Lovesusti The Worst Film Ever

SnoReptilePlenty Memorable, crazy movie

Dotsthavesp I wanted to but couldn't!

Zlatica One of the worst ways to make a cult movie is to set out to make a cult movie.

Prismark10 Victim had to tread a fine line between being an earnest issue based movie and a gripping thriller where a barrister's life is spiralling out of control because of his homosexual past.Victim is a snapshot of its time. This is evident in the scenes of the building site where London was going through post war regeneration and scenes of a plush car showroom in the middle of town which is rather a rare sight these days.Victim is also marks a society where homosexuality is illegal. The film-makers took a brave stance in making a sympathetic campaigning stance on the liberalisation of the ban on homosexuality and Dirk Bogarde who stars as Melville Farr, the wealthy upwardly mobile barrister was a someone regarded as a matinée idol and a hit with the ladies. Bogarde was one of the several actors taking a risk in making this film. Given that Bogarde himself was later reputed to be gay only heightened the risk to his professional career.Farr is going far in the world. He is married and taking silk and a place in the judiciary is not far behind. However he had a 'liaison' in his student days which had a tragic outcome. Farr also had a friendship with a construction worker who stole funds because he was being blackmailed for being gay and later dies.This event spurs Farr on to pursue the blackmailers even if this puts his personal and professional life in jeopardy.The film comes close on being preachy on a few occasions but that is expected for a bold, campaigning film of the time but it works well as a decent thriller with a few twists towards the end. It depicts the gay community as a disparate group from wealthy to the working class, old to young. You see a few hanging around a pub, regarded as a gay pub yet the publican has a loathing of homosexuals. In contrast the police inspector has a rather liberal attitude noting that the ban on homosexuality was a blackmailer's charter.Homosexuality was decriminalised in 1967 but that was not the end of the story but a beginning of a chapter which would take another five decades before their would be almost full equality. Until then there was Mrs Thatcher's attack with Section 28 and some police chiefs who thought it was more important for undercover police officers to hang around toilets and entrap gay men than go out catching burglars and drug dealers.

ha-rob Looking at this film from today's perspective it looks very tame, the story is a group of gay men from different social economic groups being blackmailed, but this film was made in 1961 6 years before the 1967 Sexual Offences Act which decriminalised sex acts between men over the age of 21 in private, the film was made during the period which became known as the British new wave when British films wanted to become more realistic and challenge the accepted view of society and the establishment but this was still a brave move at the time, the film treats the men sympathetically (who at the time would've been regarded as perverts and criminals) and argues (as much as it dares) for the law to be changed, Dirk Bogarde plays a successful barrister who decides to take on the blackmailers and let the chips fall where they may, knowing that that decision will destroy pretty much every aspect of his life, the film is well acted and very well made, i think because of its time and subject matter the film will always be very interesting as a period piece more so as time goes by, to think that less than 50 years ago there were laws like this and people were persecuted and prosecuted for their preferences is a disgrace and i think that's what most of todays audiences will think.

thinker1691 Reflection of our own history is fascinating, especially when we take the time to notice that what was once considered illegal, is now quite tolerated. The film, " Victim " is truly remarkable for it's time. The main star, Dirk Bogarde plays Melville Farr, who is married, dedicated and a well respected English Barrister (Lawyer) in England. Furthermore, as an official of the Court, he holds a prominent position in the hierarchy of polite society and is about to be appointed a Judge. Like most people,he has secrets, one of which remains deep and dark. Indeed, except for his wife Laura (Sylvia Syms) few are privy to know his is a closeted Homosexual. Years ago, it was not only damming, but against English law, punishable by imprisonment. From far in Farr's past, emerges an echo of his early indiscretions, in the form of a tormented young man named Barret (Peter McEnery) who desperately wants to meet with him. Believing he is out to blackmail him, Farr dismisses him, only to learn he later commits suicide. This changes the tempo of what is regarded as a sleeper of a movie. Yet, far from it, this black and white film extends an invitation into the dramatic, nightmarish world of terror feared by any gay individual seeking to avoid the wrath of a homophobic world. Aside from such notables as Derren Nesbitt (Where Eagles Dare), John Barrie and John Cairney (Cleopatra), there is the excellent direction of Basil Dearden. Too often a minor film such as this has a greater impact on society than many expected. Dirk Bogarde who gave us other Classics like 'A Death in Venice', 'The Servant and 'Sebastian' has once again created yet another monumental Classic. Easily recommended. ****

Robert J. Maxwell A mystery and an exploration of a social issue, namely homosexuality. At the time this was shot, homosexuality was a crime in England that led to serious time in the slams, where life could hardly have been pleasant even for men familiar with certain aspects of life in jail.Dirk Bogarde is a happily married lawyer with a lovely wife (Sims) and a promising career -- he's being considered for a Q.C. I'm going to guess that means "Counselor to the Queen." He's also trying to shake off a recent affair with a young working man, a nice guy in fact. Of course, if this ever is made public, Bogarde can kiss his honors good-bye.Well, the young man is arrested for stealing thousands of pounds from his employer but a search of his flat reveals nothing. He's living in a shabby room and eating out of tins. He's practically broke. Therefore, the police conclude, correctly, he must be paying off a blackmailer.As a matter of fact there is a ring of blackmailers whose job is to find out who is vulnerable and then drain them of cash. The victim can hardly go to the police and complain of extortion because, in doing so, they'd be admitting to criminal behavior of their own.Bogarde is gradually drawn into this business and determines to find out who is behind it. He does so, at great price.It's a dark movie, not only in its themes but its imagery. There are a multitude of shadows, not inappropriate to the material. There are scenes in which everything is murky and insubstantial except for a tiny spot on Bogarde's eyes.Not to suggest that the movie embodies anything like the stylization that became so common around this time. Never does the camera turn upside down. No slow motion or undercranking. No directorial fireworks at all. When a character has something important to say, the camera moves in quickly for the revealing close up. The director was Basil Dearden. One can only imagine what Joseph Losey would have done with a plot like this, considering what he did with the more subdued message of "The Servant." Bogarde is distant and a little frosty. He never loses his temper. Well, almost never. When his wife discovers his recent affair, she decides to leave him and he shouts angrily -- a little bit. She does leave him, too, not because he's had affairs with men -- she already knows about that -- but because he's ridden with guilt over the suicide of his last paramour and, what with all that responsibility, "There's no room left for me." There are various attitudes expressed towards gay men. Some are cynical. They provide good business for the people who run gay bars. Some are hateful. Some are sympathetic. The police are non-judgmental. It's against the law, that's all.Actually, the story pretty dated today, thank God. It was a sensation at the time of its release. Today -- it's best approached as a mystery set in a particular sub-culture that is now a historical curiosity. In a way it's sad that our society has become so tolerant. It leaves just that many fewer rules to break. What will happen next? The streets fill with Mae Wests? I'm thinking of shedding my habit of going downtown in my heels and fishnet stockings and belting out show tunes like Judy Garland. I mean, what's the point anymore?I wouldn't have made that joke sixty years ago in England.