Tea and Sympathy

Those who had the good fortune to see Deborah Kerr onstage in the Elia Kazan production of "Tea and Sympathy," will attest to her unforgetable performance. Kerr not only played it on Broadway but also toured with it, a treat for all attendees. Now nearly a half century later, her performance on film, which was very much influenced by her stage style, begins to show a little wear around the edges. It must be difficult to change one's approach after having played a role so successfully night after night. In this case, her inflections, accents, phraseology, pauses, gestures and the like are essentially theatre-based, designed to play to the whole house up to the balcony. In the intimacy of film, this becomes a bit much in the long run, and results in a much more broad, deliberate and stylized Kerr than in any of her other film work. Her character tends to emerge now more as a busy-body, snooper, peeping tom than was ever intended, and certainly it did not come across that way when the film was first released. A landmark film of sorts--for a major studio to tackle a sensitive subject in a major production--"Tea and Sympathy" benefits from a sincerely written script by Robert Anderson, solid direction by Vincent Minnelli and a secure supporting cast. Visually Deborah Kerr is beautiful, and is totally committed to both the play and her role. During her lengthy film career, Kerr certainly contributed a wealth of finely crafted performances.

Having experienced the 1950's as a child and then the 60's as an adolescent and a teenager, I have many mixed feelings about the era. I loved the music, many of the movies, the "Golden Age of Television", the relative safety for a kid, and the uncomplicated simplicity of the times. What I don't miss, however, are the oppressive, narrow-minded stereotyping and the stifling social conformity that were so prevalent during that period. So what if you enjoyed your own company and wanted to listen to phonograph records by yourself or, on impulse, even hopped the Number 8 bus to downtown Elizabeth, New Jersey where there were no fewer than four different movie theaters on the same block from which to choose, a really big deal at the time.

I didn't find this movie dated at all. Not only does it offer a glimpse of what life was like in the 1950's, which should have some historical significance to younger folks today, but its message regarding the stifling conditions of rigid social conformity is ageless. Although it is obviously a stage adaptation, praise goes to director Vincente Minnelli for so ably bringing it to the wide screen. The three leads, Deborah Kerr, John Kerr (no relation), and Leif Erickson, who all revived their original Broadway roles, are exceptional. I also loved the scene when Al (Daryl Hickman), Tom's socially pressured roommate, attempts to provide Tom with tips on how to appear more manly to the world. Norma Crane, who wonderfully played Golde in the film version of "Fiddler on the Roof", perfectly portrays the very cruel town harlot, Ellie Martin. Ironically, Edward Andrews depicts Tom's demanding father as anything but manly, perhaps intentionally. Be as I say, Tommy, not as I am.

While Tom at first appears to be the focus of the film, the stories of Laura and Bill Reynolds, his dorm house parents, slowly begin to overshadow Tom's miserable situation. This represents some excellent work by screenplay writer Robert Anderson, who also wrote first-rate scripts for "The Nun's Story", "The Sand Pebbles, and "I Never Sang For My Father." And what is Bill Reynolds doing at the end of the movie? Listening to phonograph records by himself. What's the matter with him? My only criticism is that it runs a bit long and could have been reduced in length without losing its powerful impact.

This film came to audiences at a rather schizophrenic time, things were changing, but not that much. Roles were assimilated, but not too drastically. People were questioning things, as long as it wasn't radical.

Women were still patronized, there were still clear role boundaries (witness the scene where Tom is knitting and catches derision for spending ten minutes in a sewing circle.) Not sure why that was a crime of the century, but whatever.

Deborah Kerr is tender and memorable as an unhappy wife to the school master at a prep school who realizes her marriage is a sham. She realizes this when she sympathizes with a student and resident at her home, a confused young man who simply is shy and has doubts about his future. There are some nuances regarding sexuality, but in all honesty that was a side-story, from what I inferred.

The message I take away from this film is not simply about ostracism and hatred; Minnelli as director also addresses female emotion, the reasons why Kerr empathizes with the young man, and how he eventually moves on. In the long rung, it is life affirming, although rather opaque in its message.

Discrimination and hatred take many forms, and sometimes the subtler forms are most repellent. Highly recommended. 8/10.

It is true that this film, made in 1956, two years after it appeared on the stage, is dated. And it is true, in real 1950s style, the characters may seem very contrived, and the dialogue very scripted. But Tea and Sympathy tells a very real and poignant story and if you allow yourself simply to be swept up by that, rather than looking at the film in a sceptical and critical manner, you may actually enjoy it. John Kerr does a wonderful job of playing a teenage boy, Tom Lee, who cannot seem to fit in with those around him, and Leif Erickson does just as good a job portraying the schoolmaster Bill Reynolds, who sees being 'manly' as one of the most important things there is. And lovely, refined Deborah Kerr (no relation to John Kerr), in the role she played on stage, does an impressive job of portraying Laura Reynolds, the love-starved faculty wife who still thinks about the husband she lost in the war. And she is the one who is disturbed by the treatment Tom gets from his schoolmates, and even from her husband himself, and she is the one who takes action to try and help him. The fact that there are large references to 'out of bounds' sexual activity in the film make it rather unique and daring for the decade in which it was released. Director Vincente Minnelli does a superb job of capturing the sexual tension within the Reynolds house and makes the film that much less twee. A great film, and a must see for Deborah Kerr fans.

Fresh on the heels of her stellar performance in "The King and I", Deborah Kerr (as Laura Reynolds) plays the wife of a virile man who runs a dormitory house and coaches at a boys school. She feels sympathy for Tom, as student (played by John Kerr) who is different from the other boys. Though he competes in sports, his true interests are the arts, and he is known to spend time alone listening to classical music.

The story revolves around gender roles. The film uses stereotypes, like the "he-man" and the "sensitive boy" to expose persecution by stereotyping. It is a product of its time in degree only. Conventions in acceptable gender behavior still prevail. And there have always been pockets of society that impose their own rules of conduct on their members. These conspiracies of prejudice depend on bullying to enforce conformity.

The driving force behind such movements is fear of that which is different or not understood. This is a film about homophobia, not homesexuality. John Kerr does a good job portraying Tom, the persecuted teen. He is not unlike most teens; he just doesn't conform to the prevailing "norms". Much is made about the concept of a "regular guy"---a laughable archetype when viewed objectively. It doesn't matter who you are or what you believe in as long as you conform and, thusly, assuage the fears of those around you.

The relationship between Tom and his father is central to the story. Like the coach, Tom's father has been conditioned to expect certain behaviors from himself and others. His disappointment in his son is extremely damaging. It is interesting to compare this film's depiction of the father-son relationship with that in "Rebel Without a Cause". They are different, but in each the dynamics are painful and long-reaching. It is also worth mentioning that Tom is not like Sal Mineo's character in "Rebel", but they have similar psychological repercussions.

The film ends with the reading of a letter. It's an ending that was added to conform to prevailing standards and, as such, adds nothing of value. Better to ignore it and let the film stand on its own merits, without the cowardly addendum.