SECRET AGENT is notable for being the only Hitchcock film with John Guilgud in it - and a young, dapper looking Guilgud at that. But most people recall it rather for the second (and, regrettably, last appearance) of Peter Lorre under Hitch's direction. It is also the only film by Hitch with Robert Young and Lili Palmer in it and the second with Madeleine Carroll in it.
Those cast notes being noted, let us now look at a confusion of titles in Hitch's movies of the 1930s.
THE THIRTY-NINE STEPS is okay - John Buchan's novel (one of several with Richard Hannay as the hero - another is PRESTER JOHN) has a similar plot to the movie. But SABOTAGE is based on a Joseph Conrad novel, THE SECRET AGENT. SECRET AGENT is based on W. Somerset Maugham's novel (somewhat based on his experiences as a spy in World War I) entitled, ASHENDEN, THE SECRET AGENT. Maugham would use the character of Ashenden in some of his later fiction, as a peace time writer. YOUNG AND INNOCENT is based on A SHILLING FOR CANDLES by Josephine Tey. THE MAN WHO KNEW TOO MUCH is the title of a novel by G.K.CHESTERTON about a socially well-connected man who knows where all the skeletons of the upper crust are buried, but helps keep them buried. It has nothing to do with the plot of the 1934 Hitchcock film.
Just why most of his movies changed titles is hard to pinpoint. Obviously box office attraction is involved.
SECRET AGENT begins with word (during World War I) that Willie Ashenden, the well known writer, is dead. We see a closed coffin wake for the man, and when everyone leaves we discover the coffin is empty. Ashenden has gone undercover to do some espionage for the British military during the First World War. He is assisted by Lorre, nicknamed "The General" or "the Mad Mexican" (Lorre is not Mexican in the story). They make an odd pair, with Guilgud stiff and proper, and Lorre definitely odd looking. They head for Switzerland, where they meet several people: Carroll, Young, and Percy Marmont (travelling with is wife and dog). Marmont soon appears to be the dangerous German agent that Ashenden and Lorre are to do in. And they do, in the most memorable portion of the film - only to discover subsequently that Marmont was not the spy.
Of course, barring Carroll, that leaves only one possibility, so the degree of surprise in the plot is less than desirable. Hitch overcomes this by taking our agents into the territories of the Central Powers after Young, and here Palmer enters the story (briefly - it was an early bit part). The conclusion is an exciting confrontation on a passenger train and a disaster. And Guilgud and Carroll are together for the romantic conclusion (not as good a romantic teaming as those of THE THIRTY-NINE STEPS or THE LADY VANISHES).
Of the major Hitchcock films from 1934 to 1939, SECRET AGENT is not one of the greatest. Guilgud was far too reserved in his part - good enough to watch but one would hardly think he was (at that time) the leading stage star in Britain. Lorre is better because of his eccentricity, and his blending of the sinister and comical (he is an assassin after all). Young, for the first time, played a villain - but nothing like his later performances in THE MORTAL STORM and THEY WON'T BELIEVE ME. Carroll is adequate, but her role opposite Robert Donat a year before was more interesting. A slightly better than average Hitchcock movie, but not a dull film by any stretch of the imagination.
Those cast notes being noted, let us now look at a confusion of titles in Hitch's movies of the 1930s.
THE THIRTY-NINE STEPS is okay - John Buchan's novel (one of several with Richard Hannay as the hero - another is PRESTER JOHN) has a similar plot to the movie. But SABOTAGE is based on a Joseph Conrad novel, THE SECRET AGENT. SECRET AGENT is based on W. Somerset Maugham's novel (somewhat based on his experiences as a spy in World War I) entitled, ASHENDEN, THE SECRET AGENT. Maugham would use the character of Ashenden in some of his later fiction, as a peace time writer. YOUNG AND INNOCENT is based on A SHILLING FOR CANDLES by Josephine Tey. THE MAN WHO KNEW TOO MUCH is the title of a novel by G.K.CHESTERTON about a socially well-connected man who knows where all the skeletons of the upper crust are buried, but helps keep them buried. It has nothing to do with the plot of the 1934 Hitchcock film.
Just why most of his movies changed titles is hard to pinpoint. Obviously box office attraction is involved.
SECRET AGENT begins with word (during World War I) that Willie Ashenden, the well known writer, is dead. We see a closed coffin wake for the man, and when everyone leaves we discover the coffin is empty. Ashenden has gone undercover to do some espionage for the British military during the First World War. He is assisted by Lorre, nicknamed "The General" or "the Mad Mexican" (Lorre is not Mexican in the story). They make an odd pair, with Guilgud stiff and proper, and Lorre definitely odd looking. They head for Switzerland, where they meet several people: Carroll, Young, and Percy Marmont (travelling with is wife and dog). Marmont soon appears to be the dangerous German agent that Ashenden and Lorre are to do in. And they do, in the most memorable portion of the film - only to discover subsequently that Marmont was not the spy.
Of course, barring Carroll, that leaves only one possibility, so the degree of surprise in the plot is less than desirable. Hitch overcomes this by taking our agents into the territories of the Central Powers after Young, and here Palmer enters the story (briefly - it was an early bit part). The conclusion is an exciting confrontation on a passenger train and a disaster. And Guilgud and Carroll are together for the romantic conclusion (not as good a romantic teaming as those of THE THIRTY-NINE STEPS or THE LADY VANISHES).
Of the major Hitchcock films from 1934 to 1939, SECRET AGENT is not one of the greatest. Guilgud was far too reserved in his part - good enough to watch but one would hardly think he was (at that time) the leading stage star in Britain. Lorre is better because of his eccentricity, and his blending of the sinister and comical (he is an assassin after all). Young, for the first time, played a villain - but nothing like his later performances in THE MORTAL STORM and THEY WON'T BELIEVE ME. Carroll is adequate, but her role opposite Robert Donat a year before was more interesting. A slightly better than average Hitchcock movie, but not a dull film by any stretch of the imagination.