User reviews

After returning to save the James Bond franchise with "Diamonds Are Forever," Sean Connery made a complete left-field choice for his next role. In "The Offence," he plays a stressed-out police officer on the verge of a nervous breakdown who is in a physical and psychological battle with a paedophile suspect he has in custody. Connery's character is also struggling with his own paedophile tendencies. It is an adaptation of John Hopkins play "This Story of Yours." It is essentially a two-hander for the most part with Connery and Ian Bannen (as the paedophile) trying to get the better of one another in the interrogation room of a police station.

Even though Sean Connery won his only Oscar for "The Untouchables", for me, this is by far his best performance. He is an absolute powerhouse in this going from shouting, snarling rage to raving and ranting about paedophiles to then sobbing like a child and begging forgiveness.

Ian Bannen is, if anything, even better than Connery here. His character veers from confused innocence to leering guilt, from screaming frustration to self-pity and then back to arrogance. It's an amazing performance. Sadly, Ian Bannen was killed in a car crash a few years back. A huge loss to the acting community.

While "The Offence" on the surface seems like a very British police procedural drama, it was, surprisingly, directed by the American Sidney Lumet. Like Lumet's best movies ("Twelve Angry Men," "The Hill", "Serpico" and "Dog Day Afternoon") this film features a character in an extremely pressurized situation. It's brave film-making at its darkest. Hollywood certainly took notice as Lumet was chosen to direct a young Al Pacino in two of his breakthrough movies "Serpico" in 1973 and "Dog Day Afternoon" in 1975 after this.

This is the kind of film that would not only never be made today, to even suggest it as an idea for a film would probably be the end of your career. So, if you're tired of CGI monsters and explosions and you want to experience raw acting at its finest, get a copy of this film. It is uncomfortable viewing due to its disturbing subject matter, but you won't see better acting anywhere. Highly recommended.

Arguably the best of Sidney Lumet's British films, this one benefits from a brilliant script by John Hopkins and a tour-de-force performance by Sean Connery as a cop who's been pushed too far. The interrogation scenes between him and an excellent Ian Bannen, as the prime suspect in a child molestation case, are riveting. Hopkins' dialogue is uncannily subtle in its gradual illumination of the psychological states of its two antagonists. Vivien Merchant is exceptional as Connery's emotionally-drained spouse. Gerry Fisher's cold, muted photography perfectly captures the sterility and bleakness of post-modern England. This is not a fun film, but its truths about the fragility of the human psyche are eloquently conveyed.

A burnt-out British police detective investigates some astonishing crimes but after 20 years what Inspector-Sergeant Johnson (Sean Connery) has seen and done is destroying him. Things go wrong when eventually snaps whilst interrogating a suspected child molester called Baxter (Ian Bannen) . During the course of the interrogation takes place several surprises , twists and unexpected consequences.

Interesting and grim picture with tight editing , magnificent acting , thrills , plot twists , emotion and intense drama . It was originally conceived as a tense as well as thrilling flick about a complex interrogatory . It results to be an adaptation of a stage play titled : ¨This story of yours¨ by John Hopkings about a claustrophobic and strange duel betwen a suspicious child molester and a police officer obsessively convinced of his guilt , both of whom find themselves subtly changing places . Gripping and exciting picture about a cop who wants to investigate a grisly killing with unexpected consequences , outstanding the great Sean Connery playing very well a London detective who explodes at a police interrogation reacting against a child molester . Embedded in a realistic police procedure , thorny dialog and peculiar situations nowadays have a ring of arty melodrama ; nevertheless, riveting at times. Support cast is really excellent , such as: Trevor Howard, Vivien Merchant as starring's wife , Peter Bowles and especially Ian Bannen as prime suspect in a series of brutal attacks on young girls.

