Rainey Dawn The film is about as dry as stale bread. It does hold my interest to a degree but it's not the greatest film nor the worst film that Hitchcock has made (in my opinion). From what I've read, not even Alfred wanted liked this film - he didn't even want to make it but he did.It's not an unwatchable film but it is not a good movie. It's more of an interest to Hitchcock fans and maybe some film students - that's about it. There might be another small crowd interested in this one, those that are interested in all things Irish.IDK what this film is missing really, maybe a bit more comedy to make it "spicy" or entertaining. A bit quicker pace couldn't hurt either.Not bad but not good - It's in the middle ground for me.Note: IMDb has this film listed as 1929 while most other sources have this film listed as 1930. 3/10

wes-connors A poor Irish family is notified they will be inheriting a small fortune, but things don't go according to plan. This classic stage play, by Sean O'Casey, makes a weak motion picture. Despite being directed by Alfred Hitchcock, little is done to make it interesting as a film. And, unfortunately, nothing helps you understand context. In fact, the introductory political speech and shooting of Barry Fitzgerald makes it even more confusing; a narrative explaining setting and situation would have been better. The introduction of the family characters falter, also. Central is Sara Allgood (as Juno Boyle). Her unemployed, and hopelessly in debt, husband is Edward Chapman (as Jack). Their children, one-armed John Laurie (as Johnny) and pregnant Kathleen O'Regan (as Mary), are left holding the dramatic potential.*** Juno and the Paycock (6/29/30) Alfred Hitchcock ~ Sara Allgood, Edward Chapman, Kathleen O'Regan, John Laurie

MartinHafer Before I begin the review, I would like to point out that watching this film isn't easy--particularly for people aren't used to the strong accents. That's because in addition to struggling to understand them, it gets worse because the sound is so bad AND there are no closed captions. I hope there is a better and cleaned up version out there, but I doubt it. My copy is from a cheap box set of Hitchcock's films, but whenever I have seen this film on DVD, it's been in similar sets--where captions and film preservation aren't particularly important.As for the film, like almost all of Hitchcock's films before 1934, most of his films defy a specific genre. While he did THE LODGER, most of his silent and early sound films have nothing to do with suspense or mystery. So the fact that JUNO AND THE PAYCOCK might seem nothing like a Hitchcock film is simply because there was no "Hitchcock Style" yet.JUNO AND THE PAYCOCK is a look at an Irish family and their rather ordinary and stereotypical lives. The husband, the Captain, isn't a captain at all but a lazy drinker who avoids work at all costs. The wife, Juno (Sara Algood), is a long-suffering woman who tries to make good with what they've got--which isn't much. The first 30 minutes of the film features no tangible plot--just the Captain talking and talking and talking with various friends and then his wife. This is all pretty dull. Later, the couple learn that they've come into an inheritance and their lives are thrown into a tizzy. They begin having all kinds of ideas about living high off the hog, only by the end of the film to find out that it's all for naught. Sadly, there really isn't more to the film than this.I think how good this film is to the viewer probably depends a lot on your perspective. I am sure an Irish person or someone with Irish heritage would look at this a lot different than me, an American without a drop of "green" blood. To me, it's all just a long and dull talk-fest with little to recommend it. Hitchcock has obviously worked hard to create such vivid characterizations here, but don't expect THE QUIET MAN or the like.

Jay Raskin This is a work of socialist realism, showing the lives of the working-class from the worker's point of view. It is shocking and raw, but contains a great deal wit and humor. It is certainly a surprise to see Hitchcock handling such overtly political material. He does it with a great deal of sensitivity. He allows Sean O'Casey's wonderful dialogue to carry the film and does not allow any cinematic tricks to get in the way. This is a must-see film. For those who think that Hitchcock is all technique and no ideological substance, it will be a surprise and a revelation.Only "The Skin Game" matches it for overtly Marxist political drama.