67 reviews
This is the story of a love triangle between Dr. Hirsh (Peter Finch), Alex Greville (Glenda Jackson), and Bob Elkin (Murray Head). Hirsh is a dignified Jewish doctor, Alex is a frustrated office worker, and Elkin is an artist specializing in kinetic sculpture. Both Hirsh and Alex are in love with Elkin and he reciprocates in turn to each of them individually.
If being dated is judged by the physical environment of the early 1970s (dial land-line phones, 33 rpm records, antiquated fuse boxes, dated hair styles, and so forth), then, yes, this is dated. But the movie is not dated in terms of its themes. I think this could play out now pretty much as presented here, even in our somewhat more enlightened times. It would not be out of the ordinary for a dignified middle-aged doctor to withhold public advertisement of his sexual orientation, but none-the-less privately engage in a homosexual relationship. In fact it would not be all that unusual for such a person to remain in the closet. Consider that sodomy was a crime in fourteen U.S. states until a Supreme Court decision invalidated such laws in 2003, in a 5-4 vote no less. Homosexual acts had been decriminalized in England but a few years before this movie was made. And we have a current justice on the U.S. Supreme Court who even now, in 2012, makes such statements as, "If we cannot have moral feelings against homosexuality, can we have it against murder?"
Where the movie is perhaps even ahead of its time is in presenting all three participants as accepting themselves for what they are and honestly dealing with their situation without serious guilt or dramatic jealousies. The difficulties of sustaining such a ménage à trois are realistically detailed.
I thought the beautifully filmed Bar Mitzvah was crucial to the story. Until that event I was viewing Hirsh as an essentially lonely person, but seeing that he had a community of relatives and associates who respected him disabused me of that notion. And Hirsh did not view himself in an unfavorable light. The scene that had Finch talking directly to the audience at the end was a great piece of acting; when he so simply and sincerely said, "We had something," I really felt for the guy. Glenda Jackson fans will not be disappointed with her performance. She has a wonderful way of saying things without speaking a word.
I rather like how the story begins in the middle of things--it takes very little imagination to see how this situation could have evolved. What did Alex and Hirsh see in the shallow and ambitious Elkin? You don't have to have lived too long before the questions about romantic relations, "What does he see in her," or, "What does she see in him," occur. In this case, I suppose the question of "What does he see in him," should be added. Questions of love and sex are not easily explained.
The way we get to know each person in increments, with some limited use of flashbacks, I found to be effective.
If being dated is judged by the physical environment of the early 1970s (dial land-line phones, 33 rpm records, antiquated fuse boxes, dated hair styles, and so forth), then, yes, this is dated. But the movie is not dated in terms of its themes. I think this could play out now pretty much as presented here, even in our somewhat more enlightened times. It would not be out of the ordinary for a dignified middle-aged doctor to withhold public advertisement of his sexual orientation, but none-the-less privately engage in a homosexual relationship. In fact it would not be all that unusual for such a person to remain in the closet. Consider that sodomy was a crime in fourteen U.S. states until a Supreme Court decision invalidated such laws in 2003, in a 5-4 vote no less. Homosexual acts had been decriminalized in England but a few years before this movie was made. And we have a current justice on the U.S. Supreme Court who even now, in 2012, makes such statements as, "If we cannot have moral feelings against homosexuality, can we have it against murder?"
Where the movie is perhaps even ahead of its time is in presenting all three participants as accepting themselves for what they are and honestly dealing with their situation without serious guilt or dramatic jealousies. The difficulties of sustaining such a ménage à trois are realistically detailed.
I thought the beautifully filmed Bar Mitzvah was crucial to the story. Until that event I was viewing Hirsh as an essentially lonely person, but seeing that he had a community of relatives and associates who respected him disabused me of that notion. And Hirsh did not view himself in an unfavorable light. The scene that had Finch talking directly to the audience at the end was a great piece of acting; when he so simply and sincerely said, "We had something," I really felt for the guy. Glenda Jackson fans will not be disappointed with her performance. She has a wonderful way of saying things without speaking a word.
