PUNTUACIÓN EN IMDb
6,9/10
1,8 mil
TU PUNTUACIÓN
Añade un argumento en tu idiomaAn affair between a literary agent and his best friend's wife. The story unfolds in reverse-chronological order.An affair between a literary agent and his best friend's wife. The story unfolds in reverse-chronological order.An affair between a literary agent and his best friend's wife. The story unfolds in reverse-chronological order.
- Nominado para 1 premio Óscar
- 3 premios y 2 nominaciones en total
Reseñas destacadas
The great master of Theatre, Harold Pinter, brings us the seduction of one of his (in my opinion) best plays. With stunningly clued performances by Irons, Kingsley and Hodge, the play seduces as it unfolds, and every scene is charged with a sexual tension. A daring step for film and writing, the plot is shown backwards and both the end and beginning are so beautifully touching because you know what will happen, as well as what has already. A triumph of the cinema.
Emma (Patricia Hodges) is married with Robert (Ben Kingsley), who is the best friend of Jerry (Jeremy Irons), who is the lover of Emma. The originality of this romance is the way it is told to the viewer, backwards, from the present to the past. Although being theatrical, it is supported by an outstanding cast and is a good entertainment. Basically there is no soundtrack along this drama. My vote is seven.
An ingeniously constructed movie, adapted from his play, by celebrated writer Harold Pinter, directed by Sam Spiegel, "Betrayal" shows in reverse order, the end and beginning of an extra-marital affair between a gallery-owner and her publisher husband's best friend. In a reversal of convention, we see the ravelling as opposed to the unravelling of a relationship going wrong with the backtracking device keeping the viewer watching right to the last "genesis" moment.
The characterisation does betray a little chauvinism, you do lose a little sympathy for the cuckolded Ben Kingsley character after he admits to serial philandering of his own, but for me the film succeeds by not judging the characters at all, more they're put under the microscope like lab rats for the voyeuristic viewer to examine their behaviour and come to one's own moral judgement.
To stand up to this scrutiny without deadening proceedings requires good acting and that's unquestionably the case here with Jeremy Irons and Patricia Hodge as the stars-uncrossed lovers and Kingsley as the jilted husband. The acting is restrained and avoids for the most part ostentation although occasionally you can see the twitches and tics of Irons and Kingsley kick in a la the Dustin Hoffman method-acting manual. You get the impression sometimes of scenes requiring several takes as the actors strive for naturalism, at which points it's better to enjoy Pinter's way with rhythmic dialogue and dramatic pauses - as ever he's especially good at picking up on the mundaneness of everyday conversation, even if the world of galleries and authors is probably somewhat rarefied to the rest of us. The film seeks to avoid its theatrical beginning with occasional outdoor shots as well as often employing background noises as the world outside the three's own isolated but entwined worlds come apart. Otherwise the direction is smooth but never intrusive and avoids overtly sexual scenes which I might otherwise have anticipated from the plot.
Although not perfect, this was an engrossing and entertaining examination of human emotions when love goes wrong, right and finally wrong again.
The characterisation does betray a little chauvinism, you do lose a little sympathy for the cuckolded Ben Kingsley character after he admits to serial philandering of his own, but for me the film succeeds by not judging the characters at all, more they're put under the microscope like lab rats for the voyeuristic viewer to examine their behaviour and come to one's own moral judgement.
To stand up to this scrutiny without deadening proceedings requires good acting and that's unquestionably the case here with Jeremy Irons and Patricia Hodge as the stars-uncrossed lovers and Kingsley as the jilted husband. The acting is restrained and avoids for the most part ostentation although occasionally you can see the twitches and tics of Irons and Kingsley kick in a la the Dustin Hoffman method-acting manual. You get the impression sometimes of scenes requiring several takes as the actors strive for naturalism, at which points it's better to enjoy Pinter's way with rhythmic dialogue and dramatic pauses - as ever he's especially good at picking up on the mundaneness of everyday conversation, even if the world of galleries and authors is probably somewhat rarefied to the rest of us. The film seeks to avoid its theatrical beginning with occasional outdoor shots as well as often employing background noises as the world outside the three's own isolated but entwined worlds come apart. Otherwise the direction is smooth but never intrusive and avoids overtly sexual scenes which I might otherwise have anticipated from the plot.
Although not perfect, this was an engrossing and entertaining examination of human emotions when love goes wrong, right and finally wrong again.
This brilliant movie starts with a meeting between Jerry and Emma two years after their relationship has ended; then proceeds backward, thereby ending eight years earlier, with the moment when Jerry first declares his attraction to Emma at a party. The idea that the viewer can know this information at the beginning of the movie and then is never bored is an amazing feat for this movie. All three of the actors are amazing in their roles.
It has often been said that great books can not be made into great movies, that is not the case here. This is a story by one of the greatest writers in the English language since Shakespeare and screen play by the one man who truly understood the agony behind the story. Mix that with three of the best English actors of the modern age and you have a mesmerizing story in cinematic form. Do not miss this movie if you are a fan of great literature and great movie making. At first the reverse chronology may seem a bit confusing, but ultimately it proves the genius of the director's ability to plumb the depths of the friendship and the relationship of all the characters in this sad, sad story. You will not be disappointed.
¿Sabías que...?
- CuriosidadesThis movie is comprised of nine segments or sequences which are all shown in reverse chronological order.
- ConexionesFeatured in Siskel & Ebert & the Movies: Buried Treasures - 1991 Edition (1991)
Selecciones populares
Inicia sesión para calificar y añadir a tu lista para recibir recomendaciones personalizadas
- How long is Betrayal?Con tecnología de Alexa
Detalles
Contribuir a esta página
Sugerir un cambio o añadir el contenido que falta
Principal laguna de datos
By what name was El riesgo de la traición (1983) officially released in India in English?
Responde