Vom Ende einer Geschichte

Based on the Booker Prize-winning novella by Julian Barnes (which I have read), inevitably this film adaptation is different from the original work. The structure of the book was a section of the (unreliable) narrator's time at school and university followed by the present day coming to terms with revelations of that earlier period. The film is set in the present with lots of flash-backs to the past and that works well.

More questionably, the movie version of "The Sense Of An Ending" has a different ending which is not that of the author Julian Barnes or even that of the scriptwriter, the playwright Nick Payne, but essentially that of the director, Indian film-maker Ritesh Batra (who made the delightful work "The Lunchbox"). The film offers us a conclusion which is more definitive and more upbeat that the novel but that is perhaps the nature of this different medium.

"The Sense Of An Ending" is slow and serious but not all films can be "Fast And Furious". The pacing allows the viewer to admire the wonderful acting, primarily from Jim Broadbent as the narrator, retired and divorced Tony Webster, but also from some fine actresses, notably Charlotte Rampling, Harriet Walter and Emily Mortimer, plus some new young actors.

Like the source novel, this film is a challenging and moving examination of the malleability of memory. As Tony puts it: 'How often do we tell our own life story? How often do we adjust, embellish, make sly cuts?' How often indeed ...

The English film The Sense of an Ending (2017) was directed by Ritesh Batra. This excellent movie has an all-star cast. Jim Broadbent portrays Tony Webster, a divorced man who is technically retired, but who runs a camera repair shop that specializes in Leica cameras. Dame Harriet Walter plays Margaret Webster, his divorced wife. They have a grown daughter Susie (Michelle Dockery) who is a pregnant, partner-less lesbian. Charlotte Rampling plays Veronica Ford. She holds a secret that is the key to a critical moment in Tony's life that took place 50 years earlier.

Jim Broadbent is one of the greatest actors of the late 20th and early 21st Century. I've seen him in many films, and he always inhabits his role as if he were, indeed, that person. Dame Margaret Webster is a fine actor, and has appeared in dozens of movies and made-for-TV specials. However, I think the only time I've seen her on screen was as the vile Fanny Dashwood in Sense and Sensibility (1995). She does a highly professional job as a embittered woman, whose life is absorbed by her business interests.

Michelle Dockery looks as if she just changed costumes and walked into this movie from Downton Abbey. She is always angry and depressed. For the record, her part is small and non-central in this film. I think she wants to broaden her range, but that didn't happen here. Could she ever star in a comedy?

Charlotte Rampling was one of the most beautiful women in movies. At age 70, she still is one of the most beautiful women in movies. She is not only beautiful, but she is a consummate actor who is made for this role.

This film is complicated. About 75% of it takes place in present time, and about 20% takes place in flashback. (The other 5% are dream and imaginary scenes, when the present enters into the past.) You'll have to pay close attention or you'll miss the point. In fact, during the middle of the film, I missed the point. However, towards the end, it all came together and made sense.

(Incidentally, there's a tedious sequence in the beginning, when Tony gets a certified letter, and he almost opens it, then he sort of opens it, then he opens it and doesn't read it, and finally, finally reads it. The letters starts off the entire plot, so he needs to read it, and we need to know what it says. That's the only weak part of the movie.)

We saw this film at the excellent Little Theatre in Rochester, NY. Even though it's meant to be seen on the large screen, it will work well on the small screen. This movie has a ridiculously low IMDb rating of 6.5. It's much better than that. This is one of those ratings that you have to ignore. Don't miss this movie just because it's rated so low.

P.S. Relevant to The Sense of an Ending: The Moving Finger writes; and, having writ, Moves on: nor all thy Piety nor Wit. Shall lure it back to cancel half a Line, Nor all thy Tears wash out a Word of it." From the Rubaiyat of Omar Khayyam.

Greetings again from the darkness. In 1967 Cat Stevens wrote "The First Cut is the Deepest" and the song has since been recorded by many artists (including Rod Stewart and Sheryl Crowe). The song's title is also an apt description of director Ritesh Batra's film version of the popular 2011 novel from Julian Barnes. It's one man's look back at the impact of his impulsive actions more than 50 years ago.

"When we are young, we want emotions to be like what we read in books". So says the narrator and lead character Tony Webster (as played by Jim Broadbent). Tony runs a tiny second hand camera store (specializing in Leica models) while leading a mostly benign life – rising daily at 7:00am, coffee with his ex-wife, and periodic errands for his pregnant daughter. One day a certified letter arrives notifying him that he has been named in the Last Will and Testament of the mother of a girl he dated while at University. And so begins the trek back through Tony's history and memories.

