Two Living, One Dead (1961) User Reviews

If a man thinks he is a coward so will everyone else

[Moor-Larkin · 6/10 · 2 September 2005]

McGoohan plays a dour clerk who has spent twenty years working for the Post Office. He is a serious-minded man whose only passion lies in his wife and young son. However, although he is asocial, he has a keen eye for cruelty and an early scene has him quietly reassuring the young Michael Crawford after he has been set up by the popular, loud-mouthed Bill Travers who is the Office 'character'.

Aurally, an extremely violent hold-up takes place. McGoohan's boss is shot and dies gurgling in a most horrific fashion. Travers is knocked out. McGoohan reacts to the violence by evidently thinking about his wife and child and resists his impulse to fight the robbers. Thus he emerges uninjured.

In the ensuing two weeks McGoohan's self-confidence is undermined by the police, the towns-people and most of all his superiors. All of them consider him a coward. He is passed over for an expected promotion and the job is given to the brave Travers instead. McGoohan's relationship with Virginia McKenna deteriorates as his sensitivity to what people think of him increases.He takes to wandering the streets alone at night. Eventually he meets a mysterious stranger (who shares the same lodgings as Travers) and they take to having nocturnal assignations. McGoohan discusses his behaviour in the third person by pretending he is a friend of his own character. The mysterious stranger empathises and reassures him. One night they part at McGoohans front gate and McKenna unexpectedly invites the stranger in for supper. McGoohan's deception comes to light and McKenna's distress at his betrayal of her (by his intimacy with this stranger) leads her to reveal their son is being ostracised at school because his father is a coward. Their relationship has now completely shattered.

In due course the stranger reveals he and his brother were the robbers. His brother has died in an accident consequent to their crime. He now wants to make amends for ruining McGoohans life and tells him Travers was not knocked out by them but ran into a door-post in panic during the robbery. Furthermore they were only able to plan the robbery because Travers had talked openly in his lodgings about how much cash there was and when it was available. McGoohan exorcises his demons by borrowing the gun and staging a fake hold-up of Travers where he is revealed as the braggart he is.

Mcoohan and the stranger part, the stranger promising to put his ill-gotten gains to charitable use. McGoohan returns home and offers intimacy to McKenna. She realises her man has come back and falls into his arms again.

This is a curious film where McGoohan was able to take a break from being the gallant persona that Danger Man had created for him. Around the same time he explored the characterisation of a more craven physical coward when he played the scheming Johnnie Cousin in 'All Night Long'.

The film could have been a classic British 'kitchen-sink' drama but for some reason is set in Scandinavia. This must have made it totally non-box-office at the time of it's release except maybe for the Bergman brigade! One can only assume that as it was a Nordic novel originally, the copyright-holders insisted the film be based in it's country of origin. Maybe the Norwegian in McGoohan (via 'Brand') meant he wished it to retain it's ethnicity. He surely must have had some influence in the decision as a respected theatrical actor and successful TV personality.

Either way it was one of the early steps off the beaten track that this determinedly un-populist actor was to make and of course, if you can find a copy, essential viewing for McGoohan admirers.

Who is the REAL coward?

[NellsFlickers · 6/10 · 17 January 2020]

As of early 2020, this film doesn't appear to be available commercially. There is a low-quality version which can be found online that looks like it came from an old VHS recording. Because of the image quality, I can't really attest to the overall look of the film. This also makes it difficult to tell if Patrick McGoohan is made to look pale and tired with bags under his eyes, which would befit his character, or if it is just... well... not a Blue Ray DVD! There is very little music soundtrack, which does make an already rather stark-looking film even more so at times. It is also a little confusing having a mainly British cast put in a Swedish setting.

The best performances are by Alf Kjellin (Rogers) and McGoohan (Berger). Granted, Bill Travers' character (Andersson) is basically a big oaf, and you can't do too much with that in a drama. Virginia McKenna as McGoohan's wife is ok, and their son Rolf is played well by John Moulder-Brown.

As for the subject matter, and who is in the right, that is up to the viewer. Most of the cast views Berger as a coward for not risking his life to keep a large amount of money away from two robbers who had already injured two people. Berger was thinking of his wife and son, but his boss thinks he should have sacrificed his life to the Postal Service. The audience is left to ponder just who was right or wrong.

McGoohan plays Berger as very quiet, but obviously warm hearted and intelligent. As the story progresses, and his marriage falls apart, he becomes even more of a lost soul, though he never really gives in and try to change for the sake of others. He knows who he is and why he did what he did. But any display of emotion is very low key. No "Number Six" outburst of anger here. In fact, the second to last scene, where Berger goes a bit batty and confronts Andersson at gunpoint, he is actually ever-so-slightly "hammy", though this may simply be how he felt a quiet, unassuming man like Berger would behave in that situation. If a man isn't prone to loosing his temper, doing so may actually be frightening to himself, and McGoohan's Berger does indeed seem afraid of what he is doing in that scene.

