Brief Encounter

Trailer—Brief Encounter

source: Brief Encounter

With two very charismatic stars I was hoping to see some major sparks fly. Unfortunately, the restrained British manner which the two main characters possess doesn't build up much from their initial polite consciousness from their first meeting. Loren and Burton really could have made the sparks fly with their magnetic appeal. The chemistry was there, the eye contact was there and the opportunity was there to really see some tension. But why was it so flat? Perhaps the fault lies in the direction. The script certainly offered some buildup, but the action didn't seem to follow or match. Two strangers meet at a railway station. He's a physician and she's a Social worker for a women's assistance bureau. Both admit to being married, but inevitably fall for each other. Burton's character is more pursuant while Loren is more coy. I did like the honest dialogue where both characters weigh and commiserate over the possible repercussions of infidelity and divorce. The outcome being more disastrous for her since she's raising two children. I do appreciate that a story can acknowledge the risks of the situation and all those involved, but that would disappoint those who are looking for a steamy affair to consummate. The affair lasts but a few weeks as the two agree to meet every Wednesday afternoon. They engage in simple outings such as walks in the park or dining in cafes. But when the chance comes for them to get together for that rendezvous finale they are interrupted unexpectedly which destroys their evening and ultimately ends the fling. I like both of these stars and both possess finesse and class. But their approach for their characters here left me high and dry.

...I don't think I could have hung around for a long affair! I was glad to see this film pop up on Amazon Prime. When I was a kid there were two actresses I always thought were the most beautiful women -- Sophia Loren and Lana Turner. So I was happy to see a flick of Loren's that I had seen before. Add in Richard Burton -- not a favorite of mine, but I hadn't watched him in decades, so I thought perhaps I could re-evaluate. Over the years I thought Carlo Ponti did a fine job directing Loren's career...but he sure goofed this time. She was still beautiful (and it's amazing that 47 years after making this film she is still making films!), and I still loved her laugh (which I remember so well from "It Started In Naples" with Clark Gable)...but otherwise, this was a horrible film for her to be in. Burton just seemed to wander through the story. "Nothing to see here", as a cop might say. I expect affairs to have a bit of passion...and I expect Loren and Burton to have a bit of passion. But this film just falls flat. Seems to be just two people in a mid-life crisis...and boring crises at that. And then there's supporting actor (and here, Loren's husband) Jack Hedley...or as I think I'll call him...The Mumbler. How can actor speak so unintelligibly? No wonder Loren's character was bored with their marriage. The older version of this film is a classic. This version is a mistake.

Other reviewers have noted the differences in plot, setting and circumstance between the original 1945 film and this 1974 TV remake of "Brief Encounter." I agree that the circumstances are so different that it's impossible to change the situation of the encounter and make it work. For instance, this rendition struck me rather clearly as the story of an unhappy and unsatisfied middle-aged man putting the make on a beautiful woman he meets. Richard Burton's character, Alec Harvey, is having what today is called a man's midlife crisis. But there's no such sign of unhappiness or uneasiness in Sophia Loren's Anna Jesson. It's almost laughable that Alec declares that they love each other after just a couple of meetings when she shows no sign of anything more than interest in him. So, this isn't anything like the original play and movie set in wartime England. But perhaps the producer, Carlo Ponti, and/or the director and writers intended such a different situation in a more modern setting. Suppose they wanted the film to be about an encounter in which one person is clearly "on the make," while this other is not, but instead is confronted with the temptations the encounter presents. Then I can see this movie develop as it did. For it clearly shows Anna's struggles after a time. She loves her husband and family, and wouldn't hurt them or leave them for anything in the world. On the other hand, the allure of a forbidden romance with an attractive and persuasive man like Alec leads to her confusion. The film shows this struggle with temptation quite well, I think. But, whether that was an intended redirection of the story, I don't know. Indeed, some of Anna's lines lead one to believe that that may have been the intent of this film's makers all along. If that is the case, I think they might better have changed the name to divert as much direct comparison that was sure to find many flaws. So, here are some telltale lines from Anna that point in this direction. "Loving each other isn't enough. Other things matter … decency, self- respect." "It all seemed so innocent to start with. Meeting by the cathedral. Having lunch. It was so innocent. It couldn't be dirty or furtive. It was like a dream of love. Well, we know the answer now. It is degrading." Because this film doesn't have the circumstances of the original, it moves very slowly, as others have noted. Some said they found it boring. It didn't quite seem that way to me, because I was interested in seeing how Anna dealt with the conflicting thoughts and temptations. From that standpoint, I like the way the film ended. But, as others have noted, there isn't much more to this remake. And it can't hold a candle to the quality, plot, direction and story of the original film that starred Trevor Howard and Celia Johnson. Still, this film is worth a watch for movie buffs to see two big box office draws of the past in a calmer and more mature setting in later life – and beyond the hay days of their stardom.

