Simply A Masterpiece

If you don't like this, we can't be friends.

It's entirely possible that sending the audience out feeling lousy was intentional

Although I seem to have had higher expectations than I thought, the movie is super entertaining.

Here is a magnificent play and screenplay, beautifully written and conceived. Much has been made of the performances of Michael Redgrave and Jean Kent, both of whom are brilliantly cast in a physical sense. Good as Redgrave and Kent both are, it is to the supporting cast that we must look for the strongest and most credible performances; Nigel Patrick is rock solid as Frank Hunter, the popular science teacher who transforms from thoughtless philanderer to decent human being, and Wilfred Hyde White is at the peak of his game as the headmaster who is self seeking, self satisfied, unfeeling and ultimately rather cruel. Michael Redgrave, for some unknown reason decided to give Crocker-Harris a rather thin dry voice which is obviously "stuck on" he also fails to show any vestige of the human being behind the persona of the school master until it is far too late, his performance is just that, a surface study of a rather frail failure, rather than a man who tries and fails. He is expected to be unpopular, but Redgrave's characterisation is, unfortunately, rather cold. Jean Kent is brilliantly cast in the physical sense, here is woman who could well be the wife of a rather lacklustre school master, but also has the magnificent womanliness, and frankly, sex appeal, to stir any man's biological chemistry. For all this, her performance as Millie Crocker-Harris is patchy, at times so very believable and at others driven by a surface petulance, a false grandeur and an unnecessary viciousness which guilds the lily of the already powerful writing. I have seen Ms Kent's work in other roles, she was well capable of more subtle work than this, which leads me to feel that the direction by Anthony Asquith may have been rather heavy handed or just plain careless in her case. Michael Redgrave has the more difficult role with which to contend, and in my honest opinion, his characterisation, flawed from the start, fails him absolutely at the vital moment of Taplow's gesture, and in spite of an effective gear change in his defiance of the headmaster and a fine delivery of the final speech, the overall performance is under the bar for an actor of Redgrave's standing.

When I watched the film for the first time, I thought it was a great film. But after repeated viewings, I only found the film to be getting better and better. Anthony Asquith's direction is absolutely brilliant. I don't know if anyone noticed this - The film has music only in the beginning credits and in the end of the film. Asquith used little or no music throughout the film with the exception of the song at the chapel scenes and the music outside the chapel. He was able to involve the audience as closely as possible. Asquith was able to take Terrence Rattigan's great screenplay into a much more higher level. Asquith's attention to little details make the film much more stronger. For Example, he shows the importance of lesser characters like Wilson and Brian. Through their viewpoints about Crocker Harris (Michael Redgrave), we can generally understand what the class feels about Crocker Harris. As for the performance, I thought everyone was great in it especially Michael Redgrave and Nigel Patrick.Through Nigel Patrick (Frank Hunter) and Brian Smith (Taplow), We study what kind of a man Andrew Crocker Harris really is? When he started his teaching career, he had good intentions. But he lost his way during his 18 years of teaching. Unlike Fletcher, He was never appreciated for his contributions. For Example, We find out that Crocker Harris drafted time tables for ten years. But they were issued under Headmaster's signature. And Frank Hunter (Nigel Patrick) tells that he didn't know that Crocker Harris drafted time tables of the school. Crocker Harris is a man who wants to express his interests and his ideas. And he asks Frank about his opinion on his new time table. And he also invites his wife Milly (Jean Kent) to see the new time table. But she replies "You know it bores me to death."Crocker Harris expresses his ideas to the people who are very close to him. For Example, He explains to Taplow about his attachment to the play "Agamemnon." Taplow understood Crocker Harris and presented the book of the play "Agamemnon" to him. Through this charity, we see the slow rebirth of an almost dead character inside. Unlike Taplow, Milly didn't care for the interests and ideas of Crocker Harris. She expressed her disinterest and this tarnished the confidence of Crocker Harris. What I didn't like about Milly is her cruelty towards Crocker Harris. This is where I admire the Nigel Patrick's character Frank Hunter. He ends his relationship with Milly, because of her cruel attitude towards her husband. And he tries to help Crocker Harris through kindness and respect. And Frank tells Crocker Harris that he is not going to ask Crocker Harris to forgive him for his affair with Milly, because Frank find it so hard to forgive himself. Although Crocker Harris failed to give the love Milly wanted, still he tried to express love by giving her the complete freedom to do whatever she liked. Through this freedom, she tried to destroy Crocker Harris psychologically. And this led to his persistent ill health. This is where I completely dislike Milly. Due to his persistent ill health, Crocker expressed his students the reflection of his illness. This is why almost all of his students (except Taplow) disliked him.But through his slow rebirth, Andrew Crocker Harris was able to admit his failures. And through admitting his failures, the students and everyone invited Crocker Harris to the world of Success. And in the end, we can conclude that Crocker Harris will survive and will finish the unfinished work, because of Taplow's appreciation.I rate this film 10 out of 10, because of strong performances, Rattigan's great screenplay, and Asquith's brilliant direction. I also recommend everyone to watch The Winslow Boy (1948). I think that's another great film from Anthony Asquith.

Okay, you've got to hand it to the British. This is about the last word in civilized drawingroom drama. It's so restrained and riveting, the loudest noise in my TV room was me breathing. Because, no matter how intense the movie emotions, voices are never, never raised. Sure, Redgrave is great in the central role, but it's also a performance so dry it comes perilously close to caricature. What saves it is the actor's gift for nuance and the power of the screenplay itself. Between the cast and the script, even I, whose usual fare runs from Hopalong Cassidy to Gene Autry, could feel the emotional power.I really like Nigel Patrick as the guilty opportunist. His scene with the mimicking Taplow is a little gem of professional composure. He may dislike C-H (Redgrave), as he conceals here, but cuckolding him is one thing while injuring his soul is quite another. His later contrition is quite moving. However, I can't see any man snuggling up with the bitchy Jean Kent. She's not just mean, she's irritating. A scene showing her softer-- not just needful—side would have helped. Anyway, I think I'm glad I didn't go to British public school. I had enough trouble with English grammar without the deadly travails of Latin. Then again, maybe there are the kind of rewards that C-H tries to get across in his unappealing way. But, can anyone imagine a 1950's Hollywood studio making this film. One thing for sure, the Jean Kent part would go probably have gone to a studio sex-pot. But, why am I knocking Hollywood— a Gene Autry re-run is about to come on.

A filmed play (by Terence Rattigan), for sure, but this is the kind of play that's just so excellent the film never comes close to suffering from staginess. It plays kind of like the flipside of Goodbye, Mr. Chips. Michael Redgrave stars as a crotchety old Classics teacher, Andrew Crocker-Harris, in a boys' school. It is his last day before retirement. To the students, he is something of a monster. They refer to him as "the Croc". They know he is retiring because of heart troubles, and it amuses them to think the man has a heart at all. Of course, he does, and the film peels back his layers until it is found, crushed and bleeding on the floor. He is married to a much younger woman (Jean Kent), and the love they had once has turned into bitter resentment on both sides. Kent has been cheating on Redgrave with the science teacher, Nigel Patrick. Kent has never lied to Redgrave about the affair, preferring to taunt him with his sexual worthlessness. The film is a very introspective look at one man's failure in life. It's about as well written a character study as has ever been made. Redgrave's performance is simply off-the-charts. I have no qualms about calling it one of the all-time greats of the medium. I think the film makes one major miscalculation - the vigorous applause after Crocker-Harris' departing speech. It makes dramatic sense, I guess, but it doesn't make any logical sense. Otherwise, this would be a masterpiece.