Becket

What a great film I can see why both Peter O'Toole & Richard Burton were nominated for an Oscar performance. A film adaptation of the play Becket or the Honour of God by Jean Anouilh that starts light hearted but becomes much more indeed. I had never heard the story before, and so it was all new and refreshing to me. A heart breaking story of love, but not in the traditional way that we think of it. Two men, King Henry II & Thomas Becket two friends......I felt for each character and that is what makes the acting in this classic so great. I tip my hat to both O'Toole & Burton! One that will definitely be added to my blu-ray collection! 7/3/14 Update: I watched the Blu-ray version of this restored film I just bought, truly beautiful, you really get to to see the details of the sets, wardrobe, and even actual sweat from the actors! The sound quality of the soundtrack is top notch. What an amazing story that was brought to life by two strong leading men Peter O'Toole & Richard Burton. I was really looking forward to getting this when I saw that Peter O'Toole had done an audio commentary. After watching this film for the first time last month I was certain that I had picked up on the little nuances of the story. Peter O'Toole's commentary let me know that I had indeed pick up on a lot of the cues read by the actors or looks given. I also learned so much more into how Mr. O'Toole works and how he goes about putting that into action. It was great to hear his perspective on scenes, and learn things that I had not picked up on, or even just behind the scene anecdotes. My only complaint is also about the audio commentary that was moderated by Mark Kermode....for the most part his leading questions were great, but that said there were times when he would cut Mr. O'Toole off, or start talking when Mr. O'Toole was clearly trying to enjoy a particular scene. Now it could have just been me, but I just wanted him to shut up at certain points. Here I am trying to listen to one of the greatest actors of his time, talking about an amazing piece of film he worked on, and he dares to interrupt him, shame! If you are going to buy this film I would most certainly go for the Blu-ray....not only for the great film restoration but the price alone is worth Peter O'Toole's commentary!

Historically inaccurate (Thomas Becket was also Norman, not Saxon), but even with that flaw the incredible acting of Peter O’Toole and Richard Burton, both at arguably the very peak of their skill, is not to be missed. This is a master class of how the truly great actors, as opposed to the vast majority of movie stars who are being referred to as “actors” these days, disappear into their roles until you see only the characters they’re playing and no longer them. I doubt if I can count on one hand any of the multi-millionaire “actors” of today who are close to them, let alone their equal. Instead these days we’re stuck with saying “Oh look. There’s Cruise pretending to be a fighter pilot.” Or “There’s DiCaprio pretending to be a plantation owner.” And most every other “star” pretending to be whatever role their pretending to be actors for. But never quite believably.

The tale of Thomas Becket has had many incarnations over time. T.S. Eliot's 'Murder in the Cathedral' is but the most recent acclaimed literary treatment; each revisitation seems to draw new elements forth from the story. Edward Anhalt won the Oscar for best screenplay (adapted from other material) for this film. This film shows Henry and Thomas Becket roughly equal in age (at variance from history, for in this time the age difference of 15 years is practically a generational difference). Becket is shown as being a guide to Henry, but less from a master/pupil standpoint as it is a clever diplomatic with a utilitarian and almost Machiavellian sense about him. Henry is presented as coarse and unrefined, uneducated and in need of assistance, but historically this is unlikely. Becket is played admirably by Richard Burton; Henry II is portrayed by Peter O'Toole. Both were nominated for the best actor Oscar, but neither won. In addition to these nominations and the best screenplay award, the film was nominated for nine other Oscars, running the list from costumes, music, directing, best picture, and a best supporting actor nod for John Gielgud, whose cameo as the King of France is rather interestingly presented. Indeed, the movie has a remarkable realistic feel to it, particularly for a film from the 1960s, when cinema was as likely to portray stylised and idealistic images of the past. The sets are in bare stone with a minimum of ornamentation, as would have been the case in Plantagenet times; likewise, the ceremony around the royal person is much less grand, and the church rather grand, which is both accurate and serves to highlight the underlying conflict of the story in the film. Becket is portrayed as a man of ambiguous loyalties -- a man of principle who has yet to find principles worthy of loyalty. Finally, in the role of archbishop, he finds a calling from the honour of God (and in so doing is not unlikely many priests who see their path to