Of course, a film version can never quite cut as deeply as a novel, but this preeminent cast works wonders in less than two hours. Curmudgeonly Tony is accessible and somewhat sympathetic thanks to the stellar work of Mr. Broadbent, who always seems to find the real person within his characters. Harriet Walther ("The Crown") turns in a tremendous performance as Margaret, Tony's most patient and quite wise ex-wife. Michelle Dockery ("Downton Abbey") is their pregnant 36 year old daughter Susie, and just these three characters could have provided a most interesting story. The film's best scenes feature the comfort and familiarity of a once-married couple, as Tony and Harriet talk through previously never mentioned topics. However, there is so much more to explore here as Tony's thoughts bring the past splashing right smack dab into the present.

Billy Howle does a nice job as young Tony, an aspiring poet, who falls hard for the enigmatic Veronica (Freya Mavor). Complications arise when Tony spends a weekend with Veronica at her parents' estate. It's here that Emily Mortimer energizes things (and clouds thoughts) with minimal screen time as Veronica's mother. It's also around this time where new student Adrian Finn (played by Joe Alwyn of Billy Lynn's Long Halftime Walk) captures Tony's imagination and a friendship bond is formed … only to be later shattered in a most painful manner.

There is so much going on that director Batra's (The Lunchbox, 2013) low-key approach is often misleading. Looking back on one's life can lead to the twisted version that our mind has edited/revised in order to make things seem better or worse – definitely more colorful – than they likely were at the time. Tony's distorted view of history crumbles when documented proof of his actions is presented at his first face to face meeting with Veronica (the great Charlotte Rampling) in five decades. It's at this point that regret and guilt rise up, and the only question remaining is whether this elderly man can overcome his repressed emotions and self-centeredness in order to make the best of what time he has left. Each of us has a life journey, and though few of us ever actually tell the story, there are undoubtedly numerous lessons to be had with an honest look back.

The movie, adapted from a slim novel by Julian Barnes, is a tale of memory, guilt and regret. At the centre of the story is Tom, a divorced man in his late 60s, who leads a life of oppressive sameness. He receives a letter from a solicitor and Tom's routine is interrupted.

From flashbacks to the 1960s, we learn he was involved with a lass called Veronica and met Adrian, a charismatic student. A thoughtless act leads to, or may not have led to, tragedy.

How much of Tom's history (shown in the flashbacks) is true and how much is a distortion of his memory, is open to question.

Meanwhile, Tom's life in the present continues. His daughter is close to giving birth which means regular meetings with his former wife. This gives Tom an opportunity to discuss the past. By staying alert and listening in to the conversations closely and watching the flashbacks carefully, clues emerge for us to discern the truth.

Six fellow film fans and I saw the movie together and met for lunch afterwards. Our interpretations differed. An indication that we'd seen an exceptional film.

There were things we agreed on: the ensemble cast was outstanding; the editing was first-rate; the music unobtrusive; and the director's touch admirable.

Various actions of the major characters and possible actions not actually shown on screen were raised and analysed with the results agreed to by some, rejected by others.

It's not a film for everyone … but for those who enjoy a movie where clues are given but interpretations are left to the viewer, this one's for you.

It's a movie that stays with you for days.

After somewhat iffy reviews and some discouraging interviews I was really pleased by this movie. The novel has great depth and touches on weighty topics, leaving certain unresolved issues in its wake. Payne (scriptwriter) and Batra take on a very challenging job and with the help of a stellar cast they make as good an adaptation as anyone could reasonably expect. Broadbent is magnificent as the male lead and all the female ones are excellent. The cinematography is outstanding with some exterior shots that take your breath away, indeed Batra lingers on them a bit too long, though one can see why!

There is a good deal to admire. The interweaving of past and present is highly skilled, the recreation of sixties milieus authentic. The school scenes rang true - I went to an all boys grammar school in the sixties and they get it right with the exception of the swearing. Incredible as it may seem to some people, swearing was unusual fifty years ago. I loved the way the painful weekend at Chislehurst - central to the mystery - was handled.

There were a few lapses of judgement and taste but overall I would rate this as one of the best movies I have seen in the past year. It deserves awards.