Le verdict

Sir Olivier repeats the line that it doesn't make sense during the movie, and it couldn't be more appropriate as a summation of this hodgepodge of a film. I'm left wondering not only what I watched but why and what was the point. The challenge is reviewing it without spoilers.

I'm not convinced I like any of the characters. I'm not convinced that the ending is satisfying. I'm not convinced I'll watch it again. Regardless, the actors excel in their roles.

I finished watching it because Simone Signoret can do no wrong in my book. I didn't give up on it because the direction and editing are superb. Sadly, I'm left with asking myself what was the point.

This film feels specific. If you've ever seen the Family Guy episode when they're about to drown in the panic room and Peter says that The Godfather insists upon itself, then you'll understand how this film works.

Laurence Olivier, that most noble of actors, could play a downtrodden loser better than anyone. Here, in the 1962 film "Term of Trial," he's a good, idealistic man, who teaches school to mostly ingrates. He believes in his work, and he's a man of principle - he was a conscientious objector in World War II and went to prison for it. Though he's viewed as a weakling by his wife, in fact, by going against the grain, he shows a great deal of personal courage. It's not appreciated, especially by his slatternly wife (Simone Signoret).

In this film, a young girl (Sarah Miles) whom he's tutoring develops a bad crush on him. When he rejects her, she accuses him of molesting her and his kindnesses to her - because she was one student who seemed to really care about learning - are used against him.

This is a marvelously acted film, providing the debuts for the lovely Sarah Miles, as well as for Terence Stamp as Mitchell, a young hoodlum whom Miles takes up with as revenge against Olivier. As the unhappy wife, Signoret is wonderful, and Hugh Griffith turns in a firecracker of a performance as Olivier's attorney.

Olivier is often criticized for selling out because he needed money; he's also criticized for being hammy; and he's criticized for being the great Laurence Olivier by people who have no idea of his contribution to acting. He did this film because he needed money, but it's an excellent role nonetheless, and he gives a magnificent performance. For people who think he's a big ham, I urge them to see this film, "Sister Carrie," and "The Entertainer," where he plays a bad performer. It's a real tour de force.

Gritty, and worth seeing.

You teach English in a school below your station, a spell in inside forecast your future resignation, as you objected, now you're tarred, opportunities, are now all barred, and while there's spirit, it fills a glass, for your libation. Your marriage has become bitter and soured, as your wife thinks you're afraid, a reserved coward, but you're generous and kind, you feel morally inclined, to help young Shirley Taylor, to become empowered.

Great performances from all the cast, but especially Sarah Miles who, as the besotted pupil, takes her teacher, also wonderfully performed by Laurence Olivier to the depths, as generosity and charity are rewarded with retribution and humiliation, when advances are not reciprocated, and he doesn't succumb, to the temptation.

A thrilling and compelling story that we think is going to be simply a young girl who has a crush on her teacher and then rejected it looks as if we will be on for most of the film of a trial of a charge of indecent assault. Yes and no, but this is a wonderful and a very complicated tale about the man the woman and girl. Never having seen this before it turns out that Sarah Miles, I always love, is brilliant and her first film, going on to The Servant (1963) and Blow-Up (1966). Laurence Olivier always good and was in-between The Entertainer (1960) and Bunny Lake is Missing (1965) two of my other favourite films. Simone Signoret is, of course, usually brilliant and now as this one and on with two of her best Casque D'Or (1952) and Diabolique (1955). Then there is Terence Stamp as the school bully and more, in his first role although he would go on with The Collector (1965), Modesty Blaise (1966) and Poor Cow (1967) and all of them I love. It is hard to pick the best out of the four actors because they are all splendid and the story is excellent so it is almost two hours and exceptional.

While this film will earn no plaudits from the Me Too crowd (and justifiably so, in my opinion) and the last ten minutes are a bit too plot twisty for my taste, this remains an insightful character study of a weak, alcoholic secondary school teacher with appalling judgment as well as a powerful examination of a rather sick marriage. Director Peter Glenville will never be confused with Richard Lester in the pacing department but damned if the usually too theatrical fellow does not keep the proceedings moving at a fairly good clip. The result is, in my opinion, Glenville's best film as well as the finest work Olivier has done on the screen, post "Entertainer". Plus you have Simone Signoret at her most gloriously disillusioned and bitter, Sarah Miles, in her film debut, giving a quite convincing portrayal of an unstable girl in love with a much older man, and Terence Stamp essaying a truly loathsome bully/punk. And maybe because it is based on a novel you have some very memorable subsidiary characters, as well, like Thora Hird's nasty working class mom, Dudley Foster's cold ass police detective and Hugh Griffith's go for the jugular defense counsel. Finally, the cinematography by Oswald Morris is so wonderfully kitchen sink that even Paris looks grimy. Give it a B.