MovieChat Forums > This Sporting Life (1963) Discussion > Flashback Structure Flawed?

Flashback Structure Flawed?

posted 18 years ago by davidarnold
6 replies | jump to latest

What I initially found interesting about his film was the structure.

Machin has had his teeth knocked out and as he is carted away to get treatment we get to see how his sorry life arrived at this point by flashbacks to his past.

Surely the point of this structure is that the two twin threads so created then result in some dramatic catharsis that is short dramatic and to the point to resove the tension created.

Unfortunately in this film the threads merge about two thirds through the film and the present day plot dissolves in shouty melodrama.

In the end I was with Margaret saying "oh go on just leave her alone, you berk!"

An overated and derivative film IMHO.

[–] Anscules 17 years ago

a list of what this film could be derived from in january of 1963 would be quite short. shouty melodrama... i can see how you might say that, but i simply don't agree. i thought his downward spiral became most entrancing as the film drew to a close. when he walks out of the hospital and doesn't say anything or even pause by the children - wow. that blew me away, and was done without a score attached to it or dialogue - or even facial expressions. certainly not melodrama.

i love the rugby scenes in the end, too. it no longer looks fun - it looks like mine work, only more confusing. the strange percussion an slow motion were really effective.

the final scene - he looked so different i didn't realize it was him for a few seconds.

a great film. i agree, it was frustrating watching him follow her around - jeez, move on, already - but people really do stuff like that.

"Rampart: Squad 51."

[–] myersangl7 15 years ago

Although I did enjoy this film and do believe there is a lot of amazing content there, I do agree that I kept expecting it to go back to Christmas Eve. Even at the very end I thought they would wake up together Christmas morning or something. It seemed as though they gave up on the former structure altogether for a more linear one. What's even more confusing in my mind is at what point in time does this Christmas occur? When did he get his teeth put back in? When does Margret reject him again? It didn't seem to add up.

[–] nephihaha 15 years ago

Deriving from what?

[–] PocketButterfly 13 years ago

I thought the flasback was most effective during the seduction-scene in Frank's bedroom; there's an abrupt cut to Frank feeling sick on the Bed at the Weaver's house party, then an abrupt return to Frank looking at the empty rumpled bed.

Now when I first saw this film the changes in scene annoyed me a little, until the time I was distracted from the tv screen just as the scene changed from Frank unzipping Mrs Hammond's skirt to Frank lying sick on the Weaver's bed. I heard moaning, and looked up to see Frank covered in sweat as he carresed and gripped the bed-post. As the wave of pain leaves him he looks like he's high on relief. I realised that the pain-scene functioned in at least two ways: firstly, it is a stand-in for Frank moaning and sweating in sexual ecstacy (a scene which I think may not have been passed by censors at the time of filming) and secondly, the pain that Frank goes through physically is a mirror reflection of the pain he experiences emotionally by not being able to get Mrs Hammond to feel for him. (It may, for all I know function on a third level: Frank is re-aroused by the memory or fantasy of Mrs Hammond induced by the gas-and-alcohol.)

The two scenes thusly combined make for a disburbing glimpse into a dark erotic mind.

I think if the movie were made now, there would have been an extended sex scene which may not, after all, been as effective.

[–] Clemencedane 13 years ago

I thought it was an excellent film on its own as well as the epitome of its genre. But I was also a bit confused by some of the chronology. I do feel a bit petty saying this as I know it's not the point of the film, but I want to make sure I understand.

We see him come home with his teeth knocked out and Margaret tells him it spoils his looks. But later when she dies he leaves and we see that he has his teeth. So that means she couldn't have been alive when they were knocked out. Or had he already gotten false teeth?

Also, I didn't understand why Mr. Weaver turned against him. Was it because Weaver was homosexual and not only didn't mind if his wife had affairs with playes, but was actually insulted on his wife's behalf that Frank didn't sleep with her?

[–] hovercraftfullofeels 9 years ago

You've brought up the very two things that confused me about this film. I wish there was an explanation.