Very impressive adaptation of the Harold Pinter play for the screen. Only opened up a couple of times but both turn out to be short but crucial scenes that say all the more for being set outside. The main 'set', however, is the amazingly crushed and crowded room with all its junk, or what could be considered items that might be useful in the future. A cast of three play two crazed brothers and a rather simple but aggressive 'gentleman of the road'. Pleasence plays the tramp and it is a stunning performance, at once cringing and self effacing, yet also wildly defensive and nasty. I had always wondered where the actor had managed to draw his character in Cul de Sac from, this Pinter portrayal would seem to be the answer. Robert Shaw plays the quieter of the two brothers and Alan Bates the more clearly schizoid with wild swings between what might be caring or killing. The succinct and portentous dialogue has echoes of Beckett yet even the darkest and pessimistic of the Irishman's writings resonate with a sense of kindliness towards the desperate characters, not here. However enjoyable it is to watch these three struggle for supremacy in such a forsaken situation, it is without doubt a very jaundiced view of the human psyche on display.
The Guest
1963
Action / Drama
The Guest
1963
Action / Drama
Plot summary
Aston (Robert Shaw),a quiet, reserved man, lives alone in a top-floor cluttered room of a small abandoned house in a poor London district. He befriends and takes in Mac Davies (Donald Pleasence),an old derelict who has been fired from a menial job in a café. In time, Aston offers him a job as caretaker of the house. Aston's brother, Mick (Sir Alan Bates),a taunting sadist, harasses the derelict when his brother is away, countermanding his orders. Eventually, Aston, irritated by the cantankerous old man, puts him out.
Uploaded by: FREEMAN
Director
Tech specs
720p.BLU 1080p.BLUMovie Reviews
A cast of three play two crazed brothers and a rather simple but aggressive 'gentleman of the road'.
An absurd puzzle
This film was made from Harold Pinter's first successful stage play of the same name. The play has only three characters and no clear-cut plot. (It is part of "Theater of the Absurd," movement of the time.) Yet, it was so powerful on stage that Clive Donner, Michael Birkett, and Donald Pleasence wondered about making into a film. Once Harold Pinter approved of the project, the financing—even for such a small film--was difficult since it was assumed that mass audience appeal would be limited. In the end, its financing and co-production was dependent on other actors and playwrights of the time, such as Elizabeth Taylor, Richard Burton, and Noel Coward.
As the movie opens, we see two men walking down the street on a bitter cold day. One man, Bernard Jenkins (Donald Pleasence) seems to be a vagrant. He is doing all the talking as the taller more reserved man, Aston (Robert Shaw),is taking him to his house after protecting him a downtown brawl. After the two climb the long spiral stairs to the upper story of a large rundown house, Aston invites Jenkins to come into his room and warm up. He asks what he can do for him. When Jenkins says he needs some new shoes, Aston tries to give him a pair of his shoes. But, they are too small for Jenkins.
All of Jenkins' comments are met with short polite answers or affirmations from Aston. Aston's personality seems flat (almost mechanical) as he continually refers to restoring the shed in the backyard. That seems to be his goal in life since as he says, "I'm good with my hands, you see." When Aston says he has to go out, Jenkins gets up to leave, But, Aston says that he can stay in spite of him not being with him in the house. So, Aston leaves and Jenkins stays.
Next, the third character enters the play-on-film: Mick (Alan Bates).When he comes into the room, Jenkins is taken back since Mike says that he is the proprietor of the building. Jenkins, who is there because of Aston, doesn't know how to respond. Mick is more acerbic than his brother, Aston. He never asks Jenkins to leave, but he is still cruel to him as he brags about his plans to restore the place. He implies that his brother is a slow worker and hasn't got much done. Jenkins then identifies with Mick in order to stay there.
When Mick asks Jenkins to be the caretaker of the place and help fix it up—which Jenkins had already agreed to do with Aston--Jenkins agrees. When Aston returns, there is a very short scene with all three characters in the one room. Not much is said or implied about the relationship among these three characters.
When Mick leaves, Aston tell Jenkins his personal story in simple terms. As a minor and without his consent, he was subjected to electric shock treatments in a mental hospital. The reason, he says, was based on 'lies' that were told at a local café. After hearing the story, Jenkins senses that his way into the staying in the rundown room lies with Mick- -and not Aston. But, later when Jenkins starts to put down Aston to Mick, Mick refuses to say that there is anything wrong with his brother. In fact, he attacks Jenkins for implying such a thing.
The puzzle for Jenkins is to figure out which 'horse to back' between these two brothers: how best can he assure his 'caretaker' role in this rundown house. Jenkins is always the outsider trying to get in. But, he is unable to pry his way between these two brothers that need each other in some unspoken way. Each of the three characters has pipe dreams. And their pipe dreams are—in some way--dependent on one of the other two. But, since their dreams remain unspoken, the riddle is who will win and who will lose
and why.
Good, but better on a stage.
Thankfully, this screen adaptation of the Pinter play has had a minimal amount of "adaptation" but for me, anyway, it still best belongs on the stage. Alan Bates, Donald Pleasence and particularly Robert Shaw are on great form in this rather unlikely story of the quiet, considered "Aston" (Shaw) who takes in the down-on-his-luck "Mac" (Pleasence) to live in the attic of his run down house. When his brother "Mick" (Bates) visits, he immediately senses there is fun to be had at the old man's expense and begins to engage in a rather cruel, but subtle, harassment of the older man. This version is fine, but as a cinematic experience it might as well just have had cameras (and a competent director) taking it straight from the theatre. It offers little extra by way of augmentation, and somehow lacks the intensity - or intimacy - of an original stage production. Clive Donner replicates, rather than develops, the story and whilst I'd probably moan if he did otherwise, it just left me feeling that it was done as a film for the sake of it - and I will always prefer the stage vision.