Private Potter

Given the involvement of at least two British theatrical luminaries - Ronald Harwood and Tom Courtney - and the unusual nature of the story - it is difficult to understand how this film came to disappoint in all departments.

Firstly the atmosphere seemed all rather soft - a soldier has been killed unnecessarily by the inexplicable apparently foolish or treacherous actions of a colleague. More drama, cursing, bitterness and recrimination follow in commercial organisations when someone screws up than is to be seen here (compare for example "Glengarry Glen Ross"). An earlier reviewer recommended "Tunes of Glory" to which I'd add Sydney Lumet's "The Hill" for films approaching realistic harshness.

The Cyprus campaign was part civil, part guerrilla war. Extremes of fear, anger, disgust at civilian on civilian atrocities and lust for revenge were daily experience for participants on all sides. In these circumstances British WW2 veterans, toughened up by their experience have come into their world a soft and dreamy young conscript Private Potter(Courtney). These veterans either would have had some sympathy for Potter - that or complete anger and contempt for his actions and outlandish explanation. He was after all responsible for a fellow soldier's completely unnecessary death. Given that the basis of soldiering is looking after mates, this would have been an unforgivable action, perhaps deserving of summary justice, especially on an odd outsider whose motives would be doubted.

Potter's religious experience suggests that there will be profound things said about religion but nothing is. Potter's psychology one would have thought have been explored but isn't. Potter speaks of his always being frightened even when alone yet shows little sign of this being very able to speak up for himself, not at all in awe of authority. When he flings himself on the floor it appears like suspect histrionics rather than genuine emotion. Courtney's performance combines a degree of campness with evidence of a tough and resilient personality. Potter gives an example of what as a child he regarded as bravery - the ability to spit at a priest. Of all the things children might have considered doing, this I don't believe was one of them (for authentic renderings of British childhood of the period see "Blue Remembered Hills" and John Boorman's "Hope and Glory"). Authenticity seemed sacrificed to slightly portentous theatricality throughout.

Tom Courtney delivers stock Tom Courtney and is as usual nothing less than thoroughly professional. Other actors deliver their lines as best they can. The lighting - nearly all interiors - is of that flat over-filled "B"movie kind. This is close to being a bad film. It fails to hit any target.

This film sat on the shelf for 2 years and ended up as a support feature. Really little wonder,since the characters just talk non stop. It is impossible to keep any interest. Watch King and Country to see what Courtney can do rather than this mannered performance.

I went to the trouble of registering just so I could say my personal piece about this movie. I saw it by accident on television in about 1972 when I was in Southern California doing my M.A. This "little" movie cut right through to me. I dropped whatever useful thing I was doing and sat down to watch it through, thoroughly fascinated. I loved the fact that nobody knew the least thing about what was going on. Least of all, Private Potter. Or, possibly, least of all, the Padre. There was no pretense of being able to comprehend so unexpected, and even intolerable, a thing as the immediate presence of God/god/?. The likelihood that this extraordinary movie has gone down to the dirt in a vault somewhere actually grieves me.

Though my father owned a novelization of this, the film doesn’t have much of a reputation and, consequently, I missed out on it countless times on Cable TV (it’s a staple on TCM UK). However, ever since watching Joseph Losey’s similar but obviously superior KING AND COUNTRY (1964), I’ve wanted to check it out regardless…especially since both films feature Tom Courtenay in the lead role! The latter is a soldier who balks at doing his duty and, as per Military Law, a court-martial.is ordered which will decide his fate: in KING AND COUNTRY, Courtenay’s character deserted and is executed at the end (despite the valiant defense of Dirk Bogarde); here, he jeopardizes a mission by apparently losing his nerve – an act deemed reckless and which even leads to the death of a fellow soldier!

The opening moments of the film are rather muddled, but interest picks up once the titular character is arrested. To begin with, he’s brought in for questioning in front of his Commanding Officer – whom Potter astonishes by saying that his ‘cowardly’ reaction was due to his having had a vision of God! At this, the private is considered mad – so, his superiors think of passing him on to a psychiatrist; however, before taking this step, they request the intervention of a priest. The latter queries Potter about his idea of religion – to which the young man replies that he wasn’t a devout believer…so, why would God choose him as a vessel?

Incidentally, Potter’s interrogation is intercut with that (by a debuting Frank Finlay) of an injured local – the narrative is set in Cyprus – who had tried to warn his people of the approaching British troops; by the way, I’ll be watching soon another film dealing with the UK intervention in this country – namely THE HIGH BRIGHT SUN (1964) and which, coincidentally, stars Dirk Bogarde. Potter – a mild-mannered young man with an unhappy childhood – makes no discernible progress and, eventually, is assigned to a mental hospital; however, on the way there, he manages to escape. The CO, on his part, goes to see the Brigadier to seek his advise whether to proceed with the court-martial or not; being a soldier of the old school, he feels only contempt for Potter’s behavior and even asks his subordinate if Potter is a homosexual! At the end, Potter is returned to base (after he’s caught taking a bath in a lake) and receives a visit from the CO wishing him good luck for the upcoming trial.

Courtenay – who would eventually reteam with director Wrede for ONE DAY IN THE LIFE OF IVAN DENISOVICH (1971) – was a fine actor (albeit with a limited range) who emerged during the “Angry Young Men” era of British cinema; this film, as I said in my introduction, isn’t one of his more celebrated – having been superseded by the higher-profile (and somewhat more absorbing) KING AND COUNTRY. Having mentioned once more the connection with Losey’s film, I recall comparing that one back then to PATHS OF GLORY (1957); as for PRIVATE POTTER, it reminded me of the Richard Widmark vehicle I watched recently – TIME LIMIT (1957), given that both deal with the gathering of facts prior to a court-martial (rather than with the trial itself).

A rare film set in the Cyprus Emergency with some excellent character acting. Sensitive acting by Tom Courtney but also those playing the crusties.

Note that National Service had just ended. The swinging sixties had not yet begun.

Eric Thompson who plays the adjutant went on to write and narrate the magic roundabout.

If you liked this for its take on the moral dilemmas of soldiering you could try "Tunes of Glory" although that is in colour and set in Scotland starring Alec Guiness. Another gem in my view is "Guns at Batasi" starring Richard Atteborough.