Das stürmische Leben des Joe Orton

Director Stephen Frears has often picked up interesting subjects for his films. 'Prick Up Your Ears' is based on the relationship between famous writer Joe Orton and Kenneth Halliwell. Set in the 60s, this was during the time when 'being gay' in public was considered a criminal offense in parts of UK. Joe Orton is confident, talented, mellow and liked by everyone while his partner Halliwell is comparatively shy and distant and resentful of Joe's success as he claims to be the man behind his partner's success and complains about not receiving enough credit for it.

Frears depicts the relationship quite sensibly. There is almost always a conflict or a disagreement in Orton and Halliwell's sequences but the love is always apparent. While Kenneth's insecurity worsens as Joe climbs every step up towards success, Joe always stands by him. The viewer is also given brief glimpses of Joe's relationship with his mother, sister and confidant Peggy. The depiction of the 60's gay culture is also intriguing.

The execution isn't first rate as the cinematography is flat and the editing leaves a lot to be desired. The pacing is very slow. The lighting could have used some improvement.

The acting is superb. Gary Oldman is spellbinding as Joe Orton. Even though he is more commonly known for his villainous roles, movies like these prove what a versatile actor he is. Alfred Molina is brilliant as Kenneth. A foxy Julie Walters makes her presence felt in a limited role. Vanessa Redgrave is remarkable in a brief but memorable role.

'Prick Up Your Ears' is an interesting psychological character study and true crime drama. In addition to the wonderful performances, the writing is first rate, especially the witty dialogues loaded with humour. The movie ends on a note of leaving the viewer to wonder what would have become of Orton's life had he still lived. Here was a man who had everything going for him...except one thing that ended his life.

I caught this on cable today. Had never noticed it before which is odd since I've actively tried to be aware of movies with a strong gay component for as long as I can remember. But, be that as it may this is one that somehow slipped past me until today. After watching it in awe I checked to see when it was made thinking that surely it was something made in the recent past few years, after 2000. Certainly, I thought, it must have come out during the "Queer as Folk" era which gave filmmakers permission to finally and honestly show parts of the gay world which, unless you're a part of that world, most of the rest of the world were relatively unaware of until somewhat recently as society has changed for the better in its well reasoned acceptance of gays. Yet, instead, I found that "Prick Up Your Ears" was released in 1987. I couldn't believe it. The movie was so well done. Not only did it portray something that was way ahead of its time with regards to portraying this type of subject matter, the movie itself is so modernly made. The way it was filmed and the actors and how they are acting, everything about this movie screams "I'm way ahead of my time"! And so it is. And what you find is a beautifully made movie about the effects that society's attitude towards gays in the 50's and 60's have upon two gay men, their union, and gays in general during that time. And the movie was made two decades ago, breaking ground in ways that only now that movie audiences have come to take for granted.

This is a marvelous movie, groundbreaking when it was made, about an author and the authors life-partner who were breaking new ground themselves in their day. Everything about this movie is worth seeing. The story presented, the acting, the sets, the locations. Everything. In fact, it reaches far enough into so many different things about writing and movie making and gays and society and relationships and life and death itself, and it does it so well, that one can reasonably say that if you're a student of film this is a movie that should belong on your list of movies to see and study along the way to making your own movies. And if you're a person who loves good movies, this is also required viewing. And if you're gay, well, it will thrill you to see this movie for so many reasons that only if you're gay would you really kind of understand. And if you're just somebody who wants to pass some time watching a minor cinema masterpiece that has stood the test of time, here is one for you to watch, enjoy and be educated by too. Its just a part of who we were. I miss poor Joe and Kenneth.

Before writing this I saw an interview with Kenneth Williams best known as being part of the Carry On troupe. He gave some interesting insights into Joe Orton and Kenneth Halliwell. As a gay man himself Williams experienced and felt the same things in the days before sodomy laws were repealed in the United Kingdom, considerably before they were in the USA. The pressures of living as a couple increased exponentially especially a May/August couple as Orton and Halliwell were.

Joe Orton whose work I'd like to see and is curiously unavailable is played by Gary Oldman and we see him as a young writer befriended and mentored by Kenneth Halliwell who is older and played by Alfred Molina. Williams says that in his opinion there is no doubt the influence that Halliwell had on Orton's work. But they were two very different types of personality and probably were fated to come apart. Especially when Halliwell who mentored Orton was not finding any success with his own writing. In the end it destroyed them.

