Word: pinter
(lookup in dictionary)
(lookup stats)
Dates: all
Sort By: most recent first
(reverse)
This is a precise adaptation of Pinter's play-the director and much of the cast are intact from the original 1965 London production-and it makes a fine, ferocious film. One reason for its success is that no one writes this well originally for films, not even Harold Pinter. His other screenplays are cool, exemplary, probably the best scenario writing now being done in English, as a recently published collection (Grove; $10) readily attests. The screenplays are all adaptations, though. They have the eerie accents of Pinter, share a great many of his obsessional themes, but the plots...
Here the writing is Pinter first and thoroughly, and the film-part of the American Film Theater subscription series-does him almost flawless service...
...Continental style of crediting films were adopted, this would be less a film by Peter Hall than by Harold Pinter...
...none of my plays," Pinter has said. "I can describe none of them, except to say: that is what happened. That is what they said. That is what they did." The essence of Pinter is in suggestion and allusion and tone. Of all contemporary writers, he has best calculated how to contain fire under...
...takes a great deal of cool passion to play Pinter; the performances here are never less than excellent and sometimes-in the cases of Merchant, Holm and Rogers-more than that...