All in all, I did expect a better film. Perhaps if it were a less stark production, perhaps set in Britain, and McGoohan gave his Berger just a smidge more emotion, it would be a bit more engaging.

Thoughtful film

[malcolmgsw · 6/10 · 24 February 2023]

Anthony Asquith was one of the most eminent of British directors making 44 films in a long career.

He made some thought provoking films such as Tell England(1931) and Orders To Kill(1958)with themes not dissimilar to this film.

It is therefore a surprise that this film was not distributed in the UK.

However this film works on an assumption that if Mcgoohan didn't have a go at the robbers that he must be a coward and this he and his family would be pilloried and that he would be denied a deserved promotion. This comes actors as an utterly contrived situation. What makes this film seen more unreal are the Swedish backgrounds.

Family values: who can celebrate an observer over a dead hero?

[Vziegler · 9/10 · 11 July 2006]

Fans of "Danger Man" will be surprised to see McGoohan playing a man so passive in the face of danger, but this film buttresses many of the values that McGoohan insisted upon for the character of John Drake, the spy who abhorred violence. Not only does his character Eric forego a violent response to the robbery; he spends the rest of the film demonstrating the futility of reflexive violence. Eric's friend John Kester died because he reacted violently to the thieves. Had Eric resisted, he too would have died. And the robbery would still have been successful. As Eric concludes, "It's stupid to risk your life for a few thousand kroner, especially when you have a wife and a child....I wish to God Kester had been an observer too."

The film does a nice job of depicting the price Eric and John's families pay for the robbery. The opening scenes set up the two parallel families: mothers happily serving breakfast, fathers good-naturedly walking their sons to school, sons happy and secure. That tranquility is forever lost to the Kester family with John's death. Kester's wife has no illusions about what she has lost; her son will grow up to conclude that his father was a good man, but she will always wish that he had chosen, like Eric, to be an observer so that he could return to his family.

Eric's family suffers in other ways. His wife Helen comes to wonder if he couldn't have done something to prevent the robbery; he comes to doubt himself and her; and their son Rolf is bullied by his schoolmates. From the beginning Rolf seeks to protect his parents. On the night of the robbery, he accedes to Eric's plea that they be careful not to upset Rolf's mother; later, once his schoolmates have made his life horrendous because of their scorn for his presumably cowardly father, he desperately tries to keep his father from discovering his misery. It takes Rolf's school teacher to point out the obvious: Rolf is as stubbornly protective of his father as his father is of Rolf and Helen. No matter how abused, Rolf and Eric stay true to themselves. The psychic price of this behavior, however, is high.

About 2/3 into the film, the viewer will be wondering whether this stoic persistence is worth it. Eric and Helen Berger have become strangers to one another, and neither can comfort Rolf. Perhaps, the viewer thinks, it might have been better if Eric had been killed--at least his memory would be honored and loved, and his marriage would never have known the doubt and alienation that has come to plague Eric and Helen.

The convenient deus ex machina of having Eric form a close tie to one of the robbers allows the film to resolve both the emotional and the philosophical issues at debate. After the thief insists that he would have shot Eric had Eric resisted the robbery, the question of the utility of violence is settled neatly. And because the thief also reveals that Andersson, the Post Office hero, did not in fact offer brave resistance, Eric can put aside the myth of successful violence. Confronting Andersson after hours and showing him up as a blowhard frees Eric to reassert his own self esteem and reclaim communion with his wife.

The ending (especially given McGoohan's famous reluctance to play love scenes) is quite touching, as indeed, is the entire film. The pain and loss that explode in the lives of the Berger and Kester families feels just as shocking to the viewer as it is to the on-screen protagonists. This film depicts their suffering with great sensitivity, and it's hard to begrudge the convenient dramatical device of the compassionate thief. The Bergers deserve some happiness after their ordeal, and a cautionary tale about the illusory appeal of violence is as instructive in 2006 as in 1961.

Not quite Ibsen, neither noir

[F Gwynplaine MacIntyre · 4/10 · 29 May 2003]

In the wide range of roles which Patrick McGoohan has played in his long career, his favourite role was the title character in Henrik Ibsen's "Brand": a defiant individual who is perceived to be superior to all his neighbours in the village. In 'Two Living, One Dead', McGoohan plays a similarly Ibsenesque 'enemy of the people', who follows his own conscience despite grave consequences. Based on a Norwegian novel which was previously filmed in Norway, this remake was filmed in a small town in Sweden, with a primarily British cast depicting Scandinavian characters. The dialogue makes references to money as 'kroner', and so forth.

