Becket, o Favorito do Rei

Like most dramas by Jean Anouih (1910-1987), BECKET essentially sets two larger-than-life characters against each other in a relationship fueled by widening ideological rifts. In this instance, the rift is between the holy and the secular. King Henry II of England, who--frustrated by the frequent interference of the Roman Catholic Church in his rule--manages to have friend Thomas Becket appointed as Archbishop of Canterbury. He expects Becket to act on his behalf--and is shocked when Becket undergoes a spiritual transformation and takes his office seriously.

The 1959 play was tremendous successful throughout Europe, in England, and in the United States. In 1964 it reached the screen with Richard Burton as Becket, Peter O'Toole as Henry II, such notables as John Gielgud as Louis VII of France. The film was extremely well-received and received numerous critical accolades, particularly for Burton and O'Toole. It was not, however, widely available to the home market until this 2007 MPI DVD release.

In a technical sense, BECKET looks better than ever; the transfer is very crisp and the picture likely looks better here than it did on the 1964 big screen. At the same time, however, it is very evident that this is a film that really is best seen on the big screen, where the larger than life characters and their ideological battles have the advantage of a scope to equal their nature. It also has a slightly stagey quality, most often in the script, which doesn't quite manage to shed the theatrical trappings of the original.

Even so, there's a great deal to admire, and the leading actors are most certainly chief among them. Burton and O'Toole wench, brawl, argue, and explode with invective with complete conviction; it would be hard, if not impossible, to say which gives the better performance here. Gielgud is particularly memorable in his brief appearance as Louis VII--and Sian Philips, Pamela Brown, and Martita Hunt make the most of their relatively small roles as well.

The DVD has several notable bonuses. I personally found the interviews with Richard Burton, archival footage from 1967 and 1977, slightly over rated--but the "featurettes" on editor Anne V. Coats and composer Laurence Rosenthal are excellent, and the DVD commentary by O'Toole is consistently fascinating. I personally find the film as a whole a bit dry--Coats, tellingly, makes the comment that if the producers had put just a bit more money into BECKET it would have an undeniable masterpiece--but fans of the film will find this particular package an extremely welcome one.

GFT, Amazon Reviewer

Ah, words. To paraphrase Henry Higgins, they are the pillars of society. Language is the means by which emotions are expressed, wars and love affairs are started and ended, and friendships are struck -- and melted down. "Becket" is a movie in love with words, their eloquence and, in some cases, majesty. It's a movie about friendship and loyalty, God and country, and the dynamics that occur when one tries to mix them together. I cannot think of movie so in love with words in recent memory; the only one that comes close (perhaps even superseding it) is "A Man for All Seasons." This is the proverbial film to sink your mental teeth into. It is cerebral, challenging, controversial, and tragic. If you've ever had a friend grow more and more distant no matter how hard you tried to keep things right -- this is for you.

And that is all I have to say about that...

This movie definitely has some positive attributes, but also some annoying flaws.

It is visually enjoyable, with very nice cinematography and superb costume design. And there is some fine acting, especially by Richard Burton, as well as John Gielgud.

But there are many historical inaccuracies, most of them entirely unnecessary to the story.

For example, Henry may have been harsh with his sons and with his wife, but was kind to his mother Matilda, who had always been very loving and devoted to him. The lack of respect between the two added nothing to the movie.

Thomas Becket was not a Saxon, he was born in London but was the son of a couple from Normandy. Henry was less Norman than Becket, he was the son of an Angevin father, and his mother was a mix of Norman, Scottish, and Anglo-Saxon royalty. Her grandparents were William I, Matilda of Flanders, Margaret of Wessex (a descendant of Alfred the Great, she became St Margaret of Scotland), and Malcolm Canmore, King of Scotland. So Henry II had more Anglo-Saxon heritage (1/8) than Thomas Becket (none).

The conflict between Henry and Becket actually went on for years, and there were many differences between them, not just the decision to execute a priest.

Henry was almost certainly not a homosexual. He considered Becket a good friend and supporter at one time, but the movie makes him out to be madly in love with Becket while having no liking or respect for anyone else.

The actress who played Eleanor of Aquitaine was nothing like her. In reality, Eleanor was an elegant and exceptionally strong woman. The makers of The Lion in Winter made a wiser choice by casting Katharine Hepburn.

After having read the other comments, I hardly feel able to improve upon what has already been so eloquently expressed. For anyone who enjoys high-caliber acting, intriguing dialogue, and complex relationships in a film, this is a must-see. I agree with a comment that Burton was shafted the oscar for his performance of Becket. It does seem at times that the Academy veers from rewarding darker, complex, mercurial characters in favor of anaesthitized heroic caricatures. It is one of the greatest tragedies of film-making that the talented are often unrewarded and forgotten. Richard Burton and Peter O'Toole are perfect foils in this film. The souring of their friendship makes a deeply moving story. Historical inaccuracies I can easily forgive; this is a dramatic film, not a documentary, and a director and screenwriter must condense lives into a believable and appealing plot. It is far better to make alterations than to have nothing such as this produced... (Having exposed myself thus, I must own that I am also a history scholar and usually a stickler regarding more inferior productions.) All in all, I recommend this film to anyone who enjoys superior acting and thought-provoking drama.

What p****s me off about this film is that it, like "Metropolis", is a forgotten one. Why? Why is it that everything has to be razzle-dazzle eye candy, instead of a subtle, beautiful, fine piece of craftsmanship and storytelling. "Becket" was tough to watch, because of all the grain and clicks on the neglected print. But past all of the distortion of a neglected print, I found a very remarkable and exquisite achievement that ranks among some of the best films ever made! The craftsmanship is just the beginning! It gets better! Peter O'Toole, who ironically, played Henry II years later in "A Lion in Winter", does a superb job. He's so angry, volatile, and above all, whiny. When I saw the Disney version on "Robin Hood", with Peter Ustinov playing the voice of the whiny Prince John, I felt it was directly inspired by Peter O'Toole's Henry II! He was so good at being a great whiner. And Richard Burton, as Thomas Becket, looks so reserved, strong, and reverent, as a friend of Henry II who's faith and belief in God and serving the people, brings a rift in their friendship. I also felt bad that not only was this a crappy print, but also that the beautiful photography seemed so small on the TV. This is the kind of film that needs to be seen on the big screen in order to fully appreciate it. I hope that this gets some more respect and popularity, because it needs it and it has deserved it for years!