grantss
Professional servant Barrett (played by Dirk Bogarde) is hired by a wealthy young man, Tony (Edward Fox), as his man-servant. Initially Barrett is the ideal man-servant - quiet, loyal, submissive, unquestioning and very helpful. However, over time the shine wears off and he reveals more of his true self, and it's far from submissive. Moreover, with time the master-servant dynamic starts to shift.Good build up to what I was hoping was going to be a very powerful and/or profound ending. Characters are given depth and are dynamic in their personalities. There is a decent degree of engagement and the plot develops well, albeit slowly.I was happy to take the slow-burning nature of the movie, figuring there would be a big pay-off at the end. Unfortunately, the end doesn't quite reward you for your patience. It does demonstrate how the dynamic between the master and servant has shifted, and how significantly, but that's it, and it's not really a surprise. I really was hoping for something more explosive at the end.
HelenMary
As films from the early 60s go, this is one of the darkest and most disturbing I've seen and dealt with very explicit and frightening issues. Long after I'd seen it, it stayed in my mind and worried me. I felt sorry for Tony, the rich aristocrat (James Fox) and frustrated for how he was treated, but also cross at his girlfriend for not doing anything to help him. His downfall was vividly portrayed by the great Fox and the miscreant Barrett played with superb calm and maliciousness by Dirk Bogarde was simply insidious but spectacular.Other than a psychological portrait of the moral and societal decline of Tony, it also highlights the blindness and callousness with which people act and don't really see or help anyone but themselves and are just selfish at heart. Even the "posh" people. I don't condone what the manservant did but I can see the frustration with which people in service must have felt and how easily they could be manipulated but trusting dolts who don't have a clue about anything as someone has always "done" for them.Everything about this production is dark and foreboding; the script relies on silences, and short dialogue, it uses darkness and grimness in the lighting and in the sets, despite it being a lovely rich home, and the decline is slow and painful to watch. You see ways he could have protected himself, how his girlfriend could have helped him but he is left alone to sink to the depths. Definitely not a "Hollywood" movie and it leaves you feeling emotionally shredded. As well as all this, the sexual tension of the film is quite intense, there is seduction between Tony and Vera, Barrett's "sister" girlfriend (a manipulative Sarah Mills) but also a weird homoerotic atmosphere between Tony and Barrett which doesn't really seem real or going anywhere or whether there's a point to it but it adds to the tension and dare I say it a sort sexual overtone to the film. I was surprised how explicit it was, and dealing with such taboo subjects for the time. It's a brilliant psychological drama but tragic and really really grim.
Jackson Booth-Millard
The book of 1001 Movies You Must See Before You Die has been a useful companion to me and helped me find hundreds of films I otherwise would not have heard or cared about necessarily, this film was naturally one I had never heard of, but I was keen to see what it was about. Basically young wealthy aristocrat Tony (James Fox) has moved to London, and recently he has hired manservant Hugo Barrett (Dirk Bogarde) for all his services at home, and his employee seems reliable, loyal and competent. Tony's girlfriend Susan (Wendy Craig) does not like Barrett being in the house and wants him to be sent away, and it only gets worse when the servant's sister Vera (Sarah Miles) comes to live and work as the house, and Tony has a secret affair with her. Tony and Susan leave the house in the care of Barrett and his sister while they go to stay with some friends outside of the city, and when they return they find that the siblings are in fact, therefore they are fired, and Susan breaks up with her boyfriend due to his infidelity. Later Tony decides he does still need a hand in the house, so secretly in a pub he and Barrett talk and he rehires him, and this ignites the real intentions for the servant, he plans to slowly manipulate his employer so that he will insist on needing him and break down until their roles are reversed, so he will be the master. Also starring Catherine Lacey as Lady Mounset, Richard Vernon as Lord Mounset, Ann Firbank as Society Woman, Doris Knox as Older Woman, Patrick Magee as Bishop and Harold Pinter (also writing) as Society Man. Bogarde is obviously the big reason to see this film with his pretty chilling performance as the butler-type playing mind games on his master to rule the roost, I will confess I didn't understand everything in terms of how the villain tricks the boss to go mad and collapse, but I did like how nasty he was in the right moments, it is an interesting enough psychological drama. Good!
Enchorde
The Servant is about an aristocrat, Tony, that returns to London and decides to hire himself a man servant to help him. He hires Hugo Barrett, who is not only good at his job, but very correct in his manners and confident in his abilities. Tony, however, doesn't have much personal strength, and often needs advice and leaves decisions about the house to Barrett. This gives Barrett power, so much that he supplants Tony as the true master of the house, leaving Tony in demise.The plot description opens up for very interesting possibilities. I envisioned a psychological power struggle between Tony and Barrett, a struggle that slowly shifted from Tony to Barrett. Unfortunately, the character Tony is far too weak compared to Barrett, and thus the shift is very quickly. And when it comes it goes very quickly. Instead focus is put on the introduction and the part leading up to the shift. That is very important if the power struggle is going to have any meaning, but in my opinion, is given too much time. The result was too much time waiting, and a feeling of everything being rushed when the struggle should take place. I'm not at all that impressed of the writing as many others seem to be, even though Harold Pinter is the man behind the pen. I had hoped for a much equal battle where the outcome is more unclear. Now Tony doesn't seem to realize he is in a battle at all.The acting is good, especially from Dirk Bogarde that plays Barrett, but this is not enough to carry the entire movie. Being somewhat of a classic with good ratings I had hoped for more, especially with Bogarde, Pinter and Lousey behind it. Good acting, some nice cinematic details but in all nothing to live up to the expectations.Unfortunately, the end did not much to salvage the movie either. I don't need a Hollywood ending, nor a happy one at all. But this just left too much hanging. Tony had clearly lost the battle, lost everything indeed, but it just didn't feel like it followed the story to the end. It felt like it ended mid sentence
5/10
AD
