MovieChat Forums > Becket (1964) Discussion > They don't make 'em like this any more

They don't make 'em like this any more


Absolutely breathtaking performances from the lead pair in their prime who are amazing apart and even better when together on screen - and in reply to another post, it was shown on TV recently - at 2am if you can believe it - wedged in to the dead "graveyard shift" slot in the early hours of the morning in the UK.

If more channels showed this sort of stuff at prime time rather than endless repeats of Beverly Hills Cop or Die Hard then people would have a much better appreciation of what proper acting is. Every now and then we get a glimpse of great acting in modern films (such as the scenes with Richard Harris and Russell Crowe in Gladiator), but whole films of such greatness are few and far between. There are a few films that have good performances over all and some moments of brilliance (like Blood Diamond or The Last King of Scotland) but these are exceptions rather than the rule. Maybe back when effects where limited and budgets where smaller, the focus HAD to be on the acting (such as in The Omen for $2m) but having said that, even when the budgets were off the scale (like in El Cid or Ben Hur) the acting was still much better over all I think.

Sadly the era of Heston & Eastwood will soon be over and greats like Richard Harris & Oliver Reid are passing away all the time. Let us hope that the current crop of good young actors like James McAvoy & Anne Hathaway can grow to replace the greats of yesteryear.

reply

[deleted]

Here, here!

O'Toole and Burton are so much fun to watch. You could put two those guys in an empty room, alone, with no windows and still get first rate theater!

I'd throw Christopher Plummer, Lawrence Olivier and maybe Gene Hackman in the room with 'em just for good measure!

reply

[deleted]

Guess what? I have a feeling that you're an idiot! Why don't you just go on out and BUY Freddie versus Jason. That way you can watch killing right through the whole bloody movie and not be burdened by the plot.

reply

I couldn't have put it better. We should just add that, "this is a movie for those with IQ's considerably above double-digit levels."

reply

[deleted]

[deleted]

[deleted]

[deleted]

I couldn't agree more. It is detrimental to cinema when its faithful watchers divide the faith into becket-lovers or Freddy-lovers. I dont see why one cannot criticise Becket. I happened to watch the film 15 mins ago. It is terribly long with the story progressing at a snail's pace. The performances by O toole and Burton are very good in parts but I do not think they consistent throughout thanks to the slow pace of the film.
The problem with the film is the entire film looks like it was shot on stage.

reply

[deleted]

It looks like it was shot on a stage because most of it was shot on soundstages at Shepperton. Even the big cathedral was a set, which is seriously impressive.

reply

[deleted]

The Target audience for a film like this are people into history who knew Becket was gonna die regardless of the opening. One not knowledgeable of History would still not how he'd Die. Nor was I ever certain the Death would indeed be shown.

There is nothing I dislike more then when a film is criticized for being to long, this Genre especially I always want to be long like watching a Play.

"It's not about money.... It's about sending a Message..... Everything Burns!!!"

reply

What's wrong with liking both Becket and Freddy vs Jason? In the end, Becket is just a movie, too...

reply

Well I'd hazard a guess that most people who've seen Becket wouldn't like Freddy. I know I don't.

It is slower than many epics, but that's just the sort of epic Becket is. It isn't a sword and sandals epic like Spartacus or even something like Lawrence of Arabia. It's a highly literate film, to be expected as it's derived from a play.

Also, Cinne - I knew Becket died before watching the film. I think a lot of people already know the basics of the story, which is probably why they made it like that.

reply

I have alway enjoyed historical movies and put this on my DVR as a lark. Wow am I glad. I've never seen Peter O'Toole in a role looking so young! (I still haven't seen LOA yet! When I think to look for that movie its never on!) As the op said Burton/O'Toole were amazing.

This was a real treat. I especially enjoyed Burton's clever word play and O'Toole's domestic dysfunction. Superb!



__________________________
Greetings,
Need I say more? You are remembered.

reply

Dear Cinemamania, I agree.
I saw this film in 1969 and last week in 2010.
I remembered everything from the first viewing. And I was also quite bored. The lack of nuance, the psychologically empty characters. This film was made for Americans.

reply

"This film was made for Americans."

Strange . . . considering it was written, directed and performed by Europeans.

reply

Yes. The producer (the man with the money) was American; the story was DUMBED-DOWN for Americans.

reply

I see. Well, Wallace was a powerful Producer it's true. Seems to me, however, that this was a strange property for him to invest in then (like investing in "Hamlet" in order to "dumb it down" for Americans), not to mention the equally strange choices of screenwriter, director and actors (all European and all artistic push-overs?). And, IF his intent was to dumb it down "exclusively" for Americans, well, that too seems a little strange ... ah, considering the enormous popularity of the British "Benny Hill" on BOTH continents at the time.

Guess Wallace shoulda stuck with Elvis and Ann Margaret or the Beatles whose intrinsically "dumbed down" personae were so popular with the provincials and so unpopular with Europeans -- Huh? . . .

reply

Yes, you're so right. Wallis.

reply

Ooops. Yes, it's spelled "Wallis".

reply

I agree! I will always remember the last Burton's words just before his Becket dies hacked with the knights' swords, "Poor Henry"...In the last moment of his life, he feels sorry for his murderer, his former friend whom he loved but would not betray his principles and beliefs even for him.

Another scene is also imprinted in my memory - Henry invites his family for the reunion where he is expected to name his successor. Surrounded by his closest relatives, his mother, his estranged wife, Queen Eleanor of Aquitaine, his three sons, whom he never loved nor they loved him. All they want - the throne of England. All he wants - his friend Beckett next to him, but he lost him to God...


As you are, I was. As I am, you will be.

reply

I find it hard to watch these mid-century "epics," like Spartacus or Ben-Hur or any number of films set in Roman or medieval times.

These are films made in a time period ruled by men, about time periods ruled by men, and the movie won't let a viewer forget it. It's hard to watch because, as a woman, there is absolutely no place for me in this movie, and I keep getting reminded of it.

Don't get me wrong--I'm not protesting that the filmmakers included scenes of degradation, like Henry bartering with Becket first over ownership of the peasant woman in the woods and then over Becket's mistress Gwendolyn. It's that there are so many of this type of scene, and they are completely frivolous and serve only to titillate. Scenes involving women in this film aren't designed to get a viewer thinking about their treatment, they are simply taken for granted. These scenes are there because this is what the world was like midcentury for all the men involved.

If women had simply been left out, fine. But every other scene fulfills a male viewer's fantasy about being a king and having the power to steal any women he wants, and the fact that the filmmakers take this for granted is what unsettles me. This is a film meant to be understood and appreciated by men, and there's no place for me as a viewer. Plenty of movies have male leads, and a viewer of any sex can connect with them and have sympathy and so on. But this movie, and others of its ilk, simply don't include me in their universe.

__ __ __
Gentlemen, you can't fight in here! This is the War Room!"--Pres. Merkin Muffley

reply