ordination as the means of spiritual grace; indeed, many are disappointed that the faith does not come with the office). Whether Thomas Becket actually experienced a spiritual conversion that made him a strong champion of the church, or in fact saw the power of the church as a means to an end of dominating the country, we will perhaps never know. In the film, Becket is often disparaged as being a Saxon; this is perhaps overstated, given his Norman lineage, which is never hinted at in the film. While he does not come from Norman nobility, he is far from being a simple Saxon. Burton's portrayal of Becket shows the change from worldly chancellor to spiritual archbishop in unsubtle terms. Even so, there is an ambiguity that plays out marvelously in both his performance, and the reactions of the other characters who constantly question his sincerity. O'Toole's performance is not as polished as Burton's; when he plays an older, wiser Henry II in 'The Lion in Winter' four years later, the acting is much more dramatic and effective. It perhaps goes without saying that Pamela Brown does not make the same impression on the screen as Eleanor of Aquitaine as Katherine Hepburn does in the later film, but Eleanor is an incidental character in Becket in any case. Music in this film is not a prominent feature -- various trumpet and brass flourishes announce events or major scene changes in parts; a lot of chant (long before Gregorian chant achieved popular status) accompanies church scenes -- indeed, I credit this film for giving me my first real taste of Gregorian chant. The scene with Sian Phillips as Becket's love Gwendolyen is accompanied by period string instruments -- again, Phillips is a remarkable actress who is under-utilised in this performance. Done in a flash-back manner, there is a resolution in the film -- Becket is dead, made a saint, honour is satisfied as the King does penance, and the people are happy. We know what is going to happen, but then, anyone with knowledge of history would likely know the story already. In fact, Henry's reign was rarely without challenge, but he was always powerful, and much more effective after Becket's death than before. Reigning for nearly twenty years after Becket's death, he left a very powerful Western European coalition of lands that soon fell apart, and embroiled England and France in war for centuries later. The tensions between church and state carry forward to this day; while the specifics of the challenges faces Becket and Henry II are very different from issues today, the principle of the relationship between church and state is far from definitively resolved. Also, the side-line issue of class warfare and racial prejudice (teased out with subtle nuance between the Normans and Saxons, who, ironically, look exactly the same on the screen) are addressed in an interesting, pre-civil rights sort of manner. This issue is never resolved in the film, as indeed it wasn't in the 1960s, either. This is an intriguing film, with great acting and great production values, and an interesting story that, even if not completely historically accurate, does not alter the history so much that it becomes a parody of the subject.

Say what you want about Martin Scorsese, auteur of the dark anti-hero aesthetic: The man's clearly in love with Hollywood's Golden Age. He's put himself on the line for almost two decades helming the Film Foundation, bringing public attention to the need for film preservation. Without the Foundation's efforts, such masterworks as Lawrence of Arabia, How Green Was My Valley, On the Waterfront, and Rear Window might have been lost to movie audiences forever. Now, thanks to the Foundation and to Academy Film Archive director Michael Pogorzelski's painstaking restoration, the 1964 romantic classic Becket has been re-released in all its pomp, pageantry, and Technicolor glory. Fresh off his brilliant turn in Lawrence of Arabia, Peter O'Toole gives a bombastic, explosive performance as the hated Angevin king of England, Henry II. In one of his finest screen roles, legendary Welsh actor Richard Burton plays his enforcer, Thomas à Becket, with cool-headed erudition. Whether looting among the Saxons, taking liberties with wenches, or even having his wife taken from him by Henry, Becket's a loyal pal and reliable stooge. Then, one day, trying to put one over on the pesky clergy, Henry devises a brilliant scheme to install his drinking buddy as Archbishop of Canterbury. But what begins as a fun romp in the "buddy picture" tradition veers into the sublime when Becket begins to understand the enormous gravity and honor required by his office. Transformed from yes-man into his own man, he refuses to render the things holy before God to O'Toole's spoiled brat of a Caesar, who is driven to betray Becket by an unrequited love that dare not speaketh its name. A fascinating study of integrity in the face of corruption, Becket is an unforgettable Medieval epic from the same decade that gave us A Man for All Seasons and The Lion in Winter (also starring O'Toole). Experience the grandeur of a bygone era when "over the top" meant "larger than life."

