Betrayal

February. 19,1983      
Rating:
6.9
Trailer Synopsis Cast

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

Jeremy Irons as  Jerry
Ben Kingsley as  Robert
Patricia Hodge as  Emma
Avril Elgar as  Mrs. Banks

Similar titles

Operation Mad Ball
Operation Mad Ball
In this wacky military spoof, Lemmon plays a terminally bored Army private waging a war of wits as he tries to throw a party under the nose of his obnoxious commanding officer.
Operation Mad Ball 1957
Love at the Top
Love at the Top
Nicolas Mallet, an inconspicuous and shy bank employee, one day successfully invites Marie-Paul, a young woman he hadn’t known before, in the streets of Paris to a café and sleeps with her the next day. When he tells his surprised friend Claude about the incident, the disillusioned and handicapped writer starts to guide him, leading Nicolas on a dazzling social ascent.
Love at the Top 1975
Mumsy, Nanny, Sonny & Girly
Mumsy, Nanny, Sonny & Girly
A wealthy, fatherless British clan kidnaps bums and hippies and forces them to participate in an elaborate role-playing game in which they are the perfect family; those who refuse or attempt escape are ritualistically murdered.
Mumsy, Nanny, Sonny & Girly 1970
Youth
Youth
Two lifelong friends bond whilst vacationing in a luxury Swiss Alps lodge as they ponder retirement. While Fred has no plans to resume his musical career despite the urging of his loving daughter Lena, Mick is intent on finishing the screenplay for what may be his last important film for his muse Brenda. And where will inspiration lead their younger friend Jimmy, an actor grasping to make sense of his next performance?
Youth 2015

Reviews

Evengyny
1983/02/19

Thanks for the memories!

... more
Rijndri
1983/02/20

Load of rubbish!!

... more
FirstWitch
1983/02/21

A movie that not only functions as a solid scarefest but a razor-sharp satire.

... more
Billy Ollie
1983/02/22

Through painfully honest and emotional moments, the movie becomes irresistibly relatable

... 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
LigiaMontoya
1983/02/24

It was the first movie I ever walked out of, too; in fact, I might have been cubear's date. I was with my girlfriend at the time, and we walked out about a half hour in. Horrible. A lot of hyper-dramatic dialogue presented out of chronological sequence so it was almost impossible to follow, and I just didn't care enough about any of the characters to make it worth the work of following the incredibly confusing sceenplay.Is Ben Kingsley always a great actor? Sure. But he has to have to have something resembling decent material to work with. Honestly, people were just discussing what was the worst movie ever, and - excepting truly laughable turkeys like Plan 9 from Outer Space - this was the movie I thought of.

... 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
swensonb
1983/02/26

I watched this movie because I heard that the screen-writer had used a unique structure--the story is told backwards in time. Every succeeding scene occurs chronologically before the previous one. I wanted to see if the screen-writer was just using a gimmick, or if the structure actually added to the telling of the story. I was overjoyed to find out it was the latter! The magic of this movie is that Pinter makes the time sequence seem natural. By the end of the movie, the viewer is convinced this is the only way the story could have been told effectively. I highly recommend this movie to all who love cinema.

... more