Erik Berger (McGoohan) is a middle-class husband and father and a respected civil servant: he has a secure mid-level job as a postal clerk. Berger's boss is the sub-district postmaster, John Kester (Peter Vaughan), and it's understood that Berger will eventually be promoted to that job when Kester retires. One day at the post office, Berger interrupts an armed robbery in progress: Kester has been shot dead, whilst Berger's co-worker Andersson (Bill Travers) has apparently been coshed and lies unconscious on the floor. Because Berger has a wife and young son who are dependent on him, he feels it's not worth risking his life to defend the government's money. He allows the thieves to escape with the loot before he summons the police. (The film's title refers to Berger, Andersson and Kester: two living, one dead.)

The reaction of the police, the postal authorities, the local newspaper editor and the townspeople is very interesting. Andersson -- who survived with a minor injury -- is deemed a hero for apparently having put up a fight. Kester -- who also put up a fight -- is perceived as a fool because he got himself killed. But Erik Berger is considered a coward. His neighbours shun him and his wife Helen; their young son Rolf is taunted by his schoolmates. Berger maintains that his passivity was an act of conscience, not cowardice: his neighbours disbelieve this. After Kester's funeral, Berger is passed up for promotion: it's Andersson who inherits Kester's job as postmaster.

SPOILERS COMING RIGHT NOW. Eventually, Berger learns the truth: his co-worker Andersson was not so heroic after all, and crucial details of the robbery are not what they seemed to be. Berger is vindicated.

McGoohan has long had a reputation for refusing to play violent characters. (He was reportedly first choice to play James Bond, but turned down the role because of its gratuitous sex and gunplay.) As Erik Berger, McGoohan gives a cold performance with aspects of 'holier-than-thou': even if Berger made the proper decision, it's difficult for us to like him. The very beautiful Virginia McKenna is superb as Berger's wife, the nearest thing to a heroine in this movie: there must have been an interesting dynamic on the set, as (in real life) McKenna was married at this time to Bill Travers, who plays the unexpected villain. Young Michael Crawford is impressive as the post-office errand boy who remains loyal to Berger when everyone else shuns him. (Full disclosure: Crawford got me sacked from a job once.) Dorothy Alison is touching as the slain postmaster's widow; unfortunately, her character is named Esther Kester. Alf Kjellin is good as a stranger in town, who sympathises with Berger for his own reasons ... which turn out to be rather surprising.

This movie is rather a departure for Anthony Asquith, who tended to direct films with patrician characters and classical themes. (Not surprising, in view of his parentage.) I give Asquith, McGoohan and McKenna full marks for sincerity, but this movie doesn't really come off: it's gloomy and existentialist, occasionally promising to become a noir thriller or (during the robbery sequence) a caper movie, yet never delivering. The character of Berger is ambiguous: were his actions indeed dictated by conscience, or was he simply a coward? Has anyone the right to judge Berger if they've never been in a similar situation? This film raises intelligent questions but offers no answers. The Swedish tech crew do their jobs efficiently, especially as they were working with a British director and cast. I'll rate 'Two Living, One Dead' 4 out of 10.

An unfortunately unpleasant subject that exposes humanity's hypocrisy.

[mark.waltz · 4/10 · 5 January 2021]

If it wasn't for the inward nonacting of Patrick McGoohan, this film would rank lower in my rating. It's an intriguing subject that I don't think could be done any better and might have worked as either a stage play or TV drama with a limited set. But to expand this for the big screen takes away the intimacy of one man's troubled mind after his lack of willingness to participate in the attempt to stop a post office robbery and how he is viewed by his peers following the incident.

Under the direction of veteran Anthony Asquith (also one of the screenwriters), this film certainly makes the viewer think. McGoohan gains the audience sympathy, not their jeers (unlike those he works for and the wretched locales), because in a flash of a moment of his life, he had to make a quick decision that could either make him a live hero, a wounded hero (like coworker Bill Travers) or a dead hero which happens to the third man who reacted quickly and didn't survive that decision.

His wife, Virginia McKenna (later the real life of Travers), stands by him in spite of the hideous gossip of the locales and the treatment their son gets in school. This becomes unpleasant to watch because nobody thinks outside their feelings about Travers and the deceased coworker or even how they would react. In real life, many people have been surprised by the reactions of seemingly strong men who didn't jump in when a crisis occured, something inside them beckoning them to get away.

Look for a young Michael Crawford as a young postal clerk involved in the gossip after the incident. The performances are good and the pacing only slow intermittently, so I'm surprised that I was left cold by the story which made me angrier at the reactions to what McGoohan chose to do. Then there's the angry supervisor who on the surface appears to be sad about the violence that left one man wounded and the other dead, even though his eyes indicate he's more angry about the lost funds. A sad situation that left me with no proper resolution, this ultimately served no purpose.