The question of why some cinematic classics are revisited with remakes is often met with skepticism and the new take on Robert Hamer’s 1949 masterpiece, Kind Hearts and Coronets, now titled How to Make a Killing, doesn’t entirely dispel those doubts. Released in the US and Australia now, and arriving in the UK on March 13th, the film attempts to recapture the darkly comedic brilliance of its predecessor, but largely falls short, losing much of what made the original so uniquely captivating. Directed by John Patton Ford, known for his function on the Aubrey Plaza thriller Emily the Criminal, this updated version transplants the story to a contemporary American setting, a shift that, as many critics have pointed out, diminishes the crucial element of class commentary that was central to Hamer’s vision.
Kind Hearts and Coronets, a cornerstone of Ealing Studios’ post-World War II output, remains a remarkably sharp satire of British social hierarchy. The story follows Louis Mazzini, a man driven by a decades-old family grievance, as he systematically plots to eliminate the eight relatives standing between him and a dukedom. What elevates the film beyond a simple revenge thriller is Alec Guinness’s astonishing performance – he portrays each of the eight potential victims, creating a darkly humorous and unsettling portrayal of aristocratic entitlement. The original film’s success wasn’t merely about its clever plot; it was about its incisive critique of a rigid class system and the lengths to which someone might head to overcome it. This remake, while attempting to maintain the core narrative, struggles to replicate that biting social commentary within a modern American context.
The Legacy of Robert Hamer and Ealing Studios
Robert Hamer, born in 1911 alongside his twin sister Barbara, was a pivotal figure in British cinema, though his contributions are often overshadowed by his contemporaries. He began his career at London Films in 1934 as a clapper boy, progressing to the editing staff by 1938. According to his IMDb profile, Hamer worked as an editor on Alfred Hitchcock’s Jamaica Inn (1939) and briefly for the GPO Film Unit before joining Ealing Studios in 1941. Ealing Studios, established in 1902, became synonymous with British creativity and innovation, particularly in the years following World War II. Films like Ladykillers, Saraband for Dead Lovers, and The Lavender Hill Mob helped define a period of cultural recovery and rehabilitation. Hamer’s directorial breakthrough came with his segment, “The Haunted Mirror,” in the 1945 omnibus film Dead of Night.
Kind Hearts and Coronets, released in 1949, cemented Hamer’s reputation. The film received a Golden Lion nomination at the 1949 Venice Film Festival, recognizing its innovative storytelling and masterful direction. Hamer continued to collaborate with Ealing on films like It Always Rains on Sunday, and notably helped shape the career of actress Googie Withers, providing her with substantial roles she had previously struggled to uncover. Despite his success, Hamer’s career was tragically cut short by his death in 1963, at the age of 52, leaving behind a relatively small but highly influential body of work. The studio, as noted by Far Out Magazine, hosted some of the UK’s greatest comedy directors, including Basil Dearden, Walter Forde and Robert Stevenson, but Hamer’s work stands out for its unique blend of dark humor and social critique.
A Modern Take: How to Make a Killing and its Challenges
How to Make a Killing stars Glen Powell as Becket Redfellow, a character mirroring Louis Mazzini’s vengeful quest for inheritance. Margaret Qualley plays the Sibella equivalent, a cynical and manipulative figure, while Jessica Henwick embodies the role of the sympathetic Edith. The film adheres closely to the original plot, with Becket systematically targeting his family members to claim his rightful fortune. But, the shift to a contemporary American setting presents significant challenges. The original’s sharp satire of the British class system is diluted in a society where wealth and privilege operate differently. The nuances of social standing and the historical weight of aristocratic entitlement are less pronounced, diminishing the impact of Becket’s actions and motivations.
One of the most significant hurdles faced by the remake is the absence of a single actor taking on multiple roles, as Alec Guinness famously did in the 1949 version. Guinness’s performance was a masterclass in characterization, creating a sense of unsettling familiarity as he portrayed each of the victims. The new film opts for different actors for each role, losing the crucial element of a single performer embodying the collective arrogance and entitlement of the aristocratic family. As the original review notes, the question arises: who could have possibly attempted to replicate Guinness’s feat? The article speculates on actors like Benedict Cumberbatch, Andrew Scott, Eddie Redmayne, and Jonathan Bailey, highlighting the sheer difficulty of the task.
Critics have also pointed to Powell’s performance as lacking the “ice-cold elegance” and “furious power” of Dennis Price’s portrayal of Louis Mazzini. While Powell is described as “game enough,” he doesn’t fully capture the character’s complex motivations and simmering rage. This lack of depth contributes to the film’s overall failure to reach the satirical heights of the original. The remake, feels like a pale imitation, lacking the wit, charm, and social commentary that made Kind Hearts and Coronets a timeless classic.
The Question of Remakes and Cinematic Legacy
The remake of Kind Hearts and Coronets raises a broader question about the necessity of revisiting classic films. As the original review suggests, the endeavor requires a level of audacity – a “chutzpah” – that is often missing in these adaptations. The article draws parallels to other remakes of Ealing Studios’ films, such as the Coen Brothers’ version of The Ladykillers and Todd Phillips’ take on School for Scoundrels, questioning whether these updates add anything meaningful to the original works. Often, these remakes simply lack the unique vision and cultural context that made the originals so special.
The success of a remake hinges on its ability to offer a fresh perspective or a compelling reason for revisiting a beloved story. In the case of How to Make a Killing, the shift to an American setting and the absence of a central, multi-role performance ultimately undermine the film’s potential. While the core plot remains intact, the essential elements that made Kind Hearts and Coronets a masterpiece are lost in translation. The film serves as a cautionary tale about the challenges of adapting classic works and the importance of preserving their original spirit.
How to Make a Killing serves as a reminder of the enduring power of Robert Hamer’s original vision. Kind Hearts and Coronets remains a cinematic triumph, a darkly comedic masterpiece that continues to resonate with audiences today. The remake, while not entirely without merit, fails to capture the magic of its predecessor, leaving viewers to appreciate the original all the more. The film is currently available in the US and Australia, and will be released in the UK on March 13th.
As audiences continue to debate the merits of remakes, the legacy of Robert Hamer and Ealing Studios serves as a potent reminder of the importance of originality and the enduring power of classic cinema. The conversation surrounding How to Make a Killing will likely continue, but one thing remains clear: the original Kind Hearts and Coronets remains a film to be cherished and revisited for generations to come.
The next step for How to Make a Killing will be tracking its box office performance in the UK following its release on March 13th. Keep an eye on World Today Journal for further updates and analysis of the film’s reception. What are your thoughts on remakes of classic films? Share your opinions in the comments below.
Worth a look