I rather like how the story begins in the middle of things--it takes very little imagination to see how this situation could have evolved. What did Alex and Hirsh see in the shallow and ambitious Elkin? You don't have to have lived too long before the questions about romantic relations, "What does he see in her," or, "What does she see in him," occur. In this case, I suppose the question of "What does he see in him," should be added. Questions of love and sex are not easily explained.
The way we get to know each person in increments, with some limited use of flashbacks, I found to be effective.
As the 1960s become the 1970s in London, England, a successful male doctor and divorced, female recruitment consultant both try to maintain a relationship with a self-centred younger man.
Fascinating period piece, exploring the reality of the late sixties 'free love' ideal - she loves Bob, he love Bob, Bob loves... well, nothing substantial, as it turns out. Mixing in ghastly 'of their time' friends (ex-hippie-types Alva and Bill and their dreadful kids), Sunday, Bloody Sunday is at once both dated and contemporary - set in a time of economic chaos and dealing with a taboo which, in 2009, still seems at least unsettling. Jackson and Finch are brilliant, apologetically yet furiously settling for all the crumbs they can get from their cool younger lover, although under Schlesinger's direction, Head is much less successful - whilst he captures Bob's egotistical nature, there's no counter-balance of charm, leaving the viewer wondering exactly what is either Alex or Daniel really see in him.
Ground-breaking story-telling then, and all kudos to Gilliatt, Sherwin, Janni, Schlesinger and Peter Finch for bringing this grown-up picture of early 70s contemporary life to the screen.
Fascinating period piece, exploring the reality of the late sixties 'free love' ideal - she loves Bob, he love Bob, Bob loves... well, nothing substantial, as it turns out. Mixing in ghastly 'of their time' friends (ex-hippie-types Alva and Bill and their dreadful kids), Sunday, Bloody Sunday is at once both dated and contemporary - set in a time of economic chaos and dealing with a taboo which, in 2009, still seems at least unsettling. Jackson and Finch are brilliant, apologetically yet furiously settling for all the crumbs they can get from their cool younger lover, although under Schlesinger's direction, Head is much less successful - whilst he captures Bob's egotistical nature, there's no counter-balance of charm, leaving the viewer wondering exactly what is either Alex or Daniel really see in him.
Ground-breaking story-telling then, and all kudos to Gilliatt, Sherwin, Janni, Schlesinger and Peter Finch for bringing this grown-up picture of early 70s contemporary life to the screen.
- robertconnor
- Mar 13, 2009
- Permalink
You spend your time flitting from one nest to another, you kind of toss a coin, follow your nose, to find what you discover, could be Alex for a while, then might be Daniel's time to smile, the best of both worlds if you get time to recover. Alas, both partners find it trickier than you, as you leap from pad to pad one feels eschewed, because they want you to themselves, want you to put back on the shelves, the other copy, and close the door, as you withdraw.
A little bit dated but three fine performances that are as engaging as they were back then, although you may have a stronger connection if there are similarities in the characters plights that link to your own tale.
A little bit dated but three fine performances that are as engaging as they were back then, although you may have a stronger connection if there are similarities in the characters plights that link to your own tale.
I first saw this at 17 in 1971 and was of course struck by the frankness in the portrayal of the relationship between Murray Head and Peter Finch. People in the suburban audience where I saw it SCREAMED when the two men first kissed. (Someone screamed at a director's screening of the film, much to Schlesinger's consternation. It turned out to be Finch's wife.) One of the reviewers complained about Head's acting, but he is playing a very shallow character whose youth and beauty attract Glenda Jackson and Finch. The film holds up really well today with its complex characters and lack of stereotypes and simple judgments about people. There is also enormous charm and humor in the film, especially in the supporting players. The imagery in the film stays with me--the dog killed by a car, the Mummy's milk in the fridge, the inner workings of telephone switching, driving through the rain in London, men and women making love, precocious children smoking dope, and so much more. It feels like life. It also made me a lifelong fan of Finch, who went on to win a posthumous Oscar for "Network," and Jackson, a two-time Oscar winner, who represents Hampstead in Parliament now. Probably my favorite film of all time.