The motion picture was compellingly directed by the splendid US director Sidney Lumet , though here he failed at box-office. After starting an off-Broadway acting troupe in the late 1940s, he became the director of many television shows in the 1950s. Lumet made his feature film Adaptation of directing debut with 12 Angry Men (1957), which won the Golden Bear at the Berlin Film Festival and earned three Academy Award nominations. The courtroom drama, which takes place almost entirely in a jury room, is justly regarded as one of the most auspicious directorial debuts in film history. Lumet got the chance to direct Marlon Brando in The Figitive Kind (1960), an imperfect, but powerful adaptation of Tennessee Williams'. Sidney Lumet was a master of cinema , best known for his technical knowledge and his skill at getting first-rate performances from his actors and for shooting most of his films in his beloved New York . He made over 40 movies , often complex and emotional , but seldom overly sentimental . He achieved great successes such as ¨Serpico¨, ¨The Veredict¨, ¨Fail safe¨ , ¨ Morning after¨, ¨The hill¨ , ¨Dog day afternoon¨, ¨Murder on the Orient Express¨ , ¨Network¨ , ¨The Anderson tapes¨and his best considered one : ¨12 angry men¨ . In 2005 , Sidney Lumet received a well-deserved honorary Academy Award for his outstanding contribution to filmmaking. Rating . 6.5/10 . Above average . Well worth watching .

This is a superb psychological thriller with a brilliant lead performance from Sean Connery.

Connery plays a police detective nearing burn-out, the fuse for which is provided by a child molester on the loose. When a suspect (Ian Bannen) is arrested, the detective takes it upon himself to interrogate the man -- and ends up beating him to death. From there, the film examines what drove the detective to do it, through individual scenes with his wife (Vivien Merchant) and the internal affairs officer investigating the beating (Trevor Howard). The final third of the film takes us step by step through the interrogation, as Bannen turns the psychological tables on Connery, making the detective see exactly the sort of animal that he has become as a result of twenty years of dealing unrelentingly with violence and death.

John Hopkins' screenplay plays very much like a stage play (it was adapted from Hopkins' play "This Story of Yours"), but in this case it works to the film's advantage as Connery's life is compartmentalized (by virtue of the scene structure) in a way that makes his personal life seem completely walled-off from his job, and his job completely walled off from the interrogation. As a result, his character's inability to deal with anything but his job (and consequently, even that) gives us marvelous clues as to why he does what he does. Sidney Lumet's direction -- his third venture with Connery (previously the two worked on two of Connery's best films: "The Hill" (1965) and "The Anderson Tapes" (1971)) -- utilizes the stagy conventions well to advance the story and to enhance the performances.

As for the performances, these are uniformly excellent. Connery has never been better, playing a character who is anything but invulnerable, instead being a bundle of nerves and frustrations which explode into violence at crucial moments. Bannen is every bit his match as a complex, manipulative character who is at the same time sympathetic (as Connery's victim) and repulsive (for the sadistic delight he takes in pushing Connery's buttons). Indeed, one of the strengths of the story is that it is never revealed whether Bannen did in fact molest the children in question -- by doing so, the film makes us understand that this is not the issue. Instead, the film is more about internal demons -- how we all have them, and how we can either control or be controlled by them.

Howard is solid in what is perhaps the least interesting role in the film, but Merchant is phenomenal as Connery's plain wife, who has withstood his emotional abuse and neglect for years, sometimes in silence, sometimes not, but always with dignity. In perhaps one of the most poignant moments in the film, Connery, half-drunk, looks up at her, and asks in wonderment, "Weren't you ever pretty?" Merchant's lines following that are less important for their text, than for her reading of them -- wounded, but still confronting her husband like a prize fighter who's determined not be knocked out by a cheap shot in the fifteenth round.

Perhaps the greatest tragedy of this film is that it is practically unknown in the United States, and that it did not air in enough American theaters to qualify for the Oscars. Otherwise, it would quite likely have resulted in Oscar nominations for Connery (in an otherwise weak year for the Best Actor category, the only comparable performance nominated was Al Pacino's in "Serpico"), Bannen, and Merchant, not to mention Hopkins and possibly Lumet. All the same, definitely a film worth seeing if you're tired of watching detective films where Bruce Willis or Mel Gibson blow away half of Los Angeles.

