Hitchcock's 'The Skin Game' Review

Without being told beforehand, I don't think anybody would guess that The Skin Game was directed by Alfred Hitchcock. The film, released in 1931, tells the fairly monotonous story of the war between two families, one being traditional and the other being a modern threat to their way of living. The film and its characters are well-rounded, and there are moments of tension and excitement, however the film in itself seems to present the story at a steady pace, with the ending feeling out of place and abrupt.
Plot points aside, I think the film shows great progress in the career of Hitchcock, who had directed his first feature less than a decade before. With experimentation in camerawork and editing, Hitchcock definitely shows in his direction of this film that he was out to push the boundaries of cinema and create what had not been created before, it just seems that this film was not quite the film that was going to prove that to the public.

One of the biggest forms of experimentation in this film comes from the editing and camera work. With whip pans being used in the exciting auction scene in order to reflect the sudden changes in the bidding war, Hitchcock shows that he was a master of controlling the emotions that a camera could make an audience feel. This fast paced scene, featuring a skilled hand in camera work, was definitely one of the ones that I found most enjoyable. In the same scene, a little before the auctioning has started, Hitchcock shows his editing skills, with the superimposition of a face hauntingly moving towards the camera numerous times, showing the audience how fearful of this man the young girl is.

In context of the time and the extent that cinema had been pushed before, this film stands its ground with other films released at the time. The film has excitement, plotting, deception and death, some of these themes Hitchcock went on to master in his later career, and as expected, these scenes are the ones that stand out in this film. Hitchcock himself has said that he did not make this film by choice, an adaptation of an averagely written stage play, the film is character based and slightly mundane at parts, something that Hitch's later films were rarely ever called. It appears to me, that in the time of advancement from silent films to talkies, Hitchcock wanted to perfect the art of the talkie before he made his big break-through with it. It seems that this film, along with a few others (that will remain unnamed in this post) were merely a practice for Hitchcock to see what worked and what didn't, and what didn't quite work in this film was the sound.

Considering the first feature 'talkie' film was released only four years before The Skin Game, we have to respect that the technology was not brilliant at the time of the film's production. The fact that Hitch manages to seamlessly construct both the sound and picture of the film gives him a lot of respect in my eyes, however there are parts of the film where the audio is not perfect, perhaps some actor's voices were not suited to this new advancement of technology, as there are some character's whose lines are barely audible, and some whose are perfectly clear. The fact of the matter is, the story is told, and Hitchcock, having managed to master silent films in his short space of working in the industry before talkies were introduced, uses a lot of the features common in silents to tell the story, such as the vision of the factories superimposed over the cottage.

The film is not one to watch if you are looking for the most exciting of Hitchcock's work, however it is a really beautiful watch when one enjoys looking at a director's advancement and learning process. The film is just over an hour long, not long enough to become dragged-out and to lose a modern audiences attention span, and the strength of the play that the film is based of has enough intrigue and twists to keep you hanging on for the whole hour.

FANTASY AND DESIRE IN HITCHCOCK'S 'RICH & STRANGE':

Following an age-old tradition of mine, falling ill over the transitioning new year, while the rest of London partied and celebrated the arrival of 2013, I was tucked up in bed with a huge mug of tea & my notebook, watching and writing about Alfred Hitchcock's 1931 film 'Rich and Strange' (IMDB | Rotten Tomatoes). This dark comedy pre-dates almost all of Hitch's most celebrated and appreciated films and although he had not yet fallen into what would become his unofficial title, the master of suspense, he stays true to his roots of playing with the audiences emotions (see: the cuts from the shots of Fred & Emily on the deck of the boat to the shot of the ocean rising above the porthole of their cabin). While watching this film, the ever-present themes of fantasy and desire were constantly being portrayed and a question in my head appeared, as it always does, what is Hitchcock trying to say?