Alex Greville (Glenda Jackson) is a London divorced working mom who is having an affair with modern sculptor Bob Elkin (Murray Head). Daniel Hirsh (Peter Finch) is a traditional Jewish doctor who is suffering from mysterious pains and is also having an affair with Elkin. Both know about the other relationship as well as having mutual friends. Both are willing to live with the situation but it can't really last.
For all the affairs going on, this movie is very cold. All three people are a little emotionally dead inside. It's not a fun movie. It does not make this a compelling watch. Their relationships are like slow sleepwalking in sadness. The constant emotional self-destruction grounded me down.
For all the affairs going on, this movie is very cold. All three people are a little emotionally dead inside. It's not a fun movie. It does not make this a compelling watch. Their relationships are like slow sleepwalking in sadness. The constant emotional self-destruction grounded me down.
- SnoopyStyle
- Oct 7, 2014
- Permalink
After reading about John Schlesinger's death I felt the need to revisit some of his considerable opus. I couldn't decide where to start, Billy Liar, Darling, Far From The Madding Crowd or Sunday Bloody Sunday. If a film could really penetrate the brain of a character, Sunday Bloody Sunday, showed it to me. I saw into Peter Finch's soul to such degree I was kind of embarrassed and compelled at the same time. Murray Head, personifies what Finch's character longs for and is kind of horrified by. Glenda Jackson and Peter Finch play the imperfect angles of this painfully human triangle. The charming shallowness of Murray Head's character made me understand the complexity of knowing and accepting all of our darkest contradictions. John Schlesinger was a great artist.
- marcosaguado
- Mar 10, 2004
- Permalink
- mark.waltz
- Nov 21, 2019
- Permalink
Difficult to believe that this brilliant little film is 41 years old because it still feels fresh and vibrant the way his other films remain (Midnight Cowboy, Billy Liar, Darling, etc). It is as mature an examination of love in all its aspects as any film that has been placed on the screen since. The acting by an impeccable cast and the cinematography are first rate, but it is Schlesinger's sure hand that carved this story into our memories.
Divorced workingwoman Alex (Glenda Jackson) and well-to-do Jewish family doctor Daniel Hirsh (Peter Finch) share not only the same answering service but also the sexual favors of the young handsome artist Bob Elkin (Murray Head) who bed-hops between them as the mood takes him. Both Alex and Dr Hirsh are aware of the other's existence but prefer to live with the situation rather than risk losing Elkin completely. But a wet winter weekend in London can be difficult. Exceptional cameo roles are filled by Peggy Ashcroft as the doctor's mother and by Richard Loncraine as Bob's partner and Jon Finch who manages to epitomize the London street hustler.
There have been several films that have attempted to take on the matter of ménage a trois tales but none has approached the subject of the complexities of romantic relationships with the style and aplomb achieved here. It is a masterwork.
Grady Harp
Divorced workingwoman Alex (Glenda Jackson) and well-to-do Jewish family doctor Daniel Hirsh (Peter Finch) share not only the same answering service but also the sexual favors of the young handsome artist Bob Elkin (Murray Head) who bed-hops between them as the mood takes him. Both Alex and Dr Hirsh are aware of the other's existence but prefer to live with the situation rather than risk losing Elkin completely. But a wet winter weekend in London can be difficult. Exceptional cameo roles are filled by Peggy Ashcroft as the doctor's mother and by Richard Loncraine as Bob's partner and Jon Finch who manages to epitomize the London street hustler.
There have been several films that have attempted to take on the matter of ménage a trois tales but none has approached the subject of the complexities of romantic relationships with the style and aplomb achieved here. It is a masterwork.
