Hitchcock and Truffaut almost had an argument over the relative value of this (1934) version of "The Man Who Knew Too Much" and the 1956 remake. Hitchcock, always averse to confrontation, finally admitted that the early film was the work of a talented amateur and the 1956 version that of a professional.
For a "talented amateur," this is pretty good stuff. It's true that the later version is glossier, more tense, and edgier, but this one is a lot of fun. We don't really worry for a moment that the kidnapped child (Nova Pilbeam) of Leslie Banks and Edna Best will be harmed. Nor can we readily imagine that the anonymous ambassador will be assassinated at the Albert Hall. Leslie Banks and his pal, who are trying to locate the place in London where the child is being held, don't seem to take the threat too seriously either. Where Jimmy Stewart and Doris Day played the pursuit almost entirely straight (with the exception of one ludicrous scene in a taxidermist's shop), Banks and Buddy make wisecracks and engage in one comic adventure after another -- even a horrifying scene is the office of a sinister dentist who grins demoniacally as he intones, "That one had better come out." (Gulp.) Edna Best as the anxious mother isn't around all that much. The place occupied by Doris Day in the remake is taken by Banks' somewhat mentally stunted male buddy. You can get more laughs out of a male buddy than out of a fearful wife. You can bop the buddy over the head, hypnotize him, hit him with folding chairs, and pull his tooth. Try doing that to a near-hysterical Doris Day.
Yes, the 1956 version is a more polished film, but it's a different kind of film too. This one is almost farcical and has Peter Lorre as a suavely sneaky murderer. It has a climactic shoot out that isn't particularly well done. But they're both identifiably Hitchcockian. Take your pick. You win either way.
For a "talented amateur," this is pretty good stuff. It's true that the later version is glossier, more tense, and edgier, but this one is a lot of fun. We don't really worry for a moment that the kidnapped child (Nova Pilbeam) of Leslie Banks and Edna Best will be harmed. Nor can we readily imagine that the anonymous ambassador will be assassinated at the Albert Hall. Leslie Banks and his pal, who are trying to locate the place in London where the child is being held, don't seem to take the threat too seriously either. Where Jimmy Stewart and Doris Day played the pursuit almost entirely straight (with the exception of one ludicrous scene in a taxidermist's shop), Banks and Buddy make wisecracks and engage in one comic adventure after another -- even a horrifying scene is the office of a sinister dentist who grins demoniacally as he intones, "That one had better come out." (Gulp.) Edna Best as the anxious mother isn't around all that much. The place occupied by Doris Day in the remake is taken by Banks' somewhat mentally stunted male buddy. You can get more laughs out of a male buddy than out of a fearful wife. You can bop the buddy over the head, hypnotize him, hit him with folding chairs, and pull his tooth. Try doing that to a near-hysterical Doris Day.
Yes, the 1956 version is a more polished film, but it's a different kind of film too. This one is almost farcical and has Peter Lorre as a suavely sneaky murderer. It has a climactic shoot out that isn't particularly well done. But they're both identifiably Hitchcockian. Take your pick. You win either way.