The Servant (1964)

Angus Hudson would be shocked

A "gentleman's man," Hugo Barrett (Dirk Bogarde), is hired as a personal manservant by a rich layabout, Tony (James Fox). At first deferential, Barrett takes control of Tony's London apartment and soon becomes indispensable. Tony's fiancée, the imperious and repressed Susan (Wendy Craig), sees Barrett as a suffocating presence and treats him badly. Not long after, Barrett brings his "sister' Vera (Sarah Miles) into the house as a live-in maid. Subtly, but assuredly, he turns Tony's attention from Susan to Vera, and orchestrates Vera's seduction of Tony. Through more underhanded tricks, Barrett causes the break-up of Tony's and Susan's relationship. His psychological manipulations of Tony increase in severity until he has reduced him to a simpering and depraved alcoholic, barely able to stand up, much less regain his authority. Suddenly, the dynamics have changed-the servant has now become the master.

A cruel and unusual film that still defies the norm forty-four years later, "The Servant" mercilessly skewers the English upper class and serves them up for lunch. Largely regarded as an allegory for the declining morals of what was then becoming an obsolete master-servant society, it pulls the gloves off, strips the veneer of respectability, and rankles your nerves raw. It's grim, edgy and borders on the Avant-garde. Depicting a spoiled man and his manservant in a time and place when servants were expected to attend to their employers' every desire yet disappear into the woodwork when not wanted, the master's destruction through his servant's treachery is both satisfying and disturbing. There is a great deal of ambiguity in this film, which invites one to speculate on Barrett's motivations and Tony's submissiveness. This could prove frustrating for some, but I found it rather stimulating. Not a mainstream film, maybe not even back in 1964, it's a pessimistic view of humanity; noir-ish, intense and cryptic.

As an outstanding example of the power of suggestion and cinematic craft, the film never shows the sexual depravity and sexual manipulations prevalent in the story. No actor is shown in any state of undress and there isn't a single sexually explicit scene. However, one clearly knows they're happening by the oblique and suggestive use of objects and people that by themselves mean nothing, yet when seen in the context of Barrett's devious machinations, relay the spiraling down into immorality. Most of the topics dealt with in this film were daring at that time. To deal with these merely by suggestion is a far more difficult task. The fact that the film succeeds in doing so brilliantly says much for the talents of its actors, director Joseph Losey, and playwright Harold Pinter. The passage of time has not lessened its significance and it's a technically superior film that still manages to fascinate. The issue of class conflicts may no longer be relevant, but the issues of power and moral corruption certainly are, and some would say even more so now. June 22, 2008

What, one wonders, turns Hugo Barrett on?

(may contain SPOILERS...how am I supposed to know when you feel spoiled?)

Hmm...Hugo Barrett.

Surely, some of you black-and-white lovers (of which I count myself one) remember another character named "Hugo," from a movie 18 years senior to this one, who ruins his master's life and takes away his sanity. Last Name's Fitch. The, ah, master is played by an actor who may even be a little superior to Bogarde...and there're not too many of those, and you may disagree. And in case you hadn't noticed yet, Vera, after the two of them are busted turning on in Tony's bedroom, calls down the stairs after Barrett, "I've been waiting for you...." As for "Barrett," I see from other reviews that it IS necessary to say that Bogarde's movie immediately preceding* this one ("Victim," 1961) had a character named Barrett (not played by Bogarde), who is sweet and unsuccessfully self-sacrificing--in short, just the opposite of our Barrett here, whose name is repeated almost as many times as "Barrett!" is in this movie. Unless of course the original "Servant" novel or short story by Robert (or Robin) Maugham (nephew of the more famous writer) predates both of these, and the name was already in place.... enough of that (except, in my favorite "Columbo".... FORGET IT).

I've seen the movie twice, own it, and hate it. It is perfect--the acting, the character-I hate to say development!--, the glorious cinematography, the music, the sets, the costume design, the economical and perfect dialogue. I keep telling myself I hate it because I hate or despise (or both) everyone in it, but I hate or despise everyone in Madame Bovary (Flaubert) and The Red and the Black (Stendahl)--and I love those. I think it's because Barrett's really only turned on by his own sadism and others' reaction to it. It's hard to figure him out on first viewing, because his character--I'm not talking about Bogarde, but Barrett, "acts" all the time. I think he had the whole thing planned from the beginning, starting with downcast eyes, and perfect service, then the opening of the eyes and dropping of the perfect English, and so on. I don't think the-very few!--surprises that came his way (getting busted in Tony's bedroom; Tony showing himself to be not unsusceptible to the sexual attentions of a man; Susan's kissing him at the last party) changed anything, a whisker. I do NOT think he "ran into" Tony accidentally in that bar (what a crock of lies he told him there!). You know...maybe Vera really WAS his sister! The only people who really change are Tony, who disintegrates, and Susan, who is, at least temporarily, destroyed.

