wes-connors
In London during World War II, wounded and honorably discharged soldier Van Johnson (as Maurice Bendrix) has resumed his writing career. At a party, Mr. Johnson encounters attractive Deborah Kerr (as Sarah) and asks her out to discuss a new book he's researching. Johnson is much more interested in Ms. Kerr than the book. She likes Johnson, too, and they are quickly copulating. There is a problem, however. Kerr is married to British civil servant Peter Cushing (as Henry Miles). During an air raid, Kerr and Johnson are having a tryst and Johnson is injured. Kerr finds Johnson dead and asks God to bring him back to life. In return, Kerr promises "The End of the Affair"...God answers Kerr's prayer, but doesn't tell Johnson why he's being dumped. He assumes she's found another man. The misunderstandings get more complicated after Johnson decides to hire private investigator John Mills (as Albert Parkis) to snoop on Kerr for Mr. Cushing...Original novelist Graham Greene's spiritual story receives good direction from Edward Dmytryk and gets some nice black-and-white scenes from Wilkie Cooper. The supporting cast is very good. At the time, Kerr received more praise from Johnson, who was thought miscast...In reality, they both act well in the roles. However, Kerr doesn't have any otherworldly appeal; she's lovely, but doesn't strike an erotic note. Johnson is likewise fine, but he doesn't compensate for Kerr with any animal magnetism. They don't get to know each other very well, so it must be all sex (which we don't see). It's also interesting that Johnson first sees Kerr kissing another man; we assume she's had a string of affairs, but are left misinformed. Although she writes very well, Kerr doesn't read books (only reviews) and is superstitions (doesn't walk under ladders). She is ultimately reads God well. The almighty is treated, herein, as an ambiguous off-screen character.****** The End of the Affair (2/24/55) Edward Dmytryk ~ Deborah Kerr, Van Johnson, Peter Cushing, John Mills
Neil Doyle
The first disadvantage of THE END OF THE AFFAIR is that the star chemistry between DEBORAH KERR and VAN JOHNSON is not there. Each does a respectable job as two people burdened under the strain of a doomed love affair, but the motivations are murky, the talk is endless and the resolution seems more like a cop-out than anything else.The second disadvantage is that this is from a novel by Graham Greene, a writer whose works don't seem to translate well to the screen--too intellectual, too complex and too pseudo-religious for their own good, with the exception of THE THIRD MAN.And last but not least, the story itself is dull--the "she loves me, she loves me not" theme goes back and forth between Kerr and Johnson with no meeting of the minds to bring them together. Finally, it becomes tiresome to see both of them wallowing in self-pity because their love cannot be consummated.PETER CUSHING, as the mild-mannered husband who is clueless about his wife's "problems" is effective and natural enough in the sort of low-key performance one doesn't expect from him. JOHN MILLS does nicely as the detective hired by Johnson to spy on Kerr, adding a bit of much needed humor to the rather dour storyline.Downbeat romance with mismatched stars in the leading roles, it never amounts to much. Someone like DIRK BOGARDE might have been able to be create a more believable portrait than Johnson does and at least provide the missing chemistry with Kerr. No matter, it's a tiresome tale of mutual distrust that kills any chance of a relationship.
XweAponX
I noticed in this film Van Johnson's voice has started to obtain gravel. Previously he just had a kind of whiny snide voice (Best example of this is in the 1948? 49? film "Battleground") I will always love Deborah Kerr, from my POV she can never do any wrong. It is all the better when she was handed a good script and a good director.I would classify this as one of the better scripts. This film is almost like a comedy of errors, instead it is a tragedy of errors. Actually it is quite a sad movie, I would have to read the original book that this was based upon.What attracted me to this film, are the spiritual aspects. If this film were to be remade today, and I see it was remade in 1999, I wonder how much of the spirituality would remain? I have yet to see the newer version. This film is a quest into the reason behind Faith. I can't explain it, but this film makes a lot of sense. Mrs Miles questions to the priest, to the atheist, and to God are all valid.Most people will see this film and will only consider the "affair" between Johnson's character and Kerr's... But that is not what this film is about at all: The affair is just a device author Graham Greene used to tell a story about Faith: What it means to have, and what is expected of us who have it.Of course this film has its melodramatic aspects. Also it has Peter Cushing, who is not chasing vampire Christopher Lee for once.The only weak things in this film are the confrontations between Van Johnson and Cushing- If I were Cushing and I had a wife that looked like Kerr I would have punched Johnson in the nose. But maybe the weakness of the encounters were to display that Cushing really did not care about his wife, being more interested in becoming a Lord or some important personage.
bob the moo
An American writer meets the wife of a civil service acquaintance and quickly starts an affair with her. However Maurice is plagued with feelings of guilt and jealousy against Henry having Sarah, and bitterness that Sarah is being deceitful to her husband and perhaps, him too. After a bombing falls near their love nest, Sarah leaves and Maurice assumes that she had wished him dead. When Henry confides in him about his wife's possible infidelity, Maurice poses as her husband and hires a private detective to follow her and find out what she's doing.I have not seen the remake but was quite interested to see how a 1950's movie would manage to depict the illicit affair between Maurice and Sarah without breaking every moral code of the day. The answer is with lots of talking. The film is significantly shorter than the modern version and had less controversy (or at least, does now) but it still manages to bring things out. The plot is pretty good but relies very heavily on the extended flashback/journal sequence to keep things going. The talk heavy feel is a little tiring but does work well the characters' emotions are brought out well without profanity or nudity.I don't think Johnson fitted the role that well but he was still good. His inner bitterness and guilt came out well at points and he brings his complex character out well. Kerr is also good although her role is less difficult. She does have to carry the whole journal sequence near the end and she doesn't let the film dip. Cushing only has a few scenes but he is very good. He gives an English gent performance but eventually you can see the cracks as he tries to hold his feelings together.Overall this is a solid adaptation of the book that manages to bring out the subject matter without the sexual excess of the modern version. While it is a little heavy on dialogue at times, the emotions come out with all the stilted control of the period and it works quite well as a subversive melodrama.
AD