Grady Harp
Exploring its IMDb trivia page, I read an item suggesting that John Schlesinger's "Sunday Bloody Sunday", a "Brokeback Mountain" of its era, didn't win a single Oscar because of its controversial subject, and that Finch didn't win the Oscar because of that kiss with Murray Head. And so Gene Hackman won for "The French Connection" because he played a more 'macho' type of guy fitting the standards of Hollywood back then in 1971. Now, there are so many wrong assumptions I don't know where to begin.
First of all, the performance of Hackman was as critically acclaimed as Peter Finch playing Dr. Daniel Hirsh. Secondly, Schlesinger's "Midnight Cowboy", while keeping the relationship between Rico and Joe Buck closer to the 'bromance' archetype, left enough implicitness and ultimately won the Best Picture Oscar. Finally, I believe it would be missing the point to make "Sunday, Bloody Sunday" a movie about homosexuality, and I doubt that was the intent of John Schelinsger or screenwriter Penelope Gilliat.
"Sunday, Bloody Sunday" handles the same-sex relationship subject in such a casual and matter-of-factly way you can tell that it was a deliberate choice not to leap into spectacularity or voyeurism. Granted that one kiss we get from the beginning sets the tone and looks like Schlesinger opening the final lock that contained his narrative inhibitions; right after it, the film strikes for how restrained, reasonable and measured it is. It's a word I've encountered more than once in both Roger Ebert and Vincent Canby's reviews: 'civilized'. To some degree, there's something civilized in the three characters' upbringing that spilled over their adult life and incidentally to the storytelling approach, more polished than you'd expect.
Now, I won't be the reviewers' review and I wasn't disappointed by the film as much I was disappointed by my incapability to integrate what is so great about. I guess fifty years after its release, the shock factor has worn out and for me, the film became a sort of exercise in normality with scenes lingering on needless details especially during the expositional parts. We gather that Alex (Glenda Jackson) is the baby sitter to five kids who belong to a very bourgeois and liberal family (the parents accept the relationship with Bob) and Daniel is a middle-aged celibate who can't wait for the weekend to be with Bob.
Basically, we have two people passionately in love with a man and accepts to share him literally and figuratively. But Bob, being the bohemian artist sculptor acting his age, gives so little of himself with the exception of his body and a portion of his time, it's hard for the viewer to consider him as a fully-dimensioned character and I understand that his likability isn't the point. And I agree that the film isn't much about love than a sort of resignation from the two sad persons in the name of love. But their patience is challenged again with the opportunity offered to Bob to travel to America and show his work.
Schleinsger patiently, without making any fuss about the relationships show love between reasonable people, and it ironically leads to the film's most memorable moments involving other characters. This is the kind of film where a kid is shown smoking pot, a young Daniel Day-Lewis is among a street-gang keying expensive cars, a dog dies in a freak accident and two couples argue during charades... so many interesting things happening and yet the director is forcing us to bath in that muddy triangular love filled with more expectations and waiting than true moments of passions. Maybe because love is worth all the waiting and as Ebert pointed out, "something is better than nothing".
This is a strange film seriously, strange because there are so many powerful moments that hit the right chord, the opening dialogue between Daniel and his patient starts off very well until it's cut because Daniel has an important phone call. There's another discussion between Alex and her mother (Peggy Ashcroft) where she understands that marital life can be devoid of passion and she tried to leave her husband until realizing that there was more than a meaning to her life she needed, maybe a presence is enough. We never see the mother again. Then there's a great interaction between Alex and a client (Tony Britton) fired because of age discrimination and I could feel a deeper connection than with Alex.
Daniel is given other shining moments, one with a former lover with a heroin addiction. There's also an extended sequence where Daniel gets a little more density and we see his background during a Bar Mitzvah celebration, a tradition-bound jewish family trying to find him a wife and the pressure is obviously a hint on why he chose to live a rather recluse life and we can see what's easting him. Bob however isn't given no other interactions whatsoever except with Daniel and Alex, playing a double role as someone who drives and dampers, the lives of two good persons who'd do everything for him.
