Directed and produced by Lance Comfort, Max Greene and Victor Hanbury
Peter Vadassy (James Mason), a young Austrian, hoping to become both a doctor and a Frenchman, takes a break from his studies to holiday at a small hotel on the Mediterranean coast. This idyll comes to an end when he’s arrested for espionage: the film in his camera contains some interesting - and illicit - photographs of naval installations at Toulon. Though the authorities suspect that he is innocent, and his camera had been switched for another, Vadassy is blackmailed into finding out who among his fellow guests at the hotel is a spy - before the police lose their patience and have him convicted instead.
This movie had all the elements for success: a screenplay adapted from a story by an excellent author of thrillers (Eric Ambler), a delightful and secluded setting, a collection of decently-written characters and an engaging lead actor. But it didn’t work.
The set-up was promising - though there is some lack of clarity as to whether a clandestine exchange of cameras was performed on purpose or not - but the execution of the plot thereafter seems rather haphazard. The notion of the amateur detective always has potential. The viewer may expect to see Vadassy approach his predicament with a plan, a campaign for tackling the suspects one by one, à la Agatha Christie. But Vadassy isn’t Miss Marple.
His attempts to discover the truth about his fellow guests are improvised and unsuccessful - which is probably how any amateur would fare in real life - but, worse, they don’t advance the plot. Nothing of value is learned when he finds out who among the guests admits to owning cameras; nothing comes of his spreading the story of having been robbed. Even when another man inexplicably tells Vadassy of his secret past, it doesn’t lead anywhere.
Added to these misfires are moments of comedy that are not really funny. The characters used for the purpose are more annoying than humorous. As well, though the characters themselves are well-defined, the reasons why a number of them are in a small hotel on the French coast is not. This may have been meant to contribute to the mystery of their motives, but I think it was just neglect by the screenwriter.
There is also a moment that may inadvertently give away more than the author intended. The woman of a couple at the hotel mentions her honeymoon, to which her partner reacts with mild amusement. In 1944, this may have hinted at camouflage for an illicit romance. To modern viewers, watching a film about spies, it is more likely to convey another reason for a ‘cover’ story.
Despite an ending that is rather exciting, Hotel Reserve does not live up to its promise. An uneven blend of mystery, comedy and romance, it would have benefited from a central character out of Sapper or Oppenheim, with their harder heads and resolute goals, rather than the indecisive Vadassy.
That's a shame that the movie didn't work well. I must admit I tend to enjoy books to movies because I can imagine things while reading that I cannot watching.
ReplyDeleteMovies tend to abbreviate plot-lines, too, so they come off as more simplistic as the books.
Delete