Rating: ****

British film adaptation of John Hopkins' play "This Story of Yours", penned by the playwright, concerns a troubled 20-year veteran of the police force privately interrogating a suspicious-seeming man picked up the same night a schoolgirl was found molested in the woods. The accused almost inadvertently manages to get inside the other man's head until the tables are turned and it's the cop who is suddenly examining his own dark, turbulent thoughts (he's forced to see the ugly truth, that the two men are not unlike each other). Extremely heavy (as it must be) and unrelievedly talky, the film, directed by Sidney Lumet, is a psychological think-piece, one that was very important to its star, Sean Connery. Erasing all traces of James Bond, Connery sinks deep into this tortured character, with Ian Bannen riveting as the suspect. The film begins confusingly, and audiences must get over another hurdle: a second-act argument between Connery and his wife that eats up a lot of time on the clock. Those who stick with it, however, will find the adult material tense, intriguing and haunting. **1/2 from ****

The Offence is directed by Sidney Lumet and adapted to screenplay by John Hopkins from his own play titled This Story of Yours. It stars Sean Connery, Ian Bannen, Trevor Howard and Vivien Merchant. Cinematography is by Gerry Fisher and music by Harrison Birtwistle.

Detective Sergeant Johnson (Connery) has been with the British Police Force for two decades, in that time he has been witness to countless murders, rapes and other serious crimes. The images, the people he has had to deal with, have left a terrible mark on him. When suspected child sex attacker Kenneth Baxter (Bannen) comes up for interrogation by Johnson, his mind starts to fracture and he loses control, unleashing a dark side that comes out both physically and mentally.

You wouldn't think it possible for Lumet and Connery to have a hidden gem in their respective career outputs, but The Offence is very much just that. An unnerving skin itcher with an upsetting narrative core, The Offence was a commercial flop. It barely got released across the globe and only found its way onto home format release in the last 10 years. The film only got made after Connery struck a deal with United Artists, he would only return as James Bond for Diamonds Are Forever if they backed him for a couple of projects. One of which was The Offence, so with free licence to play Johnson, and his choice of Lumet in the directing chair, Connery got the film made.

Set with a bleak concrete back drop of a "New Town" (cheaply built monstrosities the government knocked up to ease the housing issues), The Offence is a fascinating blend of police procedural and psychological drama. It poses many questions, and thrives on ambiguity to the point repeat viewings are a must, but in the main what shrieks out is the thematic point of one mans harrowing employment taking its toll on he himself. Is it possible that you can only chase and be amongst monsters yourself for so long before you become one of that number? It's invariably hard to recommend the film as high entertainment, a comfy night in by the fire this film is not. But as film art, a searing character study and acting supreme, it scores impressively high whilst tantalisingly tickling the cranium.

It's fair to say it's very dialogue heavy, and Lumet as polished a director as he is, keeps it grainy, revelling in the bleakness of the story. Connery has never been better, utterly compelling, a brooding force of nature and as committed to role as he has ever been. Nor, too, arguably, has Bannen, the scenes shared between the two men are lessons in acting as they portray two warped minds bouncing off each with an unsettling force that grips us round the throat and refuses to let go long after the credits have rolled. Howard steps in to add a touch of mature quality, he too bringing the best out of Connery in the scenes they share, while Merchant as Johnson's "on the outside" wife, is raw and heartfelt.

You can't pigeon hole The Offence, it's very much one of a kind and it demands to be tracked down by serious film fans. From the low key score and foreboding 70s setting, to the gripper of a denouement, The Offence is an essential piece of British cinema. 9.5/10

I saw this film on its premiere engagement at the Odeon Leicester Square.My notes indicate that I found the film overlong and repetative.I have just watched it for the first time since then and have to say that I still hold to those opinions.The climactic scene between Connery and Howard just seems to be a shouting match.A rather unpleasant film.

What happens when a cop is finally pushed over the edge? When all the depravity he's seen throughout his decades on the force, all the sick, violent images rolling around in his head inevitably become intolerable? In this adaptation of John Hopkins play 'This Story of Yours,' you'll see, and witness one of Sean Connery's finest pieces of acting, as well another cinematic triumph from director Sidney Lumet.

