Yellow Canary (UK 1943)

The BBC has deposited another tranche of its RKO titles on iPlayer in the UK to enable us to entertain ourselves under lockdown. It’s a mixed bag but I haven’t seen any of them before and I’m always grateful for films without ads. I plumped for Yellow Canary which promised an interesting cast in a Herbert Wilcox production, released in the UK and the US through RKO. I’ve noted before on this blog that Wilcox was arguably the UK producer-director who attracted the largest audiences in the late 1940s for films most often built around the star performances of his partner Anna Neagle. The couple married in August 1943 soon after this film finished shooting. I think I’ve previously avoided quite a few of the couple’s films because the subject matter didn’t appeal but this is another rarity, a wartime spy thriller which isn’t a biopic (like Odette (1950)) and in which Anna Neagle is perceived as a villain.

This is an odd film in some ways, adapted from a story by P.M. Bower with a screenplay by British writer Miles Malleson and the American writer DeWitt Bodeen, who is possibly best known as the writer of Cat People (US 1942) and two other titles for Val Lewton at RKO. The explanation for this is that Wilcox and Neagle were working with RKO in the US in 1940-42 before coming back to the UK. The narrative of Yellow Canary is actually set in September 1940, meaning that the film had a slightly ‘looking back’ feel in 1944 when most audiences saw it. This is evident for me with the constant propaganda messages about ‘careless talk’ etc., much of it involving a character played by Margaret Lockwood. Such ‘warning’ films were more common in the early part of the war. Anna Neagle plays Sally Maitland, a ‘girl’ from a well-off military family who was in Germany pre-war and seems to be still favouring the Germans even after a year of the war. Her character is perhaps inspired by the ‘Mitford girls’. The six girls of that ‘real’ aristocratic family included Diana who was a fascist, the partner of Oswald Mosley, and who was interned during the war. Unity Mitford was attracted to Hitler and attempted suicide soon after war was declared. The film narrative suggests that Sally Maitland is pro-fascist but not dangerous enough to intern, especially as she is intending to leave for exile in Canada. Her parents and her younger sister Betty (an underused Nova Pilbeam), who has joined the Wrens, are glad to see her leave. They don’t know that she has been behaving suspiciously in a London flat where a man has been killed and attempts have been made to signal to German bombers. But British intelligence is watching her and when she boards a train to Liverpool she is followed by Commander Garrick of Naval Intelligence (Richard Greene) in civilian disguise.

Sally (Anna Neagle) with Capt. Orlock (Albert Lieven) in Halifax

The passage to Canada on a modest steamer sees Sally meeting Captain Orlock (Albet Lieven, a Polish officer who has escaped from Warsaw and is making the same trip to meet up with his mother in Canada. Is Sally a Nazi spy and is Orlock in danger? What does Garrick know? The final section of the film is set in Halifax, Nova Scotia where these questions are resolved. Note the exhortations in the film poster above. Years before Hitchcock and Psycho, audiences are advised to watch from the beginning and to avoid knowing the ending in advance. In 1943 screenings might have been in a ‘continuous programme’ with audiences entering a screening at any point.

I can’t quite make my mind up about this film. Anna Neagle is a strong performer and believable as a hard fascist character (though some of the actions and re-actions around her are harder to take). Richard Greene is more problematic for me because I haven’t seen anything of his work in Hollywood or British films up to this point. For me he has always been Robin Hood in the 1950s TV series. I’ve seen a suggestion that his good looks saw him rivalling Tyrone Power as a handsome action lead for 20th Century Fox. But in 1940 he had returned to the UK and enlisted in the Royal Armoured Corps which released him to make propaganda pictures like this one on three separate occasions. His post-war career didn’t meet the success he perhaps deserved but 144 episodes of The Adventures of Robin Hood imprinted his action hero image on a generation of British children (the shows were broadcast from the start of ITV in 1955). Yellow Canary is generally well made at Denham with some atmospheric cinematography by Max Greene (Mutz Greenbaum) and it is quite pacey and engaging.

