography Hitchcock used “multiple cameras for a fluid sound track”[1, p.139] so why not do a bit of that editing?
Within its limitations the acting was generally good which isn’t a surprise considering the calibre of the cast.
Jill Esmond, as most women do, looked marvellous in a tie and even rocked her oversized jodhpurs.
And talking of looking marvellous, Phyllis Konstam (great name as well) had a lovely face.
And with her husband (Bunny Austin), she made half of a beautiful couple.
Alma fact: scenario by
Appearance by a cat or dog: at least four dogs
Source: The Early Hitchcock Collection (Optimum Releasing)
-  McGilligan, Patrick. Alfred Hitchcock: a Life in Darkness and Light. Chichester: Wiley, 2003.