ÉVALUATION IMDb
7,7/10
7,8 k
MA NOTE
Un avocat renfermé risque sa carrière pour traduire un maître chanteur en justice.Un avocat renfermé risque sa carrière pour traduire un maître chanteur en justice.Un avocat renfermé risque sa carrière pour traduire un maître chanteur en justice.
- Nominé pour le prix 2 BAFTA Awards
- 3 nominations au total
Frank Pettitt
- Barman
- (as Frank Pettit)
Avis en vedette
Henri-George Clouzot's "le corbeau" (the raven,1943) always comes to mind when it comes to slanderous mail.The principal differences between the French movie and Dearden's one is that in the former,the raven was not a blackmailer,he was not in it for the money ,but out of pure wickedness,and he would "punish" not the gay-it was too soon- but the adulterer,the abortion and other little sins.
Dearden's work is a bold move for the time.The movies dealing with homosexuality were very rare then.It was one of the first to fight against intolerance. Of course this topic was in Tennessee Williams' plays ,but it was not really militant .We can mention in the sixties the almost contemporary "children's hour" (Wyler,1963) "the fox "(Mark Rydell,1967) and "the staircase" (Donen,1969).
Dearden's work suffers from a certain inflation of secondary characters which weakens the drama.(Dennis Price's part does not seem much relevant.)Consequently,the best moments are to be found in the first twenty minutes:Peter MC Ennery (who would be Rasputin's assassin in "j'ai tué Raspoutine"(1967) ,and coincidence,this Yusupov was also a gay)'s escape ,recalling sometimes James Mason's in "odd man out" ,is breathtaking:alone in a world gone hostile and threatening,his phone calls remain unanswered,and everybody turns his back on him:his buddy's girlfriend's attitude is telling ,full of contempt and repulsion.The scenes between Dirk Bogarde -I do not need to add to the praise he has already received- and his wife are also great moments of true emotion.Had Dearden focused on the husband/wife/young man,his film would have gained in strength.Nevertheless,this courageous plea is still worth watching.
Dearden's work is a bold move for the time.The movies dealing with homosexuality were very rare then.It was one of the first to fight against intolerance. Of course this topic was in Tennessee Williams' plays ,but it was not really militant .We can mention in the sixties the almost contemporary "children's hour" (Wyler,1963) "the fox "(Mark Rydell,1967) and "the staircase" (Donen,1969).
Dearden's work suffers from a certain inflation of secondary characters which weakens the drama.(Dennis Price's part does not seem much relevant.)Consequently,the best moments are to be found in the first twenty minutes:Peter MC Ennery (who would be Rasputin's assassin in "j'ai tué Raspoutine"(1967) ,and coincidence,this Yusupov was also a gay)'s escape ,recalling sometimes James Mason's in "odd man out" ,is breathtaking:alone in a world gone hostile and threatening,his phone calls remain unanswered,and everybody turns his back on him:his buddy's girlfriend's attitude is telling ,full of contempt and repulsion.The scenes between Dirk Bogarde -I do not need to add to the praise he has already received- and his wife are also great moments of true emotion.Had Dearden focused on the husband/wife/young man,his film would have gained in strength.Nevertheless,this courageous plea is still worth watching.
1961 in England. Homosexuals were routinely jailed just because they were homosexuals. It was still the love that dare not speak its name.
Blackmailers had a terrific open season on gays - extorting funds for silence. It is incredible that this movie was made - on two levels. One being the obvious, who would want to star in such a controversial film?
Enter one Dirk Bogarde, putting both his reputation and his career on the line. He moved deliberately beyond his "Doctor in the House" series of light romantic leading men to make this benchmark film.
It may seem dated today to some eyes, but it captures an authentic London of 1961 and is filmed on location in the streets for most of it. One can see the barriers, goofophiles, holding the passersby back from the location shooting! "Flower Drum Song" is featured on a marquee in one of the scenes.
The suspense is carried along beautifully, you are never sure how it is all going to turn out, there are no easy solutions, there are some wonderful sub-plots, unexpected little surprises, like the childhood friend of a victim staunchly loyal against his wife's homophobic wishes.
The husband and wife story is beautifully depicted and completely non-formulaic. I love the rush and buzz of London surrounding the taut, tense story. Groundbreaking film. 8 out 10.
Blackmailers had a terrific open season on gays - extorting funds for silence. It is incredible that this movie was made - on two levels. One being the obvious, who would want to star in such a controversial film?
Enter one Dirk Bogarde, putting both his reputation and his career on the line. He moved deliberately beyond his "Doctor in the House" series of light romantic leading men to make this benchmark film.
It may seem dated today to some eyes, but it captures an authentic London of 1961 and is filmed on location in the streets for most of it. One can see the barriers, goofophiles, holding the passersby back from the location shooting! "Flower Drum Song" is featured on a marquee in one of the scenes.
The suspense is carried along beautifully, you are never sure how it is all going to turn out, there are no easy solutions, there are some wonderful sub-plots, unexpected little surprises, like the childhood friend of a victim staunchly loyal against his wife's homophobic wishes.
The husband and wife story is beautifully depicted and completely non-formulaic. I love the rush and buzz of London surrounding the taut, tense story. Groundbreaking film. 8 out 10.
This is probably the most mature film ever made about the realities of gay life in 1960s Europe (not just Britain). Bogard's unflinching portrayal of a gay lawyer's search for the truth about an attempted blackmail of his ex lover is masterful. Sadly, a lot of the particulars depicted here still hold true-gays in public life are still persecuted and subject to blackmail (since not all are "out" in the current sense of the word). There is none of the hideous sniggering anti gay attitude here that characterize many later films about homosexuals (ie, Cruising, and especially, Staircase-a truly awful film featuring two straight actors, Richard Burton and Rex Harrison, both engaged in a disparate attempt to prove they are 'not gay' I suppose). Beyond the subject matter, actually much too serious for a standard film noir, the film is photographed beautifully in moody early sixties black and white, perfect for a noirish crime drama such as this.
