Not really attempting to force a choice here, bhaktigirl, just looking for a way to start some conversation. Personally I favor "Becket" but I think we gain more from having to say why, beyond "O'Toole was better in this one or that one," or, "I like Burton/Hepburn better," or something of the like. For me the complexity of the relationship between Henry and Becket was more satisfying than that of Eleanor and Henry. Alot's been said about the great Kate and her portrayal of Eleanor in this movie but for me it just didn't work - the great beauty robbed of her charm by time, still possessed of her steely mind and great manipulative powers but still half in love with the man who imprisoned her and wishing, really, just to be loved. A sixties farce of womanhood that wants to be "Taming of the Shrew" but for those darn inconvenient facts of the story. Everybody talks about Peter chewing the scenery in this movie but how about the scene where Eleanor tells Henry she slept with his father? Ouch!!! That's some of the worst over-acting I've ever seen. Absolutely horrible. Of course, that's just my opinion. Where "Lion" is strong for me is among the young players - the past relationship between Hopkins and Dalton is superbly played, and indeed Dalton handles his work with O'Toole extremely well. John Castle is up to par as usual, and whoever plays the loutish young John is brilliant. But this is hardly enough to support the major players in an overblown soufflé falling flat. (Mind I still watch it about once a year, usually around Xmas.) Becket, on the other hand, while it's got its hysterical moments (and I agree with another poster, its rendition of Eleanor is shameful, one of its few flaws) is marked for me the more I watch it, by a remarkable restraint. There are so many moments where Becket and Henry, alone or together, are having some of their worst moments, and they say so little, yet it's freighted with so much, and only actors the caliber of O'Toole and Burton - at the very top of their game - can make that kind of art. How lucky we are to have that. I think of (for example) when Henry has gone to see Bishop Folliot and says "I have the Archbishop of Canterbury on my stomach, and now I must vomit him up." And there's just so many..."Favor for favor, remember?" There's so much BEHIND the dialog. Who but Burton could've pulled off that praying to Jesus scene and make you really think about Christianity as a viable way of life for a minute? :) (Apologies to any of that faith - it's just my wry little joke for those who aren't - but the man's PERSUASIVE.) Lion, with its flaws, is definitely better than 95+ percent of the crap that comes out these days; I just still, for the above reasons mainly, find Becket the better movie - for me, one of the very best ever made. I think, in retrospect, what inspired the original post was not so much a take-down of the two movies, but a thought that here were two O'Toole portrayals of the same man on film, which both got Oscar nominations - the last time I checked, the only time that's happened in Oscar history, so I think it was really more about comparing O'Toole performances, but I didn't really want to tell people to go there, I just wanted to see if they would.
reply
share