WHEN HOLLYWOOD LOVED BRITAIN: The Hollywood “British” Film, 1939-1945 by H. Mark Glancy looks at what the author argues is a niche genre existing from the early 1930s through the end of WW II: films set in Britain or the British Empire, about them (or a Hollywood idealized version like The Rains Came), based on British writers such as Dickens, Doyle or Stevenson and starring expat British actors.
Glancy explains the development of talking pictures was a big spur to making these films: spoken language meant a language barrier in many countries but not in England. The British Isles were also small enough, with enough cinemas, that distributing them was easy. And as Germany began pushing against foreign non-Aryan influences in films shown there, there was less cost if Hollywood got cut out of that market for being openly pro-British (from what I’ve read elsewhere, adapting classics such as David Copperfield appealed to studio heads as a way to prove they were a class act).
When WW II began, the studios were positioned to make pro-British films such as A Yank in the RAF, even if that meant working around the Production Code (couldn’t say anything that was anti-German) and isolationists. Glancy goes into the factors influencing the genre, criticism (the benevolent view of the British class system and British colonialism) and how the war encouraged Hollywood to put an even more positive spin on things. This makes me wonder if one reason the 1941 Dr. Jekyll and Mr. Hyde eschews any hint of Victorian hypocrisy is the need to present our ally in the best possible light (much as we did with the Soviet Union in that era).

I expected to like BORROWED TIME: The Story of Britain Between the Wars by Roy Hattersly just as much; I didn’t. The book covers a number of interesting angles — post-war efforts to build a lasting peace, Edward VIII’s abdication, the boom in the British car industry post-war, the housing crisis, cricket, the struggles of the poor — but Hattersly, a former member of Parliament, focuses too much on the politics and very inside baseball in that: who took which position and why, how this played out, which ministers and MPs rose or fell as the issues developed. I get none of the sense of everyday life David Kynaston puts into his 1950s histories and there’s too much stuff that doesn’t get covered: nothing on Scotland or Wales, little on the Empire outside of India, nothing on the “bright young things” who partied through the 1930s. There’s also a lack of structure — why stick the chapter on Edward’s 1930s abdication right after the chapter on post-WW I peacemaking? Unsatisfying, overall.


