And there was I thinking that clipped and proper english accents represented icy, 'stuff and nonsense' emotions. Lean's BE proved me wrong In this horribly lit excursion, we are told that this is a very attractive man who has everything in 'Good ole first world Blighty' but chooses on a whim to make real its fantasies built on the briefest of moments. I've always had a problem with Loren's English and here it annoys no end. I keep expecting that fish mouth to open and close making loud ungainly Neapolitan sheep noises while the rock hard, lacquered coiffed, brown mask slips to reveal the ugly emperor underneath. And I suspect this is how the studios sold us many Euro actors as 'attractive''. People were unused to foreigners living next door and put down any red flags of repulsion to ''well, they're foreign right?'' An excuse on which Bardot's career was built. Sassoon did not push big hair to hide humungus skulls for nothing. But this TV knock off was not made to compete with Lean's gentle direction. It's purpose was far sinister. The remake attracts curiousty for 70's morals, nostalgia for picture postcard Surrey and permission to deride the folk who lived there. The railway station is run by the budding imposed demographic - miserable women and immigrants , the carefully chosen male replacement. The subtext of errant men, boring men, abusive men and slavishly devoted providers is taken for granted as the parade of bug eyed women read their scripts glumly. BTW - did Rosemary leach say she was 28? Maybe I heard wrong. Anyway - Burton tries to resurrect the passion he owned in Anne of The Thousand Days but looks like a hungry rat against this hunk of Italian prosciutto. Seventies eyebrows with a fake tan don't do anyone any favours. But the lie must be upheld. Fashion was designed by men for men. Now it's four caterpillars on the brow bone, 34 pairs of eyelashes and swollen toilet plunger lips. Women were being led by the Loren into questioning their contentment all the way through to ungodly ungrateful selfish thoughts. One would have thought that this seemingly happy marriage needed spicing up not an adulterous distraction for which we were told Burton and Loren are blameless. Surrounded by money, house, kids , job, the awareness that others were in dire straights did not bring gratitude or emotional loyalty. How disappointing. This disgraceful copy was to push feminism when it was not needed and destroy the divine feminine. It is funny that real women would never think like this publicly until tall, wide shouldered, silicone pumped, big headed foreign men made it seem exotic. No one had a problem with Danny La Rue, Les Dawson or Edna Everage, but tricksters never know when to stop. Seems the stage and government has always been for free may sons.

I am not a romantic. Sometimes I like to watch a romance but when I found this in a bargain bin, I grabbed it, being a long-time fan of Ms Loren and her work. I can take or leave Mr Burton, his ego always overshadowed any work he did in my opinion, although Anne of the Thousand days was interesting. I thought he came over as a grubbby little mid-life crisis driven man, while she was in a Big Rut despite loving her husband and family to distraction, she was bored. Meeting a beautiful woman and having the chance to strike up a conversation would have boosted his ego no end, and So Dr Harvey hopes to meet her again... and again and before he knows it, he has a massive crush on her. She is flattered, as her husband is preoccupied with life and the kids, whereas most of her maternal duties seem taken over by the nanny or au pair, and she dabbles in voluntary work. As he pushes hard to make this more than it probably is, she is swept along until it's impossible to get out. Inevitably, it cannot last, it is not real and bruised as they are, they must part. I thought she acted him off the screen, however I had wondered if they had indeed had an affaire while making the move - there's no sign of chemistry here. I know he had his health problems but he had become a sad, seedy middle-aged man when he made this - Liz had no need to worry.

I don't understand the low ratings for this film. It is quite a treat with brilliant performances by both Richard Burton and Sophia loren. I've read most negative reviews about the lack of chemistry between the two, I am not sure I noticed any lack of chemistry here. Yes the whole encounter and the subsequent relationship is awkward because it simply is. The two characters understand the awkwardness of their fling and choose to ignore it, yet it still feels uncomfortable to them. I thought this is reflected on their emotions and is why viewers interpreted as lack of chemistry, if anything, it is brilliant performances and acting by the leads. Our new generation doesn't understand love anymore, this kind of relationship displayed here is rare nowadays when all the current relationships now mostly involve sex and lust. I loved this film, a must watch.

It was called Brief Encounter, when, after looking at each other once, and then into each other's eyes, Richard Burton asked, "You know what's happened, don't you?" Sophia Loren replied, "Yes!" and Richard said, "We've fallen in love." As Tommy Cooper would have said, "Just like that!" Moral: Some things are much easier to get into than get out of.

Brief Encounter is a romantic drama movie directed by Alan Bridges and stars Late Richard Burton and Sophia Loren. The movie was a remake of 1945 classic with the same name. The movie could've been a decent romantic movie had the movie been decently executed with a decent pace but due to slow pace the movie falls flatly. The acting was good in fact the acting was superb, Sophia Loren was charming and Late Burton was great. Screenplay was very slow and is the main reason for the debacle of the movie. Climax was average. Overall if you have a lots of patience then this is the movie for you otherwise please ignore.