Great Britain had some strict sodomy laws as Oscar Wilde was living testimony to. Gay artists however got different treatments depending on who their patrons were. Oscar Wilde and the Orton/Halliwell duo in their respective generations were treated one way. But Noel Coward moved at the highest levels of British society and he had a Teflon like immunity from what befell the other three.

The film is told in flashback with Vanessa Redgrave as Orton's agent telling his biographer Wallace Shawn what the two were about individually and separately. Both Oldman and Molina were brilliant.

I can't help thinking that if they could have been traditionally married back then, they could also have been traditionally divorced when the love faded. That certainly would have been better all around.

But then we would not have had this fascinating tragedy.

Although in some ways more theatrical/televisual than cinematic, this is one of the best British films of the 80's, and is probably Alan Bennett's most successful screenplay. Bennett and Orton have a number of things in common - a love of "found" dialogue (here mainly given to Orton's landlady) - theatrical success in the 60's (Bennett in "Beyond the Fringe") - and of course their sexuality.

The film is quite interesting in what it leaves out - anyone who has read Orton's diaries will know that "the latter part" is rather underplayed here. Also sadly missed is "Mrs Edna Welthorpe" an alter ego of Joe's who would write to newspapers denouncing his plays as filth - a rather cunning way of securing free advertising. A very interesting telephone conversation with Brian Epstein "...one of the boys is happily married..." plays with what we now know about Epstein and Lennon in a beautifully understated way.

Orton and Halliwell's relationship is counterpointed in the film by "John Lahr"'s own marriage (Wallace Shawn is great here too, as always) as Lahr's researching of his biography acts as a framing device for Orton's story. As others have commented, the dynamic of the central relationship rings horribly true to anyone who has been in a halfway similar situation.

It's interesting to speculate on what would have become of Orton had he lived. Time has dimmed the shock value of his plays to the point where they will probably never have the same effect, and despite various rumours (the Sex Pistols?) no-one has picked up the Beatles script, probably for the same reason. Live fast, die young, leave a good looking corpse? Perhaps.

Gary Oldman follows up his unknowable Sid Vicious in SID AND NANCY with an equally elusive Joe Orton in what is ultimately a riff on A STAR IS BORN. As Orton's star rises, that of his needier, more vulnerable lover Kenneth Halliwell, played with compassion by Alfred Molina, declines.

The screenplay, by Alan Bennett, is based on critic John Lahr's biography of Orton. Bennett makes the writing of the biography part of the story, and briefly tries to parallel the relationship of Lahr and his wife Andrea (played by Wallace Shawn and Lindsay Duncan), but I'm not sure that it helps the film much. Splitting the story's focus in its early sections removes us from Orton himself. That's who we want to stay with. The only real benefit the Lahr section gives us is one wonderful scene between Ms Duncan and the great Joan Sanderson as her hyper-middle class mother, decoding shorthand sections of Orton's diary to reveal highly salacious behaviour. Ms Sanderson's deadpan performance, enthusiastically uncovering Orton's meaning while remaining steadfastly unshocked, is one of the highlights of the film for me.

There are a dozen or so cameos from other wondrous actors, mostly known for their theatre work -- Margaret Tyzack, John Moffatt, Julie Legrand, Selina Cadell -- as well as substantial support from Francis Barber and Janet Dale as, respectively, Orton's warm-hearted sister and eccentric landlady.

Ultimately, the film rests on the shoulders of the central trio: Orton, Halliwell and Orton's agent, the redoubtable Peggy Ramsay. She is played by Vanessa Redgrave in a glowing performance, that helps to hold the disparate parts of the film together.

Molina's work I've already praised. So we're back to Gary Oldman, who is absolutely brilliant as Orton. What Oldman is able to do is to accept, rather than explain, his characters. He thinks it's OK not to make them totally knowable, and he's right.

Director Stephen Frears is equally difficult to pigeon-hole. He favours realism on the one hand, but on the other he is capable of pulling off highly-charged scenes - like the orgy in a public lavatory -- which might floor less gifted artists.

All in all, an entertaining and informative film, not without its flaws. In particular, its depiction of gay men's lives in the late fifties and early sixties is interestingly honest.