"Sunday, Bloody Sunday" insists on the fact that we sometimes miss a great deal of our lives because we're in love with someone who don't deserve it, but the consolation of being in love is paradoxically greater than the chagrin caused by that love. That's how intelligent and modern "Sunday, Bloody Sunday" is, raising some aspects of the modern couple that would ring even truer in our times of solitudes and Internet-driven desires, where love has lost a meaning while still being the meaning of everything.
But for all its capability to provide great and sober scenes, I'm afraid the film hasn't dated as well as many classics of the era. It is highly marked by the 1970s and the insistance on the social crisis never exactly finds a point of convergence within the story (liberal crisis? Freedom?), the film could as well have talked about IRA to seek relevance (though the title had me fooled)
First of all, the performance of Hackman was as critically acclaimed as Peter Finch playing Dr. Daniel Hirsh. Secondly, Schlesinger's "Midnight Cowboy", while keeping the relationship between Rico and Joe Buck closer to the 'bromance' archetype, left enough implicitness and ultimately won the Best Picture Oscar. Finally, I believe it would be missing the point to make "Sunday, Bloody Sunday" a movie about homosexuality, and I doubt that was the intent of John Schelinsger or screenwriter Penelope Gilliat.
"Sunday, Bloody Sunday" handles the same-sex relationship subject in such a casual and matter-of-factly way you can tell that it was a deliberate choice not to leap into spectacularity or voyeurism. Granted that one kiss we get from the beginning sets the tone and looks like Schlesinger opening the final lock that contained his narrative inhibitions; right after it, the film strikes for how restrained, reasonable and measured it is. It's a word I've encountered more than once in both Roger Ebert and Vincent Canby's reviews: 'civilized'. To some degree, there's something civilized in the three characters' upbringing that spilled over their adult life and incidentally to the storytelling approach, more polished than you'd expect.
Now, I won't be the reviewers' review and I wasn't disappointed by the film as much I was disappointed by my incapability to integrate what is so great about. I guess fifty years after its release, the shock factor has worn out and for me, the film became a sort of exercise in normality with scenes lingering on needless details especially during the expositional parts. We gather that Alex (Glenda Jackson) is the baby sitter to five kids who belong to a very bourgeois and liberal family (the parents accept the relationship with Bob) and Daniel is a middle-aged celibate who can't wait for the weekend to be with Bob.
Basically, we have two people passionately in love with a man and accepts to share him literally and figuratively. But Bob, being the bohemian artist sculptor acting his age, gives so little of himself with the exception of his body and a portion of his time, it's hard for the viewer to consider him as a fully-dimensioned character and I understand that his likability isn't the point. And I agree that the film isn't much about love than a sort of resignation from the two sad persons in the name of love. But their patience is challenged again with the opportunity offered to Bob to travel to America and show his work.
Schleinsger patiently, without making any fuss about the relationships show love between reasonable people, and it ironically leads to the film's most memorable moments involving other characters. This is the kind of film where a kid is shown smoking pot, a young Daniel Day-Lewis is among a street-gang keying expensive cars, a dog dies in a freak accident and two couples argue during charades... so many interesting things happening and yet the director is forcing us to bath in that muddy triangular love filled with more expectations and waiting than true moments of passions. Maybe because love is worth all the waiting and as Ebert pointed out, "something is better than nothing".
This is a strange film seriously, strange because there are so many powerful moments that hit the right chord, the opening dialogue between Daniel and his patient starts off very well until it's cut because Daniel has an important phone call. There's another discussion between Alex and her mother (Peggy Ashcroft) where she understands that marital life can be devoid of passion and she tried to leave her husband until realizing that there was more than a meaning to her life she needed, maybe a presence is enough. We never see the mother again. Then there's a great interaction between Alex and a client (Tony Britton) fired because of age discrimination and I could feel a deeper connection than with Alex.