Cheerfully ahistorical costume drama, mightily acted at by two of the great names of English movie making. As far as historical accuracy, costumes and sets, it’s sort of a cross between “A Man for All Seasons” and “Xena Warrior Princess”. Some of what goes on in the script has a nodding acquaintance with “real” happenings, and some is enjoyable melodrama. Peter O’Toole is, by modern drama standards, pretty bad here. No mistake, he looks great, although I don’t know why they bothered to put him in black hair and beard. He’s supposed to be a Norman, right? O’Toole leaves little scenery un-chewed, no grimace un-grimaced or leer un-leered. His Henry has a manic edge to him that’d be off-putting even if he weren’t going for dissolute corrupt drunken rapey royal creep. Over-selling it. Also, in a couple of ill-advised shirtless scenes, he’s scary pale and skinny. For a King who revels in food and drink and hunting, he’s way more ascetic looking than Burton, who’s playing an abstemious cleric who appears to be severely hungover most of the time. O’Toole apparently did not work out. With his royal robes off, he looks like a skinny fourteen year-old, who doesn’t get much sun. Richard Burton, with the meatier role, plays, well, Richard Burton. Young or old, whether it’s “Virginia Woolf” or “Night of the Iguana” or this thing, he’s always Richard Burton, hangdog expression, world weary and sad and wiser than is good for him. His Becket is too understated to mesh well with O’Toole’s bouncing off the castle walls. For one thing, despite being contemporaries, Burton looks a generation older. John Gielgud. It’s a bit part, but when is it not good to see John Gielgud? Especially in full ecclesiastical garb? The movie itself is an entertaining mish-mosh of improbably clean castle walls, stylized interiors, some hilarious process shots of O’Toole and Burton pretending to ride horses, and unconvincing day-for-night filters. Probably shouldn’t judge this movie by today’s techniques, but for all the piety and pretense, it’s really just a step up from a routine Robin Hood outing. But fun! Watching two great hams at work, striding about in churches and palaces with doublets and hose, crowns and ermine robes, bishop’s mitres and croziers and swords and daggers and halberds and everybody swirling capes and robes everywhere. “Becket” may be history-lite but it’s got some nicely shouted speeches and mobs of extras and parades through the streets. O’Toole slavers over hot French babes, Burton broods about the injustices done his Saxon brothers and sisters, politics are politicked. Becket and Henry ramble on about their love for each other until you want to tell them to just get a room, OK? Seriously, if O’Toole was any more over-the-top shouting and mewling Henry’s obsessive love for Becket, we’d be watching “Brokeback Mountain”. For their final meeting on the French coast, you kind of expect O’Toole to tell Burton, “I wish I knew how to quit you!” Burton, meanwhile, mopes. He mopes as Henry’s best bro, then he mopes as Archbishop. Full mope mode. Becket’s turnabout from Machiavellian schemer and Royal Fixer to pious churchman is done in about five minutes of unconvincing screen time. Really, a scene or two of having doubts and seeing the light would have slowed things up, but made more sense? Henry also goes from “Love the B man!” to “That guy is getting on my last nerve!” on 4X FFWD. OK, you got to compress a lot of history to fit it into two hours, but a little character development wouldn’t hurt. Characters talk endlessly in a manner that no living human being has ever talked; speeches, not dialog. But not bad speeches in a stagey sort of way. Except maybe the ridiculous ones King Henry orates at his wife and mother. Those are terrible, and the ones to his kids not much better. Of course, Henry’s real kids were a revolting lot, a whole mess of revolts, so maybe he’s right to critique these ungrateful brats. Eleanor, in her later years, was kind of a trial, too. That said, the historical Becket wasn’t Saxon. Norman through and through. And Henry II wasn’t quite Norman. And it’s not like the Saxons were the put-upon original inhabitants of Britain; they were a few generations removed from their own invasion and suppression of the Britons who’d previously owned the place. And by the time of Henry and Becket, the usual intermarriage and gene-pool spreading of the latest invaders and the last invaders had pretty well blurred bloodlines anyway. Henry’s claim on England was a lot shakier than his roots in France. He didn’t even speak English, I mean. But Henry Plantagenet was quite the brilliant administrator and his legal reforms set the stage for English common law that we’re still working with today. While he might have hunted to excess and caroused more than prayed, he also put the Kingdom on a sound monetary footing, which was no small chore after his dad’s management. And the historical Henry simply didn’t have time to moon all that much over his wayward priest, what with constant touring of the provinces, rebellious flare ups in France (always with the flare ups in France. Seriously, was France really worth all the trouble?), conquering Ireland, the bleeding Scots…. Henry had a lot to put up with, aside from his struggles with the Church. He left England with more territory and better laws than he found it; his kids pretty much pissed it all away, of course. And let’s just say that the long-running tension between church and state and reformation and orthodoxy is kind of oversimplified by a factor of 10 or so. A tension which would last until the arrival of another Henry, the Tudor usurper. About whom a lot of other movies have been made. But enough nitpicking about history. If you want to watch British screen legends working off each other in front of elaborate scenery, you can’t go wrong with Burton and O’Toole. There’s a lot to enjoy here, and the Hollywood (or Shepperton) version of sainthood besides. Burton gets a great death scene; O’Toole gets to emote like a spurned lover and then be sorrier than anybody’s ever been sorry before. And there are some lovely bits of film with Gregorian chants and files of black-clad monks to look at. The score is the sort nobody does anymore, the Technicolor is exploited to the full, the costumes are on the cusp between lush and laughable. So, lots to enjoy. For a period costume epic, you could do worse.