Connery stars as Detective Johnson, a tough-as-nails cop investigating the rape of a young child. It's routine for him, as he specialises in the violent and the brutal. He's been doing it for twenty years and has seen everything that can be seen. However, when confronted with a strange man- masterfully played by Ian Bannen- who was picked up near the crime scene, he snaps, cascading into a tangled web of memories, violence and insanity.

Connery and Lumet first joined forces for 1965's 'The Hill', a powerful, intriguing war drama set in a North African military prison. They then reteamed in 1971 on the slick crime caper 'The Anderson Tapes.' The two evidently enjoyed a positive experience working together, and for their third collaboration decided to try something a little darker and more abstract: 'The Offence.' (They made two more films, 1974's brilliant 'Murder on the Orient Express' and 'Family Business,' in 1989; but the less said about that mis-cast, unfunny crime comedy the better).

'The Offence' is a fascinating study about the effect of violence on one's mental state, a dark police procedural and a riveting drama all at once. Anchored by a career best Connery, the film moves at a brisk pace, rapidly establishing a paranoid, seedy atmosphere of psychological malfunction. John Victor Smith's tight editing is outstanding, and under Lumet's direction brings us some very frightening, expertly cut sequences.

In a long and varied career, this may be cinematographer Gerry Fisher's finest hour. Due to his composition and framing, scenes look and feel claustrophobic (whether indoors or out), which adds to the tense atmosphere running throughout the film. He captures the growing madness of Connery's character masterfully and has an artful touch when it comes to shooting scenes of violence that is striking and understated.

Connery has never disappeared inside a character as thoroughly as he does here (with the possible exception of Daniel Dravot in John Huston's 'The Man Who Would Be King'): never once can you spot him acting. His Detective Johnson is an unbalanced, frightened, occasionally cruel man who has seen too much violence in his life to continue on as normal. Memories of murder and mayhem overwhelm him, and Connery captures the PTSD-like effects the character experiences with great sympathy, depth and understanding- it's one of his finest on-screen performances.

The supporting cast is filled with talented actors- Trevor Howard has a small but meaty role, and Vivien Merchant steals her all too brief scene as Johnson's long-suffering wife Maureen- but Ian Bannen stands apart from the pack. As an odd character who may or may not be a child molester, he is slick and seedy; like a snake-oil salesman for the devil's brew. His scenes with Connery are some of the darkest and morally vague you're ever likely to see. His performance rivals Dennis Hopper's in 'Blue Velvet' as one of cinema's most entertaining and insidious creeps.

The film goes to some very sinister places, but never becomes painful to watch. The story is handled with care and intelligence- Hopkins's screenplay is just as powerful as his original theatrical production- and has some unforgettable moments. Lumet and Connery together were a force to be reckoned with, as this obsidian-dark, clever crime drama proves. It's a fantastic, well-written and devastatingly entertaining piece of filmmaking.

Five-time Oscar nominee Sidney Lumet (Network, Dog Day Afternoon) directs John Hopkins' play and gives us an intense and revealing portrait of the effect of years of crawling around in the slime, and what it can do to people.

Whether it be child abuse investigators, or social workers, or soldiers, or police; dealing with the sordid and dangerous side of society takes it toll.

It certainly did on Sean Connery, who had 25 years dealing with the worst criminals. he finally lost it all when faced with a child molester. Psychologists would call it "stamp collecting." Every little injury is placed in an album and cashed in all at once. Couples do this all the time, as do employees. Ignore the hurt for the moment and then cash them in at some insignificant time. In this case, Connery cashed in when he just couldn't take it anymore.

Oscar-nominated Ian Bannen (The Flight of the Phoenix) gave an incredibly good performance as the molester.

A superb film that shows the stress of dealing with society's ills.

I want the 2 hours of my life back :( This is a pretentious load of crap. I don't understand what all the other reviewers are talking about. Connery's "performance" consists of chewing on the furniture for most of the movie. The film makers seem to think that under-exposed film, bad lighting, and worse sound will make the movie seem deeper. The characters and motivations are totally contrived. Yuck.

