Becket
Dir. Peter Glenville, 1964
Stiff, traditional costume drama with lots of pretentious posturing about the "honor of God". Burton is solemn and wooden, and the direction is plodding and all too self-important. The only saving grace is Peter O'Toole as Henry II, who is human and alive: sly, impetuous, dangerous; yet true, vulnerable and appealing at the same time. (And an aside: Brad Pitt has a slight resemblance to O'Toole, although without the energy and fiery eyes.)
Henry II appoints his childhood friend, fellow debaucher and confidant Thomas Becket (Richard Burton) as Archbishop of Canterbury, to thereby control both church and state. To his shock, fury and hurt, Becket turns against him in supporting the independence of the clergy. Tragedy eventually ensues.
Why do people lionize Burton as a great actor and as a handsome man? In this film he seems neither, especially with the helmet haircut.
Many historical details are also wrong. For example, much is made of the plot angle that Becket is Saxon and is widely considered a traitor by the vanquished Saxons for joining the Norman court of Henry II. But in fact Becket was not Saxon but Norman.
The only other interesting aspect was the plainly homoerotic relationship between Henry and Thomas. Henry openly speaks of his love for Thomas, and his jealousy and pain is obviously that of an abandoned lover rather than a man who finds a dear friend unfaithful. This seems pretty bold for the time the film was made, and strikes a true note in an otherwise monotone production.
Nov 2013
2.5*
Dir. Peter Glenville, 1964
Henry II appoints his childhood friend, fellow debaucher and confidant Thomas Becket (Richard Burton) as Archbishop of Canterbury, to thereby control both church and state. To his shock, fury and hurt, Becket turns against him in supporting the independence of the clergy. Tragedy eventually ensues.
Why do people lionize Burton as a great actor and as a handsome man? In this film he seems neither, especially with the helmet haircut.
Many historical details are also wrong. For example, much is made of the plot angle that Becket is Saxon and is widely considered a traitor by the vanquished Saxons for joining the Norman court of Henry II. But in fact Becket was not Saxon but Norman.
The only other interesting aspect was the plainly homoerotic relationship between Henry and Thomas. Henry openly speaks of his love for Thomas, and his jealousy and pain is obviously that of an abandoned lover rather than a man who finds a dear friend unfaithful. This seems pretty bold for the time the film was made, and strikes a true note in an otherwise monotone production.
Nov 2013
2.5*
No comments:
Post a Comment