"Becket" explores the question put to Christ two millenia ago of whether man owes his primary loyalty to his monarch or to God. The search for the resolution of that question, and how it was answered, makes "Becket" one of the best historical dramas ever made. Peter O'Toole and Richard Burton are in top form as the young Henry II of England and his partner-in-mayhem Thomas Becket, whose primary interests are wine and women and not necessarily in that order. England in the 12th century was devoutly Roman Catholic, and the Catholic hierarchy enjoyed a level of power and prestige equal to, if not higher than, the king himself. But when the old archbishop dies and Henry needs to appoint a successor in his place, Henry outfoxes everyone by doing an end run around the bishops and naming Becket as the new archbishop. The bishops are upset; they believe Henry intends for Becket to be a puppet figure to be used to further the king's own ends. But to everyone's surprise, Becket takes his job more seriously than Henry ever intended. No one could be more stunned and shocked at this development than Henry himself. The confrontation between Henry and the clergy is set immediately following the old archbishop's death, when Henry informs the assembled bishops that there will only be one head honcho in England, and that is the king. The bishops are not used to having their power abrogated by anyone outside the church; they answer only to the pope and to God. The king and clergy are on collision course, and Henry, to his chagrin, finds that Becket is solidly on the side of the Church his king has appointed him to represent. There will be no compromise here. The stage is thus set for a fateful confrontation. One has to wonder: when Henry blurted out his petulant rhetorical question "Will no one rid me of this turbulent priest?", did he really not expect to be taken at his word? He's made it clear over and over again that he is the king, and the king is the law. So it's hard not to feel a sense of disgust at Henry's hypocrisy as he undergoes a ritual flogging in the cathedral crypt to expiate his guilt at having instigated Becket's murder, and immediately afterwards announces on the church steps that Becket will be venerated as a saint. Power-hungry to the last, Henry has abrogated to himself the privilege of an announcement that should have come from the new archbishop, or from the pope who alone has the power of canonization. The film has everything going for it: a great plot, two excellent performances by Burton and O'Toole, terrific direction and cinematography, and fine historical accuracy. The Gregorian chant running through the scenes in the cathedral transport the viewer 700 years back in time. For two unforgettable hours, we're part of 12th century England. And finally, let me add my request to those of the other reviewers of this excellent movie: Will someone please hurry up and release this film on DVD? I'll be first in line to buy it. This review is being UPDATED on 5/23/07 to add the following: Since I first reviewed this movie three years ago, my opinion of the acting, plot, characterization and script writing has not changed. This is a magnificent film by any criteria. I wish I say the same for the DVD. The picture quality is terrific. The sound quality, however, is not nearly as good, and for anyone who is hearing-impaired, a very serious problem is that this DVD is NOT closed captioned. The audio track is in English, French and Spanish. There are English subtitles for those who require them, but accessing them is tricky on some DVD players. It looks like whoever put this film on DVD was trying to cut corners. This movie deserves better. Judy Lind

I can only speak of the LaserDisc edition, which in itself was good enough to have the Widescreen version of such a masterpiece. Richard Burton (Becket) and Peter O'Toole (Henry II, Plantagenet, a role he would reprise four years later in "The Lion in Winter", another masterpiece), deliver a vivid and excruciating portrayal of two close friends to whom life reserves a cruel surprise. Based on true events and characters of the 13th Century, but translated to the screen from the same play, which in turn, was adapted from "Murder in the Cathedral", this historic portrayal of Feudal England is very imaginative and well done. The two actors deliver powerful performances and the story, with all its subplots, is solid storytelling of the best kind. The only thing that kills me, is why, oh why, Paramount, with its wonderful Star Trek franchise and re-release techniques, never came to the idea to re-release this