The Shakespearian references in the opening titles & in a title screen of the film are one of the things that first trigger questions in the audiences mind. The actors are referred to as 'players' in the opening credits, a term from the 16th century that was used to describe actors who travelled in packs to perform shows. Theatre in 16th century England was an escape from the ever-changing monarchy which caused religious uproar and a general bad time for the country. The fact that Hitchcock added this small

change to the usually orthodox title credits suggests that he wanted to make a point that the actors, and subsequently their characters, desire some sort of escapism. (see also: the scene in the midst of the travelling montage where Fred & Emily visit a theatre- possibly offering a literal and physical interpretation of the opening title 'players' reference, and suggesting the actors in the film and the performers in the theatre are similar. Subsequently, the bearded man who pinches Emily's behind could be seen as a reminder of reality, that they are living a dream and will someday have to return to reality, however instead of dealing with the problem, Emily suggests leaving, showing once again, a running away from reality)

The other Shakespearian feature of the film is the direct quote from The Tempest, and, although it is one of the few Shakespeare plays I have not read/seen/heard the plot of, the quote itself seemingly sets us up for the story to come and also strengthens the point that deliberately, Hitchcock wanted to show the escapism and change that is desired by many average people. 

The cruise ship is the vehicle of transportation taking Emily and Fred away to their fantasy-world, almost presenting itself as somewhere in-between fantasy and reality. Both of the affairs start on the boat, with the railings of the ship visible in both, almost keeping them penned in to this fantasy world. The Arabian land in which the ship docks at shortly after Fred meets his 'Princess' is presented to us without a title card, which is interesting in the fact that the majority of the other lands are titled. The town they visit, and the people we see working there, present an almost contrast to London at the start of the film where Fred was working. His uncomfortable and undesirable commute on the underground and his strict, mundane job are both paralleled with a contrast of people of the 'fantasy' land walking around freely in the sunshine, and casually making sales in small stalls. The contrasts between the two places continue, with the weather and colour both also adding to the effect of a desired place in the latter.

A dark, rainy London factory is replaced by...

A bright, sunny, Mediterranean paradise. 

The boat provides a location for the first kisses of both of the affairs, and with features of a ship being prominent in both of the shots, such as portholes and railings, we can take that Hitchcock is portraying that the cinematic space is key in the romances. It is almost as if the boat, (as previously mentioned, the vehicle that is taking F & E towards their fantasy world), is almost involved in the relationships. The question is being presented to us that if normality continued and F & E remained in their mundane life, would they feel the distance between them that they felt on the ship? Do our routine and busy lives distract us from what we truly want in life? 

We can expand on this by looking at the metaphor in which F gives of his fantasy 'princess' and E. F compares his 'princess' to "champagne", while referring to E as "water", an interesting description which can tell us more than appears of the film. Water is a needed for our survival, whereas champagne is simply a luxury, one that not everyone can have but is nice when drunk. The effects of too much champagne can lead to sickness, a negativity, while water is sustainable and in any amount is a positive. The effects the two women have on F is similar to the two drinks described and therefore, we see that Hitchcock is saying that reality, in the metaphor, the water, is what is needed in order to live properly.

Continuing on from the champagne description of the 'princess', we can look at the portrayal of fantasy as a negative thing. Is Hitch telling us that there are limits to what is acceptable to fantasise about. Surely the 'princess', who we later find out to be nothing but a con artist, is representing the negatives of fantasising, and the lack of limitations in fantasy worlds is being shown to be a factor that can lead to bad things. 

The ship sinking at the end of the film is representing the end of the fantasy. Aside from the sinking of the vehicle transporting them to their fantasy, the fact that the camera and F & E never leave their cabin shows their lack of ability to access the fantasy world anymore. What once held their 'perfect' affairs is now literally crashing down around them signalling the devastation it has caused. 

The film ends with a Chinese ship coming and helping a distressed F & E, and their desire at the start of the film, to escape reality, is now turned on its head, with their only desire being to get safely back to normality. This flip on the recurring themes of the film presents us with a closed ending, which Hitchcock later took on board with his most famous films, giving the audience the desired closure in which they have been craving through the nail-biting suspense for the whole time.