The film was very entertaining (loved the homage to Hitchcock) and great to watch.

I not going to write a synopsis but it was enjoyable. I've purchased a DVD and have watched it 5 times.

Each time I've watched it, there is something new I saw: for instance, the heroine, who was driving, left the car running when they ran up the stairs to go back to the castle to search for the 39 Steps :)

Masterpiece Theatre has great stories to offer. Each time the Masterpiece comes on, I have to watch in case it's something really interesting that catches my "fancy". This one did!

The setting is in England first, but moves to Scotland - home of my great grandparents. The scenery is beautiful and looks VERY cold since some of the exterior shots show their breath as the actors talk. I loved the train scenes - especially the ventriloquist and "dummy" who helped the Hero escape the police.

All in all, it's a great trip of story line to whisk a person away from daily trials and mean people.

I thought I might be driven to writing my first ever film critique in response to a feeling of elation at having just watched a truly inspiring film.

In fact, it's quite the contrary. So appalling was this film that I immediately felt a strong moral obligation to warn others against watching it. Trust me, I know about these things - under no circumstances should anyone be tempted by the film's title nor the superficial charm of its lead character played by Rupert Penry-Jones to believe that this is anything other then complete, utter tosh.

The plot bears the thinnest of resemblances to Buchan's book, the characters are furnished with a 'Terry and June' comic gravity and the running time is 85 minutes too long. Anyone giving this film a rating of more than 1 needs to get out more :)

When the Guthrie Theatre of Minneapolis announced its 2010 dates of live presentations and The 39 Steps was a part, I thought first of Hitchcock and wondered. His 1935 film was immensely entertaining when I first saw it on TV in the '50s or '60s -- Mr. Memory at the Music Hall, the Scotland chases, the room at the inn, and back to the Music Hall with Mr. Memory's explanation. I could hardly wait to see it again, and when I did it had lost something for me. Obviously, with mysteries, that is the case. Nevertheless, I'll always treasure the first experience. Years later I found Buchan's 1915 novel (one of a series using Hannay as the protagonist) at a yard sale and ate it up. As John Huston did with The Maltese Falcon novel, Hitchcock did with The 39 Steps -- followed a great story well told and just translated it to film. Or so I thought. I'd forgotten until finding this under "Questions" about the film: "... the actual 39 steps are different ... Hannay is never handcuffed to a woman...the romantic bit was made up for the movie...". But "both stories are highly episodic.... Buchan ... long discrete chapters ... whereas Hitchcock hurtles abrupt changes...". Well, why not since novels employ the art of high, middle, and low points but film language is the art of high points, mainly. Gotta be that way. Reluctant to watch this TV version, I did so anyway. You have to for comparison sake. I found the two leads, male and female, attractive and effective, and the camera work just as good. I'm still planning to find the book on one of my shelves. And when I do, I'll give it another go. And lay it out for my wife to consider. (Oh, oh. She says I did that the first time, and she has read it.) I remember the book as rather thin in appearance but thick with adventure. A red binding. The Guthrie stage version was a testament to creative stage adaptation. The fast pace was great fun with five (5!) actors doing quick changes for multiple roles but never harming the context. Now I found the book: copyright MCMXV, fewer than 230 5x8 pages.