Odio que fue amor

As the dry-as-dust, cuckolded public schoolmaster, dying of heart disease, yet heartless in the eyes of his pupils, Michael Redgrave gives one of the screen's finest and most moving performances in Anthony Asquith's superb screen version of Terence Rattigan's play. (Rattigan himself wrote the economical, precise and first-rate screenplay). The rest of the cast act in that arch, fastidious fashion prevalent in British films of the time, though that fine and under-valued actor Nigel Patrick breathes considerable life into the role of the adulterous but penitent science teacher while Jean Kent is superbly treacherous as the unfaithful wife.

As a director, Asquith never really displayed much in the way of a visual sensibility, relying instead on the quality of his scripts but he still managed to make some of the best British films of the period, this being one of them. Although well-played the Albert Finney remake doesn't come close.

I do not think the 1994 remake is so appalling.But it cannot hold a candle to this one,for sure,though.Part of the reason can be found,IMHO,in how the two directors deal with the main character.THe color version gambles on Albert Finney's performance and overlooks the rest of the cast which is not that much exciting in the first place (M.Modine is rather bland).Here ,the whole cast is outstanding ,from the young guy who plays the student to Jean Kent,a bitchy wife ,from Nigel Patrick's bewildered science teacher who becomes a human being during the movie to Wilfrid Hyde-White's (whatever a precedent user's view on the matter)mischievous,suave and finally cruel headmaster.

Of course Michael Redgrave steals the show ,but he gets good support all along the way.His performance is subdued,but emotionally intense ,and if you do not shed a tear during his final speech,you must have a heart of stone.The black and white cinematography and the stifling atmosphere give the tragedy the three unities (place,time and action) and an inventive directing makes us forget it's a play,like in the best Mankiewicz works.

This is an exceptionally written and acted film--one that I strongly recommend. However, I warn you up front that it is often hard to watch because it deals with some very sad and pathetic people--particularly the lead, played by Michael Redgrave. The film is about the final weeks in a job by a long-time teacher at an upper-class British school. It seems that a sickly middle-aged teacher (Redgrave) is leaving and, unfortunately, his leaving isn't causing any sense of loss among the students or faculty. That's because long ago this teacher's spirit dwindled away--much of because he is locked in a loveless marriage. And, over time, his disappointment in love has been translated into a coldness towards his students. It's a fascinating but powerful study of a pathetic man--a man, who at mid-life, has come to realize that his life has been a waste and his wife could care less about him.

This is a wonderful film--and an interesting contrast to the old character from "Goodbye, Mr. Chips". While Chips was a bit stuffy, he adored his students and was beloved...whereas, with the character from this film Redgrave plays a man who is bitter and sad...yet by the end manages to keep some level of self-respect.

By the way, my wife hated that this film never really got to the heart of why the teacher and his wife were so cold towards each other. There is a scene that alludes, mildly, to perhaps him being impotent or perhaps even gay--but she needed to know this in order to love the film and was disappointed it was never revealed. See the IMDb trivia for more on this, by the way.

Based on Terence Rattigan's play, this is a moving story of a public (private) schoolmaster's disappointments as his life slips away from him, and his increasing sense of isolation from everyone around him as even his wife makes clear her bitterness towards him. Michael Redgrave's performance is masterfully poignant. The film was made in an era when the values inherent in the film still had considerable currency, helping the film to achieve a degree of authenticity which it is doubtful could be achieved today. (I have not seen the more recent version, though, so it may be that I am wrong). If you are interested in the human condition, or simply want to see a masterful portrayal of human pain then you should watch this film.

Michael Redgrave was obviously born for the role of Andrew Crocker-Harris in this Asquith-directed version of Terence Rattigan's clever and absorbing play.

On the face of it, the subject matter and material are rather thin. Crocker-Harris, a stuffed shirt of a schoolmaster, is about to be retired due to ill-health, and replaced by a modern new blood who sees teaching as an extension of psychology. Mrs Crocker-Harris is a frightful snob and an unhappy wife who is playing away from home, and the schoolboys only have eyes and minds for a cricket-playing hero about to leave to join England's team.

You may feel all this would be predictable and more than a little dull, and perhaps without a strong actor such as Redgrave in the central role, it may well be. I have seen the stage play, with Edward Fox as Crocker-Harris, and found it a great performance and a wonderful period piece.

Here, Redgrave is a real tour-de-force, and his supporting cast, including Wilfred Hyde White as the headmaster, and Jean Kent as the battling Mrs Crocker-Harris, are well cast. There are several charming scenes between Crocker-Harris and his replacement (Ronald Howard), and between the older schoolmaster and pupil Taplow (Brian White).

And the Browning Version? A translation of Agamemnon which reminds Crocker-Harris of a time he was a young and enthusiastic teacher, ready to mould the young.

This film is a worthy companion to the earlier classic 'Goodbye, Mr Chips', and, I think, is just as good.