This is the story of Melville Farr, a high-ranking English barrister who has just been offered an appointment to be a Queen's Counselor. But Farr is gay, and in investigating who has been blackmailing a friend he is exposed to being blackmailed himself. How Farr deals with this and the impact it has on his career and marriage makes for a quality drama.
I was thinking that in order to appreciate this film you had to put yourself back in the time when homosexuality was against the law in England, since we have now come such a long way from that time to where some elected officials are now openly gay. On the other hand, the basic theme of this movie still plays. A closeted high-ranking lawyer with a reputation as an upstanding family man could still be open to blackmail. People are still "accused" or "suspicioned" of being gay and often feel the need to defend themselves against such charges, as if there were something inherently wrong with it. Acceptance of differences comes slowly.
The performances are good, particularly Bogard and Syms. Lovers of skillfully filmed high contrast black and white will appreciate this - it's an art form that has pretty much disappeared. The first half hour, before you really know what's going on, is particularly engrossing. It plays in the style of a film noir thriller.
The one thing I found a bit bothersome was the apparent need for the characters to vocalize their plight, with statements like "Don't they understand that we are just like anyone else," and "Why are we singled out," and so forth. The plot makes these points well enough, what with a suicide, a heart attack, ruined careers, and multiple blackmails.
However, it probably took a fair amount of courage at the time just to make this film, which was clearly a plea for legal reform. Reform that came six years later in 1967.
I was thinking that in order to appreciate this film you had to put yourself back in the time when homosexuality was against the law in England, since we have now come such a long way from that time to where some elected officials are now openly gay. On the other hand, the basic theme of this movie still plays. A closeted high-ranking lawyer with a reputation as an upstanding family man could still be open to blackmail. People are still "accused" or "suspicioned" of being gay and often feel the need to defend themselves against such charges, as if there were something inherently wrong with it. Acceptance of differences comes slowly.
The performances are good, particularly Bogard and Syms. Lovers of skillfully filmed high contrast black and white will appreciate this - it's an art form that has pretty much disappeared. The first half hour, before you really know what's going on, is particularly engrossing. It plays in the style of a film noir thriller.
The one thing I found a bit bothersome was the apparent need for the characters to vocalize their plight, with statements like "Don't they understand that we are just like anyone else," and "Why are we singled out," and so forth. The plot makes these points well enough, what with a suicide, a heart attack, ruined careers, and multiple blackmails.
However, it probably took a fair amount of courage at the time just to make this film, which was clearly a plea for legal reform. Reform that came six years later in 1967.
It would be easy to view this movie as nothing more than a somewhat dated film. However, for it's time, this movie was ground-breaking, for any number of reasons, including its superb acting. Dirk Bogarde and Sylvia Syms, in particular, were perfect in their parts.
What many don't realize is that this movie is credited with helping to decriminalize homosexuality in Britain. When "Victim" was released, it started a nationwide discussion about homosexuality and associated blackmail. At the time, approximately 90% of all blackmail cases involved homosexuals, and Bogarde's character was a classic example of a blackmail "victim". The point of the movie wasn't that all homosexuals were victims, but they could only be victims so long as the law permitted it. The blackmail wasn't merely because they were homosexual, but due to the harsh prison sentences a homosexual could (and often did) receive. How often does a movie get the opportunity to help create such a profound change in society?
What many don't realize is that this movie is credited with helping to decriminalize homosexuality in Britain. When "Victim" was released, it started a nationwide discussion about homosexuality and associated blackmail. At the time, approximately 90% of all blackmail cases involved homosexuals, and Bogarde's character was a classic example of a blackmail "victim". The point of the movie wasn't that all homosexuals were victims, but they could only be victims so long as the law permitted it. The blackmail wasn't merely because they were homosexual, but due to the harsh prison sentences a homosexual could (and often did) receive. How often does a movie get the opportunity to help create such a profound change in society?
Le saviez-vous
- AnecdotesThe famous scene where Melville Farr (Dirk Bogarde), having been confronted by his wife Laura (Sylvia Syms) about Barrett (Peter McEnery), finally admits to her that he "wanted him," was added at Bogarde's request, and was partially written by him. Bogarde states in his autobiography that he felt the screenplay lacked credibility because it was too ambiguous and did not adequately explain Farr's involvement with Barrett, and skirted around the issue. It's worth noting that Bogarde was gay, and considered this movie an extremely personal project.
- GaffesCamera shadow moves onto Madge's coat as it pushes in closer from behind after Eddy leaves the bar.
- Citations
Detective Inspector Harris: I can see you're a true puritan, Bridie. Eh?
Bridie: There's nothing wrong with that, Sir.
Detective Inspector Harris: Of course not. There was a time when that was against the law you know.
- ConnexionsFeatured in Film Profile: Dirk Bogarde (1961)
Meilleurs choix
Connectez-vous pour évaluer et surveiller les recommandations personnalisées
- How long is Victim?Propulsé par Alexa
Détails
Box-office
- Budget
- 153 756 £ (estimation)
- Brut – à l'échelle mondiale
- 25 962 $ US
- Durée1 heure 40 minutes
- Couleur
- Mixage
- Rapport de forme
- 1.66 : 1
Contribuer à cette page
Suggérer une modification ou ajouter du contenu manquant