Daniel is given other shining moments, one with a former lover with a heroin addiction. There's also an extended sequence where Daniel gets a little more density and we see his background during a Bar Mitzvah celebration, a tradition-bound jewish family trying to find him a wife and the pressure is obviously a hint on why he chose to live a rather recluse life and we can see what's easting him. Bob however isn't given no other interactions whatsoever except with Daniel and Alex, playing a double role as someone who drives and dampers, the lives of two good persons who'd do everything for him.
"Sunday, Bloody Sunday" insists on the fact that we sometimes miss a great deal of our lives because we're in love with someone who don't deserve it, but the consolation of being in love is paradoxically greater than the chagrin caused by that love. That's how intelligent and modern "Sunday, Bloody Sunday" is, raising some aspects of the modern couple that would ring even truer in our times of solitudes and Internet-driven desires, where love has lost a meaning while still being the meaning of everything.
But for all its capability to provide great and sober scenes, I'm afraid the film hasn't dated as well as many classics of the era. It is highly marked by the 1970s and the insistance on the social crisis never exactly finds a point of convergence within the story (liberal crisis? Freedom?), the film could as well have talked about IRA to seek relevance (though the title had me fooled)
- ElMaruecan82
- Aug 17, 2021
- Permalink
The setting is London of 1970 and shows privileged people against a background of economic crisis and West End squalor. The main feature is intended (I believe) to be a love triangle whose base is a straight woman (Glenda Jackson) working in a recruitment firm and a gay doctor (Peter Finch) and whose apex is a bisexual artist (Murray Head). The Jackson and Finch characters are solid, sympathetic, interesting and credible, but the artist is so utterly heartless and, above all, frivolous that it's difficult to imagine anyone being in love with him for more than a night. This weakens the film considerably. Moreover the gay aspect is no longer (2022) interesting. Instead I was left with a sense of astonishment at how much smoking goes on in this movie; people were lighting up at every opportunity and puffing enthusiastically. Actually the smoking was more enthusiastic than any sex that went on.
- xerxesqarquebus-34598
- Feb 18, 2022
- Permalink
When I saw this film in 1971, I was too young to understand the basic human compassion that Schlesinger and Gilliat were examining when they collaborated on the film.
Having just watched the DVD again, I am truly stunned at how relevant the film has remained. I have never seen anything like it: Glenda Jackson struggles with her own fears of selfishly needing Murray Head; Peter Finch struggles with trying NOT to need/have expectations of him, all the while forgiving Murray Head for never being able to be needed or to meet his expectations.
It is the most adult love story I know.
Having just watched the DVD again, I am truly stunned at how relevant the film has remained. I have never seen anything like it: Glenda Jackson struggles with her own fears of selfishly needing Murray Head; Peter Finch struggles with trying NOT to need/have expectations of him, all the while forgiving Murray Head for never being able to be needed or to meet his expectations.
It is the most adult love story I know.
A very maturely executed drama that's most remarkable feature - its calm and reasonable handling of sexual diversity - has now largely been integrated into society. It remains an intimate and realistic study of character and the details of life, though it is weakened by the central relationships, and the supposed passion between the main characters, being unconvincing.
- Quinoa_Chris_Kirk
- Sep 26, 2019
- Permalink
I can understand why this film was important at its time, but I think that, having been spoiled with so many great films over the years and coming to it so late, it doesn't really compare or seem very relevant any more. They don't actually make a fuss of the homosexual element thankfully, it just is. There's no awkward coming out scenes or prejudice towards the LGBT community. In fact, in some ways it's a bit too free and bohemian, detracting from the story itself with obnoxious children and odd friends.
I didn't like the characters enough to make a connection with any of them and found that the film dragged on a bit and didn't really have a purposeful story. Was it to show that love shouldn't be shared between more than two people? Was it just a way of making a film about relationships that don't fit the standard biblical framework? Or was it saying five kids and a dog are too much for people to handle?