The film comes in two halves. The first half is a very boring and slow "who done it?" cops and robbers affair, trying to find who attacked some little children. But it is incredibly, painfully slow and tedious. It is not helped at all by the acid-trip habit of inserting random imagery of flowers into scenes that were otherwise intended to be tense.

The second half is one of those pretentious dialogs where two characters talk at each other for an hour. This is the scene other reviewers rave about, and I totally don't get it. It is *awful*; Connery and the other guy are both horribly over-acting, and don't look like realistic characters at all. They look like awkward puppets acting out the tedious message of the film makers.

Again, yuck. And I even *like* Connery. But this is almost as bad as Zardoz. Almost, because nothing could really be as bad as Zardoz :)

To me "The offence" is a must. I think this film deserves to be rediscovered and reaprecciated, because it shows two giants of the cinema at their peak.

Actually the film stars Sean Connery -here in his first role after quitting the official James Bond series-, he's directed by his long time friend Sidney Lumet, one of the most talented American directors. The movie is like a theatrical piece, there's not much action. Everything stands on the actors and their expressions, the atmosphere is dark and depressing. But this is is the goal of the story. Sean is a 40 years old policeman, who faces again with a case of child abuse. He's used to deal with the most miserable stories of humanity... But this time his rage and frustrations explode: he beats a suspected person (Ian Bannen) and loses the control, he kills him. He's suspended from the service.

The movie is a psychological study of a hard man, who loses his dignity and understands too late he's a disturbed man as well. "The offence" is a small British film, a big contrast to the lavish 007 productions. We have not a hero here, we have an actor who proves once more to be a wonderful performer -here the desperation of his character is really deep.

In 1972 the movie didn't enjoy a big success, it has been revalued with the time. (maybe the story was too sad and disturbing for being a hit). Today it's considered a milestone in Connery's career. Of course it is.

The thing that has so fascinated me about Sidney Lumet, and the reason I think he doesn't get the credit others would get for his high points, is the fact that, in a sense, he is the anti-auteur. Not a single one of his films has the style or tone of any of his other works, a quality chalked up less to versatility than simple unevenness. Unlike Billy Wilder, where every one of his films is a different type of classic, Lumet is as varied in quality as vibe, and it's baffling that the same man could make a dry, satirical masterpiece like Network and an awkward, ignorant mystery like A Stranger Among Us. A filmmaker who somehow opened up Murder on the Orient Express, a film entirely set on a train, but couldn't take Long Day's Journey Into Night off the stage. The same man can make a lurid, trashy potboiler like Guilty as Sin, and fire back with a lugubrious British police procedural, namely 1972's The Offence.

The film follows (Sean Connery), a detective whose every other word is "bloody", on his obsessive and tireless quest to hunt down a pedophilic child rapist. Lumet has adopted a jarring, off-putting European style: odd angles, drab settings, and long, slow takes. Too long, in fact, as many scenes precipitously tip from intriguing to slumber-inducing, and several scenes continue on far past their point of usefulness. For instance, the opening police interrogation scene is intended to inform us of two things: (1) that the man they're holding isn't talking, and (2) that Connery is overly driven to solve the case, to the point of wrongful violence. We are shown the full scene as the finale, and that should tell you all you need to know, that this is the cut version of the scene; it should take no more than five or six minutes to establish, and yet, eats up over twenty minutes of screen time in a film nearly two hours long. Did he have to fill a quota? The film manages to put forth a lot of simple platitudes in such a bizarre, roundabout way that I can't believe there could be any other reason for it.

The Offence has other problems, all of them technical.The film needs a replacement at both editor and director of photography, as the film's pace is maddening, long scenes of nothing punctuated by quick, baffling flashes of actual information that are difficult to catch much less comprehend. Lending credence to the quota theory, the film opens with a pre-credit sequence that is a silent, slow-motion version of an inessential scene that occurs not twenty minutes after the credits roll. The film is also hideously poorly-lit, bathing every scene in a pool of darkness that makes it damn near impossible to discern what is occurring when something actually is. Of course, as established, not a lot actually does. Once the aforementioned suspected quota-filling interrogation concludes, the film goes even an even more punishingly overlong scene, a drunken rambling of an argument/discussion between Connery and his wife (Vivien Merchant), with all the incoherence and crying of a Cassavetes film with none of the pathos or downtrodden horror. The scene once again takes half an hour to explain what could have been done in a dozen minutes of screen time: his job has affected him to the point of emotional ruin because of the horrible things he has seen, especially pertaining to children.

