The Go-Between

When I first heard the BBC was going to show a new version of The Go Between I wanted to turn in and watch it. I read the novel years ago and it made a vivid impression on me. Its always been one of my favourite books, and I thought of it with fondness after I moved to East Anglia.

It was wonderful at first seeing the older Leo with his younger self (in his green suit) on the train. I liked how the filming concentrated on the house and the lush greenery. But I was disappointed. The new Marion is no Julie Christie. Fair enough, no one else is Julie Christie except Miss Christie herself, but the Marion in this re-imagining is fair, very pretty, but lacking any real depth until she becomes angry with Leo for not taking messages to Ted. The new Ted, like Marion, is lovely to look at. I wasn't surprised when Ted was swimming in the nude and working in the fields stripped to the waist. (The BBC has been broadcasting several adaptations of classic novels recently including scenes with topless and wet males, trying to capitalize on the fervor made by Colin Firth swimming as Mr Darcy in Pride and Prejudice) It was nice to have some eye candy for the ladies and it worked well with the themes of the story. The cricket scene and the following concert were well played too.

It turned out to be a chocolate box depiction of the Go Between, full of richness but full of sweetness mostly on the surface, mostly shallow, and ultimately unsatisfying. I disliked the compartmenting of the story so the viewpoint of the old Leo was shoehorned to the end. I missed some of the key scenes in the novel, such as Leo offering his dry bathing suit to Marion so she can dry her hair with it and Leo polishing Ted's cricket bat. I missed seeing Norwich Cathedral, and Marion meeting up again with Leo at the train section wasn't as meaningful as her ditching him at the Cathedral and telling him to wait for her. While the cricket scenes and concert scenes were effective the new version doesn't give as much indication of the class divide as the original novel or the 1971 film. I liked the hints of a Norfolk accent in Ted's speech: it would have been nice to hear and see more Norfolk in the film. It felt very abridged and heavily cut so it could fit into a 90 minute slot. I much prefer the 1971 film. Harold Pinter did a fine job with the screenplay, and the acting is superb. Only Vanessa Redgrave and Jim Broadbent achieve any pathos in this version. The young actor who plays Leo is sweet looking and finely suggests his inner torment. The viewer however isn't given any notion of Leo's acting and conniving to win popularity in the house. Several times in the novel Leo plays for effect, like asking for a large amount of sugar in his tea because small boys are supposed to like sugar. I groaned at the ending: seeing the Old Leo and the young Leo together in the train traveling to the house was effective, but seeing them together walk towards the house at the end, preparing to speak to Marion's grandson, was corny. Marion's recounting of what happened to the others in the house did sound like a rushed through list, and didn't convey the weight of destruction: how the brand new century so promising in that long ago summer turned out to be devastating for Marion, her family, and the country.

I have rated this film as 8 out of ten because if you ignore the original version it is an excellent production with some good performances but for me nothing can match the original 1971 version which I would give 10 out of 10.

It was an almost impossible task to attempt to improve on the original and if you can't do that, why bother? Unfortunately the new film blatantly tries to copy the 1971 version in several places and inexplicably omits key lines and characters that were in the L.P. Hartley novel.

And why was the new film not filmed in Norfolk? Berkshire is an unconvincing substitute. Railway buffs will also have noticed that the station shown was obviously southern, probably the Bluebell Railway, not at all like a Norfolk station.

One can understand the BBC's desire to remake "Cider with Rosie" and "Lady Chatterley's Lover", and perhaps even "An Inspector Calls", although the last has at least two fine filmed versions, but their decision to remake "The Go-Between" was a misguided one.

Jospeh Losey's 1971 version is one of those rare occasions in which everything seemed to be right - a top notch cast, beautiful cinematography, a terrific Michel Legrand score and a superb Harold Pinter screenplay. L. P. Hartley himself was moved to tears after seeing the film. So then why remake it? How could it possibly fare in comparison?

This television version does not even begin to compete with its predecessor. Adrian Hodge shows little faith in his audience forgoing any subtlety in his dialogue and general characterisation. The cast are a pale and uncharismatic bunch.

Seek out Hartley's novel and Losey's film - they are masterpieces. Skip this one.

The acting of Jack in this movie is outstanding - he should be at the top of the credits.

I also found this adaptation to be far superior to the original, much more attention grabbing.

There is a danger of believing that originals are always the best but this is not always the case.

Lesley Manville portrayed the mother superbly and captured the horrible nature of many women of her age and position - people who did absolutely nothing for a living.

10/10

I am, more often than not, left disappointed when my favourite literary classics are adapted for television or the big screen, and while this BBC production of LP Hartley's novel is not perfect, it does better than most.

The drama begins with a crushed, sorrowful looking older Leo (Jim Broadbent) travelling on a train to Norfolk, the scene of his foreign past. He imagines his younger self, (Jack Hollington) who accuses him of being a "Dull Dog." The older Leo then lays the blame for him being this "creature of ashes and cinder" squarely on the shoulders of his younger self. I found it to be a clever, and moving way of beginning the story.

We then travel back fifty years in time to the scorching summer of 1900 and the characters that would haunt Leo into his old age.

Leo spends his holidays at the country manor of his upper-class friend Marcus. (Samuel Joslin) It is here that he meets the beautiful, but manipulative and selfish Marian, (Joanna Vanderham) who he becomes instantly besotted with. He then becomes a postman of sorts, as he delivers love letters between Marian and her bit of rough, the tenant farmer Ted Burgess. (Ben Batt)

Over the course of the summer, Leo feels increasingly uncomfortable and guilty about ferrying these correspondence, which he now knows aren't just "normal letters," back and forth. The engagement of Marian to the landlord, war hero, and thoroughly decent Trimingham (Stephen Campbell Moore) increases Leo's torment even further.

I found it to be well directed, beautifully shot, with picture perfect locations. The performances were excellent throughout, especially from Master Hollington as young Leo. His acting was subtle, natural, intuitive and he had a charismatic presence that you could not take your eyes off of. One to watch out for I would say.

At times it felt a little rushed, especially at the end where Broadbent returns as Leo, Batt as Marian's grandson, and Vanessa Redgrave plays the part of an older Marian. That is just a small complaint though. Overall, I found it to be a very moving adaptation of my favourite LP Hartley novel