The Angry Silence

source: The Angry Silence

Ostensibly this is about the dynamics of a strike in Ipswitch but it really deals with a much more general question -- what attitude do we take towards someone who doesn't conform? Suppose there is a genuine source of concern about worker safety in a factory. Suppose management is willing to look into the matter and take corrective measures. Suppose, provoked by an outside organizer, the union strikes anyway, although without the backup of a national union they'll have to live on their own money. Suppose one poor factory stiff, in the person of Richard Attenborough, has a wife and kid to take care of and can't survive on the little he's saved and decides to work anyway. What do you -- the average worker who has gone along with the rest and stayed home -- do about (or to) Richard Attenborough who is weakening the collective stance? In this instance, you'd use a tactic of alienation that the Old Order Amish call "shunning." You don't speak to him, look at him, or pay any attention to him at all. You give him non-person treatment. Then, as the general hatred gains its own autonomous momentum, you run him over with a car, hospitalize him, and cost him an eye. Then finally you wake up and realize that things have gone a little too far, especially in the face of the willingness of some in management to cooperate. The more abstract questions, of course, have to do with non-conformity. Suppose, instead of an ordinary grimy factory worker, it's a homosexual? Or, in a community that belongs exclusively to one political party, the guy voices opinions too closely resembling those of the opposition party. Or maybe he's just unusually dumb, ugly, or fat. Suppose he smokes cigarettes. You can see that this exceptional film is getting at more than labor relations in 1960s England. It's well done without being a masterpiece. The direction by Guy Green is functional and not splashy. The performances are all up to par, as you'd expect from such a seasoned cast. Pier Angeli, as Attenborough's wife, is surprisingly effective. She's not a kid anymore but retains that piping girlish voice. The film doesn't glamorize her either, although she's quite beautiful despite the homely braids and drab garb. Nice job overall.

When this film was made Trade Unions had no legal liability.Often as realistically shown in this film workers went on wildcat strikes with no sanction from the union.Striking was called the British disease.Now I am no fan of Thatcher who was our local MP.However she did bring in balanced union laws.So whilst strikes still happen they are a lot rarer and there has to be a written ballot with a simple majority in favour.This film accurately depicts the poor state of worker/employer relations till the eighties.I still remember the three day week.

I loved this movie. Pier Angeli keeps you entertained and her performance is riveting. Richard Attenborough is brilliant in this motion picture as well. I really enjoyed the message in this film. The corruption that goes on in unions is evident in this movie. I believe that this type of wrong-doing is still going on today in unions across the globe. I read in a biography of Pier Angeli that she rehearsed the confrontational scene between herself and her on-screen husband's former friend the night before the directors filmed that scene. She apparently scared the hell out of the actor in that scene that night because she gave her all and she really got aggravated. She had just filed for divorce prior to taking on this role so I guess you can say that she had a lot of bent up frustration and wanted to release it. Love her!

For reasons best known to themselves A.C.T. (or, as it was by then A.C.T.T.) allowed this union-bashing entry to proceed without let or hindrance. Presumably screenwriter Bryan Forbes did not yet have sufficient clout to slip wife Nanette Newman the role of Dickie Attenborough's wife though Dickie himself found the usual supporting role for brother-in-law Gerald Sim. Alfred Burke takes the pivotal role of the Communist agitator sent from 'London' to provoke the wildcat strike that leads to Attenborough being 1) sent to Coventry and 2) hospitalised after being attacked, ironically, by yobs with no political agenda. Beginning with Eight O'Clock Walk Dickie had utilised his penchant for non-English leading ladies and here Pier Angeli turns in a half-decent performance as his wife. Clearly an anti-union veteran Attenborough also starred in a more comedic/satirical take on the same theme in I'm All Right, Jack.