This is especially unfortunate considering Sean Connery is as his absolute best, projecting a damaged man who just wants to do the right thing, shifting believably from injured humanist to flailing, wide-eyed, all-out rage at a moment's notice. Most of the rest of the cast are unremarkable character players, with Connery receiving able support from both brilliantly whimpering Ian Bannen, as well as legendary British thespian Trevor Howard, who shows up as a blunt, irked detective superintendent, and his voice is as authoritative and distinctive as I have always known him to be, with a wonderful aged gruffness to his voice that provides a fabulous counterpoint in his scenes with Connery. Of course, the scene is merely verbally articulating information we already know, and even its freshness wears off in time.

Lumet has had some duds before in my quest, but none has been as frustrating as The Offence. When the film's plot trudges on, the film is captivating drama, but so often, the wheels grind to a screeching halt to spend an inordinate amount of time revealing and analyzing things we already know and have assumed at the outset. In fact, looking back on the film, it's far more theatrical than I initially noticed, and really, the entire film amounts to three or four extended setpieces with a handful of scene transitions in between. Unfortunately, those transitions ended up being the only parts really worth my time. That's the real offence.

{Grade: 5.75/10 (low C+) / #15 (of 20) of 1972 / #18 (of 26) of Lumet}

The writer of this moving and disturbing film, John Hopkins, once said that to understand the nature of human evil one must first look inwards at oneself. Therein lie the answers. With 'The Offence', Hopkins took this philosophy to the limit and created a stunning portrayal of latent evil emerging from the wrecked personality of a good man.

Sean Connery's plays a cop who has seen too much of the dark side of human nature. The relentlessly brutal horrors of his job have eroded his human decency to the point where his own perverse subconscious urges are lured to the surface. Connery's failure to articulate his own tortured feelings leads to frustration and hostility as he becomes alienated him from his wife and colleagues. To his horror he realises that the only person who truly understands his pain is a suspected child molester (played with slippery relish by the late great Ian Bannen). Eventually, Connery's growing emotional dependency on Bannen leads to violent catharsis and death.

Sidney Lumet has never quite made a film like this before or since. Although he is on familiar ground - cops under intolerable pressure - the dream-like cinematic textures achieved here are reminiscent (though not imitative) of Welles and Tarkovsky.

The film is an acting tour de force: Connery and Bannen give the performances of their lives. Vivien Merchant and Trevor Howard are also compelling in vital supporting roles. Harrison Birtwhistle's sophisticated musical score supports the characters and scenes perfectly.

'The Offence' is one of the few films which accurately captures the bleak, estranged architecture of the many English New Towns that sprang up in the 50's and 60's. Lumet's eye for these soul-sucking landscapes is brilliant - better than that of most English directors. Originally conceived as 'workers paradises' by over zealous town-planners, these would-be concrete utopias rapidly became focal points of social malaise. It is fitting that Connery's troubled character should live and work in such desolation.

The story is not only emotionally complex but has an ambitious, multi-layered, time-shifted narrative structure that echoes the fractured memory of Connery's character. Lumet takes all these elements and shapes them into an unforgettable portrait of human frailty.

Sean Connery is more a superstar than an actor. Although his talents have been recognised by the Academy (for his rather unconvincing turn as an Irish cop in The Untouchables (1987)) and remembered for his role as the first James Bond, he is high up on his own pedestal, a gift for voice actors and one of the handsomest faces ever to have graced the screen. But anyone in doubt of his ability as a proper thespian need look no further than his grim, tormented portrayal of a cop who has seen one too many dead bodies in Sidney Lumet's The Offence, a huge flop at the box office and a film now faded into memory, ripe for a re-discovery.