one on DVD as well!!! Perhaps the eternal fight over rights and who gets what and when, will go on forever. Greed seems to rule the world even when it comes to real masterpieces of art and history. Producers go insane and studios uptight, not to use another euphemism for it. Whatever happened to reasonable, creative and talented producers of yesteryear? And what about chasing bankers, lawyers and the kind out of Hollywood and instead bring back guys a la Talberg, Mayer, Selznick and Warner, who had a sense for the business, but also had a creative talent and the interest of the public at heart? Marlon Brando once said, that no one should be rewarded just for doing his job. How right. How wise. There are too many awards and rewards out there and too little true talent that deserves them. But that's the world of business, not that of creative minds. So, in conclusion, buy the videotape (it's well worth it, although I would wait for the DVD release anyway, otherwise you may spend twice the money) or, if you still own a LD player, try to get hold of the LaserDisc. The image resolution is sharper, although the sound is still a miserable and conventional Mono. I hope that in some way, whenever, whomever will be so generous as to release a DVD version of it, may also want to clean it up somewhat and perhaps remaster the sound and the picture quality. I know perfectly well, that some movies were simply produced in Mono. Sometimes to spare money and sometimes, plainly because the director wanted so. But hey, we're living in the 21st Century now, not in the 1960's, so why wouldn't even purists see how far better a stereo sound is? I mix my own sounds and I can produce a perfect balanced and round stereo sound out of any monaural record I possess. It's no big deal, but some people think it is costly. Wrong! The only cost is in time, not money. Even a kid could do it... Becket, as said, is monaural and so are still many recent other DVD releases, from John Wayne Movies to early James Bond flicks and many others still. I wonder if the studios have become purists, or simply plain lazy. With all the money people pay yearly, to go to the movies, buy DVDs, CD Soundtracks and various memorabilia, it is amazing to me that the studios haven't got the finances to improve their products and instead keep on producing dozens of other, new and rather stupid (see deja vu) movies each year. Becket may not be a masterpiece like Ben-Hur or Lawrence of Arabia, but it is certainly not as utterly stupid as Dumb and Dumber and absolutely not as boring and wasteful as Pearl Harbor. But again, hey, who am I to criticize? I am just a voice in the desert. A nobody, who buys DVDs instead of going to the movies. Yet, I am also a stage director and an actor and know when the acting is good and performances are at their peak. So take it from me. If you have the money to spare, buy the tape, waiting for the DVD to pop up. If not and you can wait so long, buy the DVD the day it appears on the horizon, but if it doesn't, you would have missed some piece of acting here. You will never regret it...

Peter O'Toole and Richard Burton were often in their cups while filming this story of friendship. The two seem type cast as the two fast friends, with Peter O'Toole as the ebullient, imperious, youthful King Henry II, who misreads his much older, more mature, more whimsical companion completely, when he makes Burton's Becket the Archbishop of Canterbury. The cast is a who's who of great British stage actors of the period, including Donald Wolfit, John Gielgud, Martita Hunt, and Pamela Brown. Produced by the legendary Hal Wallis and directed by England's foremost stage director of the period, Peter Glenville, the movie won an Oscar for Best adapted screenplay from the Jean Anouilh Broadway hit of the same name. This is, for stage lovers, top drawer work from among two of the finest directors, and playwrights of that generation. But the bravura performances of the leading men dominates the film, and, for that alone, it's worth watching. Amazingly, this picture seems to have escaped the signs of the time it which it was made. The costumes and scenery are quite arresting, and the ritual of excommunication is in sound and sight just plain riveting. If you are looking for a film with wonderful dialogue and actors who can give its interpretation its due, if you are in the mood for watching friendship treated seriously as one of the four loves, and if you don't require modern digital tricks an intrusive music and sound effects, you might give it a try. The possible rewards are great, and the risk minimal.