Füge eine Handlung in deiner Sprache hinzuIn WW2 London, a writer falls in love with the wife of a British civil servant but both men suspect her of infidelity with yet another man.In WW2 London, a writer falls in love with the wife of a British civil servant but both men suspect her of infidelity with yet another man.In WW2 London, a writer falls in love with the wife of a British civil servant but both men suspect her of infidelity with yet another man.
- Regie
- Drehbuch
- Hauptbesetzung
- Nominiert für 1 BAFTA Award
- 1 Gewinn & 2 Nominierungen insgesamt
- Doctor
- (as O'Donovan Shiell)
Empfohlene Bewertungen
I have not seen the remake but was quite interested to see how a 1950's movie would manage to depict the illicit affair between Maurice and Sarah without breaking every moral code of the day. The answer is with lots of talking. The film is significantly shorter than the modern version and had less controversy (or at least, does now) but it still manages to bring things out. The plot is pretty good but relies very heavily on the extended flashback/journal sequence to keep things going. The talk heavy feel is a little tiring but does work well the characters' emotions are brought out well without profanity or nudity.
I don't think Johnson fitted the role that well but he was still good. His inner bitterness and guilt came out well at points and he brings his complex character out well. Kerr is also good although her role is less difficult. She does have to carry the whole journal sequence near the end and she doesn't let the film dip. Cushing only has a few scenes but he is very good. He gives an English gent performance but eventually you can see the cracks as he tries to hold his feelings together.
Overall this is a solid adaptation of the book that manages to bring out the subject matter without the sexual excess of the modern version. While it is a little heavy on dialogue at times, the emotions come out with all the stilted control of the period and it works quite well as a subversive melodrama.
With a background of World War II, neighbors Maurice Bendrix and Sarah Miles (Van Johnson and Deborah Kerr) have a deep, passionate romance. But they are separated for a year or so, and when they try to resume the relationship (or when Johnson tries to resume the relationship - Kerr seems relatively hesitant). It turns out that, due to personal experiences, Kerr has had a religious revelation. She is listening to a Catholic priest. She is also trying to help a man with a deformity (a birthmark) on his face who hates God. She is also concerned about the spiritual health of Johnson and of her actual husband Henry (Peter Cushing, in a very moving - and non-horrific role). The film shows how Kerr affects all the lives around her, even beyond her death after a short illness (as the novel does). Yes, it is too talky - novels about ideas (and here it is the age old question of what is real love, the spiritual or the profane)usually are. Greene, good Catholic exponent that he was, would have said that Kerr's devotion to her God was an outpouring of divine true love to her fellow creatures. Her death is not a tragedy. But Greene the novelist and part-time realist cannot leave it there. Johnson's character is bitter at the end of this remarkable novel, and at the end of the film. And his bitterness is directed at the source of that love that triumphed over his profane one.
The construction of the film is complex,showing the same events from two points of view.Sometimes you may lose the vital lead ,for a lot of important things are not necessarily on the screen.
If the movie is successful ,it's because of Deborah Kerr's extraordinary skills.She is sensational in her part of an unhappy woman,in search of something really worthwhile.Whereas Maurice (Van Johnson) is all passion and jealousy,her quest is much more demanding.
A lot of us have ,at least once in our lives,asked God for something.And if this wish comes true,is it proof positive that God exists?And if the person who prayed Him is an atheist?Does it mean that she has got to change her way of thinking? That she is indebted to Him?That's Sarah's moral dilemma ,lost between her love for Maurice and her moral concern,and trying to find her way ,helped by two men Father Crompton and Smythe.
Deborah Kerr's fans should watch this .
At the time,Edward Dmytryk had probably moral concern too.
The movie does not, cannot, express the passion so much a part of Neil Jordan's version; furthermore, it's talkier, and the talk isn't as good. It doesn't capture the period (World War II and just after) in the slightest, despite some newsreel footage, but otherwise London is presented very well in handsome black and white photography. It's an honest and respectable version of Greene's novel, but Jordan's is the classic.
Wusstest du schon
- WissenswertesGregory Peck was offered the lead.
- PatzerAfter the bomb explosion, when Sarah leaves, she stops in doorway and grabs the door side with the right hand. Between cuts, she appears without hand on the door at all.
- Zitate
Sarah Miles: What do you believe in, Henry? All these years I've been married to you I've never really known; I've never even asked. Do you believe that there's a hell and a heaven, and an immortal soul, and a god who rewards and punishes and answers prayers?
Henry Miles: It's not exactly the sort of thing to go into over a cup of tea.
- VerbindungenFeatured in Peter Cushing: A One-Way Ticket to Hollywood (1989)
Top-Auswahl
- How long is The End of the Affair?Powered by Alexa
Details
- Erscheinungsdatum
- Herkunftsländer
- Sprache
- Auch bekannt als
- The End of the Affair
- Drehorte
- Produktionsfirma
- Weitere beteiligte Unternehmen bei IMDbPro anzeigen
- Laufzeit
- 1 Std. 45 Min.(105 min)
- Farbe
- Seitenverhältnis
- 1.85 : 1