Playing with time Rashomon (1950)-style, the film begins in slow motion, where an unknown disturbance at a police station has a few officers panicked. It is revealed to be Detective Sergeant Johnson (Connery) standing over the bloodied body of suspect Kenneth Baxter (Ian Bannen), with fellow police officers scattered on the floor. It then goes back, and we are in a grey, miserable city gripped in panic as a child-killing paedophile roams free. The latest disappearance of a young girl has Johnson riled, and officers cruising the street pick up Baxter, who is wandering alone in the night covered in mud. The young girl is found raped but alive by Johnson himself, who insists on spending some time alone with the suspect.

Based on John Hopkins' stage play This Story of Yours, Connery fought tooth-and-nail to adapt it for the big screen, eventually reprising his role as Bond in Diamond Are Forever (1971) in return for the green-light. Although the film consists of long, talky scenes, Lumet uses stylish editing in order to avoid being stagy and to delve further into his anti-hero's head. His reputation as a no- nonsense director betrays him here, as scenes of gruesome murders, body parts, and a host of other atrocities Johnson has witnessed flash before our eyes. The use of slow motion in the flashback moments also employs a sort of circular filter at the centre of the screen, reflecting Johnson's disconnection from his actions but getting slightly tiresome in the process.

There are three long, outstanding scenes. The first is Johnson returning home to his wife (Vivien Merchant) following his interrogation of Baxter, drinking heavily and exploding at the one person who could possibly help him. The second is Johnson's own interrogation with superintendent Cartwright (the ever-excellent Trevor Howard), a man who has witnessed the same level of horror himself, but has learnt to separate his work from his life, something Johnson is unable to do. The third is the extended interrogation of Baxter, where Bannen's creepy turn surely must have been an inspiration for the Joker-Batman verbal showdown in The Dark Knight (2008). It's incredibly bleak stuff, but the raw honesty of the script and performances makes this powerful stuff.

www.the-wrath-of-blog.blogspot.com

A girl has gone missing. Police Detective Sergeant Johnson (Sean Connery) joins the search and finds her in shock after being brutally raped. He tracks down suspect Kenneth Baxter and brings him in for interrogation. It ends with Baxter beaten by Johnson who has been haunted by his years of working on terrible cases.

This is a compelling character study. It shows Sean Connery at his acting best. Director Sidney Lumet stripes the movie down to its bare walls and allows Connery to boil over. The best section is him alone with his wife. The second best section is with his supervisor. In a way, I almost rather be imagining what happened in that interrogation. It's anti-climatic to actually see it. You know what I would do for a shock ending. Have him go to a hospitalized Baxter and kill the suspect there. Have him turn into the thing that he hates. Have the violence truly infect him and transform him.

Most British films from this era are usually quite good, but this one isn't. It is poorly written with repetitive flashbacks and overall it is tedious. And there is very little plot. I was relieved when it finally ended. The acting is OK though and the location scenes of Bracknell in 1972 will be of interest to those from the area.

Remarkable, dark, disturbing film. Sean Connery was a perfect, suave James Bond, and many of his later films were just audience-pleasing parodies, but this man can act. His portrayal of a seemingly hard-boiled detective merge perfectly later with the sociopathic figure he really has become. This is a searing film, which creeps up on you, and stuns you with sudden realizations. Connery's character (Sergeant Johnson) would have probably lived out his career, and his life, literally drowning in his sickness and misery, but for his meeting with Baxter, a suspected child molester and murderer. As the interview progresses, Baxter can clearly see the illness and pathology in Sergeant Johnson, and each push the other's buttons, closer and closer to the edge, and beyond. The revelations revealed take you back and forth, until you don't quite know who the real deviant is.

Sean Connery and Ian Bannen were simply breathtakingly good. Great atmosphere and pacing in this dark, chilling movie. The slow, brooding, quiet pace to the film lends an air of disquiet, and an impending tragedy.

Tedious, over acted, unrealistic procedures. A slow somewhat confusing start that descends into a hamfest. The interaction between the lead and his wife was particularly unrealistic as if both were just mouthing the lines from a bad script. The remainder comprising mainly of a supposed 'deep' shouting match between characters. Doesn't warrant the extremely high ratings.