This 1939 "Raffles" remake, specifically following in the footsteps of the 1930 early talkie, but also based on the character from literature and theatre, as well as still earlier film versions in 1917 and 1925, is a slight scenario, but it's affable enough. Suave, soft-spoken Englishman Ronald Colman from 1930 iteration is swapped out for the suave, soft-spoken Englishman David Niven this time around. The plot is developed a bit more here and the ending is slightly altered, probably to submit to the Hays Code, but, for the most part, the 1930 and 1939 films are barely distinguishable outside of the former's creaky early synchronized-sound recording. Gregg Toland even worked as cinematographer on both pictures and seemed to have tried to replicate some of the same shots, including of the amateur cracksman's first jewelry heist. I think the 1930 scene is actually the better, which might be because the all-time-great art director William Cameron Menzies also worked on that production. Visually, the most notable thing the 1939 one adds is the early television, which detectives at Scotland Yard use to watch a cricket match featuring Raffles.
A first theft from a museum of a painting is also added. With the amateur cracksman leaving his own mark with his card and, then, sending the painting to a retired actress to help her financially, as she may now collect reward money for the painting's return--the conflation seems to be that his thievery is an art form. As in the 1930 film, too, the amateurism of the heists and the cricket are paralleled. That's why he returns the stolen goods instead of profiting off of them; it's a sport to him. Moreover, there's the romantic interest, with Olivia de Havilland in the supporting role this outing, who seems to become attracted not only to the man, but also the excitement of his criminal activities. The spectator may be expected to similarly swoon.
A first theft from a museum of a painting is also added. With the amateur cracksman leaving his own mark with his card and, then, sending the painting to a retired actress to help her financially, as she may now collect reward money for the painting's return--the conflation seems to be that his thievery is an art form. As in the 1930 film, too, the amateurism of the heists and the cricket are paralleled. That's why he returns the stolen goods instead of profiting off of them; it's a sport to him. Moreover, there's the romantic interest, with Olivia de Havilland in the supporting role this outing, who seems to become attracted not only to the man, but also the excitement of his criminal activities. The spectator may be expected to similarly swoon.