Home > Drama >

Betrayal

AD:This title is currently not available on Prime Video
Free Trial
View All Sources

Betrayal (1983)

February. 19,1983
|
6.9
| Drama
AD:This title is currently not available on Prime Video
Free Trial
View All Sources

Pinter's semi-autobiographical play examining the surprise attraction, shy first steps, gradual flowering, and treasonous deception of a woman's extramarital affair with her husband's best friend; the entire story is told from the husband's point of view, with the scenes in precise reverse chronological order. Written by Dan Hartung

...

Watch Trailer

Free Trial Channels

AD
Show More

Cast

Similar titles

Reviews

Afouotos
1983/02/19

Although it has its amusing moments, in eneral the plot does not convince.

More
SparkMore
1983/02/20

n my opinion it was a great movie with some interesting elements, even though having some plot holes and the ending probably was just too messy and crammed together, but still fun to watch and not your casual movie that is similar to all other ones.

More
Salubfoto
1983/02/21

It's an amazing and heartbreaking story.

More
Kaydan Christian
1983/02/22

A terrific literary drama and character piece that shows how the process of creating art can be seen differently by those doing it and those looking at it from the outside.

More
nomorefog
1983/02/23

In 'Betrayal' the narrative is presented backwards, a gimmick employed later by Christopher Nolan in his breakthrough film Memento (2001). Here, we have the breakup of a relationship presented at the beginning and we come to learn later (unfortunately much later) what it was that got the couple together in the first place. (Please don't ask me what that was, because I've already forgotten.) To me, this bizarre form of narration is as pointless as it is exasperating. As 'Betrayal' unfolded, I felt bereft of any kind of causational narrative to cling to. The question being: why should the audience be making notes when it's only a movie and not a university lecture in semantics. The plot becomes so incomprehensible, that the point of the film is totally lost and the entire exercise becomes a pointless waste of time. I sit there in my living room and wonder: will an Edward Van Sloan character stroll on-stage as the proscenium arch is revealed and ask me questions about what I've just seen? And, worse still, expect me to have the answers? I think this is a relevant objection on behalf of the audience who are within their rights to question the methodology which 'Betrayal' employs to tell its so-called 'story': to me there is no story. Instead the film is a collection of fragments cobbled together. It just pretends to be a story, and this does not bode well as the correct method on which to present an entire movie.Written by Harold Pinter, 'Betrayal' stars Patricia Hodges as the woman whom Jeremy Irons is having a secret affair with over a number of years. Naturally they are best friends with the spouse of the other, both who seem to be (at least initially), blissfully unaware of the situation. Hodges and Irons continue their affair secretly in a very sad and dingy-looking apartment. The conversation between them is terribly tedious as we get to hear about the children and the jobs and the cloth-eared spouses who are foolish enough to keep on living with this pair's adulterous behaviour instead of throwing them both out on the street where they belong. Both Hodges and Irons come across as too grasping and selfish for the audience to have any connection with and the entire enterprise has at its core a very dead heart. The only thing in this film that makes any sense is that over a period of time their relationship is finally, if not found out, then at least suspected. I disliked the pair of them so much, I was almost glad. Ben Kingsley has a featured role as Hodge's creepy husband who correctly suspects the worst about what is going on, but it is left to the audience's imagination as to what he is may, or may not, do about it.Personally I sat there in my living room, wondering why 'Betrayal' got made in the first place as it is scarcely entertaining and not nearly as deep as it would like us to think it is. Instead it's nasty, incoherent and an extreme example of movie making at its worst. When a group of ambitious artistes like David Jones and Harold Pinter attempt to make false claims about the medium being a form of high art and attempting to hijack it from the mass audience, this to me is a warning sign of redundant intentions and questionable outcomes. As you may be aware by this review, I was extremely disappointed by 'Betrayal' and the effort fell on deaf ears since I was disengaged, disturbed by its portrayal of men as hypocritical misogynists, (which they probably are, but I don't want to watch it) and turned off by its loopy narrative that honestly, drove me completely up the wall. Not recommended.

More
suzy q123
1983/02/24

One of Pinters best plays, this one is filmed with just a superb cast. Jeremy Irons looks like he's about to steal the film, then Ben Kingsley sneaks up on you with an odd stiff but wounded performance that takes your breath away. I loved the woman too. A masterfully told story of love and desire, and pain within relationships. Not easy to watch, not very 'flash', but worth it indeed.

More
philiponel
1983/02/25

This brilliant movie starts with a meeting between Jerry and Emma two years after their relationship has ended; then proceeds backward, thereby ending eight years earlier, with the moment when Jerry first declares his attraction to Emma at a party. The idea that the viewer can know this information at the beginning of the movie and then is never bored is an amazing feat for this movie. All three of the actors are amazing in their roles.

More
howardross
1983/02/26

This is a really fine movie with excellent characterizations. I've never seen Patricia Hodge in anything else but in this movie she's the equal of Irons and Kingsley. It's interesting how the movie starts with the very emotional end works it's way back to the innocuous beginnings.

More