Sally in danger

Somehow, however, it just doesn’t ‘feel’ like the other similar wartime spy thrillers and I have to agree with Monthly Film Bulletin‘s reviewer in 1943 (who calls it a ‘spy melodrama’) that although the script is ingenious, it invites a comparison with Hitchcock’s spy films and suffers as a result. It’s not giving too much away to reveal that Sally and Garrick have to work together in the end. The idea that they don’t trust each other and that they might have things to hide recalls Hitchcock films like The 39 Steps (1935). The script for Yellow Canary doesn’t really exploit the potential of this relationship. All spy films by their very nature test the audience’s credibility threshold but in this case the script goes too far. My comparison would be with Michael Powell’s films written by Emeric Pressburger, The Spy in Black (1939) and Contraband (1940). Powell & Pressburger (who joined to become ‘The Archers’) also produced 49th Parallel (1941), one of the best propaganda films ever made by UK filmmakers which was made entirely in Canada under wartime conditions before the Americans joined the Allies. There are some parallels between Yellow Canary and 49th Parallel, especially in the focus on the vulnerability of the Canadian Atlantic coast to penetration by U-boats. But The Archers films are far more exciting, and plausible, I think. I’m intrigued that Anna Neagle played opposite a much younger leading man. There seem to be some doubts about Richard Greene’s birth date but he is at least nine years younger and by most accounts thirteen years younger than Anna Neagle. It says a great deal about Anna Neagle’s status that such casting was possible in 1943 and she presents as a much younger woman. Would it happen today without any notice? I’m not suggesting it is a problem, just trying to understand how the film industry was then.

Sally and Jim Garrick (Richard Greene) make a handsome couple

A trivia note to close on: it was interesting to see Cyril Fletcher in one of his first film roles. At the beginning of the film he is in effect playing himself as a swanky night-club entertainer, delivering waspish short pieces, one of which has Sally as its target. He became one of the first ‘celebrity TV entertainers’ in the 1950s.

7 comments

  1. christinegeraghty

    Pleased to see this. I wrote about Yellow Canary aeons ago and discussed nationality and femininity, disguises and betrayals, by comparing it to Went the Day Well and The Silver Fleet. Not sure where that comparison came from! i knew a lot less about Anna Neagle than you do.

    Like

    • Roy Stafford

      I suspect your interest in The Silver Fleet was because of Googie Withers and a young Kathleen Byron as resistance fighters in Holland. Oddly, one of my thoughts about Yellow Canary was to wonder how Googie Withers would have been in the Anna Neagle role.

      Is your writing in that book following the BFI Summer School of 1983, National Fictions? (It seems to have disappeared off my shelves, but I’ve got it somewhere.)

      Like

      • christine geraghty

        it’s actually in a Gledhill edited collection called Nationalising Femininity so you are probably right about Googie Withers and i think I like the uprising of the women in Went the Day Well too.

        Like

  2. keith1942

    I think Roy is broadly right about the film. Herbert Wilcox was a good producer but not that effective as a director; he tends to the conventional. Anna Eagle, however, was not only a successful actor but consistently played strong-minded and independent women. Margaret Lockwood has something of the same. Richard Greene is not in the same class; one of those British actors long on good looks, shorter on acting skills. But Max Greene is an excellent cinematographer, especially in the use of low key effects.
    What is interesting about the title is the treatment of a sympathiser of German fascism. This was typical of a certain faction among the pre-war bourgeoisie. Political commentators pointed to this but I cannot think of other films that address the issue. Deborah Kerr’s character in I See a Dark Stranger (1946) is pro-IRA. It is only in recent years that I think films have adressed this topic. The novel Remains of the Day and the film version (1993) is one example; and Glorious 39 (2009) is another fine example.

    Like

    • Roy Stafford

      Replaying the early scenes, I note that the dining companion of the Colonel who sends Sally to Canada, remarks in the nightclub on Sally’s arrival at the club. She asks why Sally hasn’t been interned and sent to Brixton gaol like the others. I couldn’t catch watch she calls the internees – ‘OTPs’ or something similar? I’m still not clear what the stuffed yellow canary that she receives means (apart from the allusion to cowardice). This is one of the problems with the script I think.

      Like

  3. Lois Padawer

    Very good article, but a funny error: you talk about Margaret Lockwood in the sections about “careless talk,” but you mean Margaret Rutherford—quite different! (Rutherford is pretty funny in the film.) Though Nova Pilbeam is certainly underused in the film, there is a version of the film that is much worse. In what is either a U.S. version of the film or anyway some cut version, much of the beginning is missing, including the home background of the Neagle character. The ending at home is rendered rather meaningless or at least odd. Cyril Fletcher is also missing in that version. That is the version offered by the U.S. channel TCM, so if you watch the film on that channel or website, watch the first 11 minutes or so on youtube first. TCM actually broadcast this film recently in a tribute to Rutherford.

    Like

    • Roy Stafford

      Thanks for this Lois. I have a genuine problem with names these days. My aged brain has substituted the wrong name a couple of times before and fortunately someone spots it eventually. Such an unlikely substitution too!

      Thanks also for the info on the US cuts. It was a big problem for quite prestigious British films in the 1940s, the butchery of Powell and Pressburger films being the most high profile examples. I can understand cutting Cyril Fletcher but losing that family meal would ruin the narrative I think.

      Like

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.