Considering that nearly everybody has sex with nearly everyone else in this movie, it is hardly what I would call a sexy movie. This is because, except for two early scenes of Tony and Susan (she's his fiancée? He asked her to marry him, but she didn't answer the question), the second interrupted by an extraordinarily light knock by Barrett, they all involve Guess Who, for various purposes of his own. The intense, in no way innocent game of hide and seek is accompanied by Barrett's spitting out words of hatred ("You've got a guilty secret! But you'll be caught!"). His enthusiasm is intensified by his natural sadism.
It's not because no sex is shown, but only understood, that the movie isn't sexy; it's because...it's so cold in this movie! Only toward Vera, whom Barrett probably has no sexual feeling for, is he--slightly--affectionate. (As I said: maybe she is really his sister!). And that phonograph record, playing five different times: "Now that I love you alone..." each times less loving than the last.

The sexiest thing in "The Servant" is the playing and singing of guitarist Davey Graham,which Tony not only hears in the coffee shop, but all the way home, at full volume. Not too loud; just right. The last verse goes:

Baby, baby, in your big brass bed,
Rock me Mama, till my face turns cherry red
Rock me Mama, rock me slow
Rock me one more time before you go.

It's like an oasis.

Never hire a manservant (I believe the most popular review mentioned this), no matter how innocent he is, and if you do, for God's sake, don't hire his sister, no matter how competent she is. The last thing you need in your home having to deal with an oligarchy! (other than your own)

Next weekend, I'm going to see another Losey movie, "The Go-Between," which has Hugo Fitch's master's last performance* at the end of it. The role doesn't call for any speech (a woman is beseeching him to do something he doesn't want to do), but by the '70s, Redgrave was probably more comfortable not talking, anyway. There--I told you his name.

* (Not quite!)
May 29, 2008

the servant

after seeing this movie when it was a new release, we were not disoppointed viewing it again,after all these years. brilliant film, with the handsome actor.Dirk Bogarde. who could portray , sinister,roles and love,romance roles. he was a remarkable actor. November 22, 2007

Very British

"The Servant"

Very British

Amos Lassen and Cinema Pride

Looking back to 1963, I found a British classic which tackled homosexuality long before America incorporated gay themes into movies. With a screenplay by master playwright Harold Pinter and directed by the wonderful Joseph Losey, how could a film go wrong? "The Servant" has a great script, admirable acting and excellent direction.
Tony, an aristocrat, moves to London and hires Hugo Barrett to be his servant and he is to be responsible for everything in the home. He seems loyal and competent but Tony's girlfriend, Susan, does not like him and asks Tony to send him away. However Barrett brings his "sister", Vera, to work in the house with him and she and Tony have a brief affair. Upon returning from a brief trip, Tony and Susan discover that Barrett and Vera, in Tony's room and it so happens that they are actually lovers and not family. They are fired and Tony and Susan break up. Tony later meets with Barrett in a pub and hires him once again. Now Barrett is free to impose his own dark intentions on the house. He turns the tables and switches places with his master. What the film does is take a deep look at class relations in Britain via the switch between a dainty bachelor (James Fox) and his contemptuous servant, (Dirk Bogarde). Barrett realizes and uses his expanding powers over Tony who loses his identity slowly and becomes a slave to the man he hired.
"The Servant" is a movie that is close to perfection especially when considering that it was made so long ago. It is a sinister thriller with a great deal going for it. The homoerotic undercurrent works well and although the movie has aged, it has done so gracefully.
There is a great deal of ambiguity in the film and it carries tension along its plot. Dealing with power and manipulation, a series of quirky developments occur. Harold Pinter is a genius with the English language. His screenplay is terse and laced with the feel of menace.
The movie belongs completely to Dirk Bogarde, however. He gives his role a malevolent campiness which conceals bitterness and rage that was common to the lower classes. This is a satire on the British class system and each character has an archetypal function.
The movie is confusing but it is a visceral experience. Joseph Losey gives us a claustrophobic atmosphere with an edge. Erotic during the first half, it becomes frightening in the second half. The plot moves downward throughout and we feel the sexual permissiveness and suggestion from the very beginning and the tension of which drives the drama. It is an original and brilliant film which cannot be fully analyzed.
The cast is uniformly excellent and as Bogarde reveals the true nature of his character, frightening as well.
August 14, 2007

The Servant

Written by Harold Pinter, Losey's "The Servant" is a psychosexual allegory of power, exploitation, and class resentment that belongs, in its unique way, to the "angry young man" school of British film. Bogarde was hailed (justifiably) for his sinister turn as Hugo, while Fox easily inhabits Tony, the impotent, manipulated aristocrat. One of the best films of the sixties, and among the best British films ever, "The Servant" is vintage Pinter, and a first-rate showcase for the gifted, under-appreciated Bogarde. July 2, 2007

More reviews at Amazon.com ...