The Angry Silence is a watchable straight forwardly told drama, with a solid cast. It's bland in parts, but the family moments kept it going for me. Pier Angeli's splendid throughout, raising the level of the film each scene she's in. Attenborough and Craig also had their moments. The scene where Anna verbally attacks Joe for not standing up for Tom and going along with the cruel behavior, was the only time I felt anything substantial. I didn't dislike the film, it's just that there are films where I don't even like most of the characters and they are still capable of giving me more than this did. Show me one person at least stand up for the guy or say something to appose the mob. Joe doing it after the damage has been done doesn't give it heart, he just feels guilty.

I saw this film in my first year in law school in New York in 1991. A prior comment calls the film "right wing." Unfortunately, given the subsequent events in Britain in the 1970s and contemporary events in Detroit right now, it is prescient. Lord Attenborough's character faces a labor high noon many encounter in a union shop. One older worker in the film wants only to make a product that he is proud of. A pride that forces in the union movement obstruct. Anyone compelled to join a union by organizers who hire on only to unionize, will appreciate this film. I know. I've been there -- twice. White collar and blue collar jobs. That the film was made at all is amazing. But this often grim picture does have a comedic sibling -- the equally brilliant I'M ALL RIGHT JACK with Ian Carmichael and Peter Sellars. See both and you will understand what happened to Britain as well as too much of industrial America. If corporate greed has a partner, it is union executives who throw their members under a bus to save their jobs. THE ANGRY SILENCE should be required viewing for anyone who believes that political films -- not politicized films -- have a place in Hollywood. Heartbreaking story, economic direction, and brilliant acting. In dramatic black and white. The screenplay won a BAFTA Award for Bryan Forbes.

I remember the reviews of this film in 1960 but did not manage to see it. Now (2007) I have seen most of it for the first time on afternoon TV. It struck me at first as an anti union film, but so much water has flowed under the bridge that it might be taken as a film about the herd instinct; about how unthinking people are so easily led whether by politicians of all persuasions or union reps with agenda of their own. I deplore the near destruction of the unions by Thatcher, but one can never return to voting by a show of hands any more than we can return to the the industrial Britain of the post war era. Unions need to be rebuilt but in another form. The young couple are too saintly by half but there is an attempt to provide a certain amount of balance. Curtis actually says he can see "both sides".

It's quite hard to find a copy of this excellent film but it's well worth the effort seeking it out. At the very start we see a sinister agitator (Alfred Burke) arriving to meet the useful idiot shop steward (Bernard Lee) whose job it is to foment industrial warfare in the engineering firm from whom they both take wages. We are shown how the workforce is alienated by the creation of a series of trivial disputes culminating in a strike initiated on a pretext whose REAL motive is the destruction of the company. Bear in mind that the elimination of British industry one company at a time was a strategic objective of the Russian communists throughout the postwar period. (It was only after his death that it was learned that Jack Jones, a prominent Trades Union leader during the 1960s and 70s was a paid Soviet agent.) At the centre of this drama is a dissenting figure played (in a strong and convincing performance) by Dickie Attenborough who resents being told what to do by a bunch of union thugs following a mass-meeting. His story, the uncomfortable choices with which he was presented, and the distressing consequences of his actions are the subject matter of this important film. It was not for another 20+ years after the making of this drama-documentary that the industrial relations climate in the UK was belatedly altered for the better by the Thatcher government. Better late than never, but by then much damage (including the destruction of the UK car industry) had been done.

"The Angry Silence" can be read in two ways: one, it is a pretty accurate depiction of the way union relations were run in the late 1950s and the shadow of the far left; or, it is a propaganda piece for the far right and nothing like the truth. There are strong arguments for both camps to be correct. What struck me about the film was the central performance from Richard Attenborough as the lone worker standing up against bullying and blackmail from his trade union colleagues. One scene in particular which takes place in the canteen is a masterclass in screen acting of its type, and there are also good scenes between Attenborough and his screen wife, played by Pier Angeli, and his work colleague and lodger, played by Michael Craig. Bryan Forbes always seemed to be veering off in different directions with the various movies on his CV, and this is an odd one. Whatever your politics, it is a good film and provokes a reaction. Whether the reaction is one which matches the reality has to remain open to question.