If this film was made today, they would have to be more sympathetic to the situation and emote better. The wishy-washy acting would not cut the mustard and more content/dialogue would be needed to give an explanation that is missing from this one. Something to make me care about the romances and be upset by any break ups?
Also, I didn't notice a message that says that no animals were harmed during the making of the film, but I hope that was the case.
I didn't like the characters enough to make a connection with any of them and found that the film dragged on a bit and didn't really have a purposeful story. Was it to show that love shouldn't be shared between more than two people? Was it just a way of making a film about relationships that don't fit the standard biblical framework? Or was it saying five kids and a dog are too much for people to handle?
If this film was made today, they would have to be more sympathetic to the situation and emote better. The wishy-washy acting would not cut the mustard and more content/dialogue would be needed to give an explanation that is missing from this one. Something to make me care about the romances and be upset by any break ups?
Also, I didn't notice a message that says that no animals were harmed during the making of the film, but I hope that was the case.
- adamjohns-42575
- Oct 13, 2020
- Permalink
"Sunday Bloody Sunday", which tells the story of two older adults (Glenda Jackson and Peter Finch) who are discreetly in an parallel relationship with a young, irresponsible artist (Murray Head), has never appeared on free television (i.e.: U.S. network and syndicated television). Unlike John Schlesinger's previous movie of two years earlier, the Oscar-winning "Midnight Cowboy", I have never seen this movie in a sanitized, edited version and I'm very glad of that.
Former New Yorker movie critic Penelope Gilliatt wrote a brilliant character study. In a very quiet, non-judgmental and unassuming way, I wonder if the story is a bit of an autobiography in the life of openly gay director John Schlesinger?
Very adult, thought-provoking and extremely well-acted, "Sunday Bloody Sunday" was made in 1971 and despite some dated 70s trappings, is still way ahead of most movies that deal with the subjects of sexuality and adult relationships.
Former New Yorker movie critic Penelope Gilliatt wrote a brilliant character study. In a very quiet, non-judgmental and unassuming way, I wonder if the story is a bit of an autobiography in the life of openly gay director John Schlesinger?
Very adult, thought-provoking and extremely well-acted, "Sunday Bloody Sunday" was made in 1971 and despite some dated 70s trappings, is still way ahead of most movies that deal with the subjects of sexuality and adult relationships.
This was a step forward for Schlesinger. After the grim working class stories--A Kind of Loving, with Alan Bates and June Ritchie miserable over an unwanted pregnancy; Billy Liar with Tom Courtenay constantly fantasizing as a way of coping with his dull life--we got Darling, a slick bit of commercial film-making with Julie Christie. Then the trip to New York for Midnight Cowboy, a picture so empty, and so honored by the Academy, that I feared he would become just another hack, a la Clive Donner.
Instead we get a character study, one of the best films of the last three decades. Daniel Hirsch is drowning in respectability; a Jewish doctor who can't muster the courage to come out because the congregation wouldn't understand, so resigns himself to matchmaking attempts by his mother. Alex Greville works with high level job candidates, whom she can sleep with to chase the boredom away. She wants a husband, but her mother advises her to accept that half a loaf is better than none. Bob Elkin is the love object for both; a handsome and really shallow young man who thinks about his future a lot, and realizes that it doesn't involve either Alex or Daniel.
So many wonderful scenes: Bob and Alex visit friends for the weekend. Bob raids the fridge, finds some milk. Alex tells him it's mother's milk--phwoah! Daniel has a party; a woman starts yelling at her husband about the au pair girl he's been sleeping with. Bob wants to leave; his aesthetic sense is offended by this unseemly display of emotion. Daniel wants him to stay, to provide moral support, but Bob is just too selfish to listen. There is always the feeling that disaster is just around the corner, that the triangle will soon collapse.
Glenda Jackson and Peter Finch are just about perfect as the adults in this situation, and Murray Head, if he doesn't show any great acting ability, at least makes us believe in his desirability. He went on to perform roughly the same role as Annie Girardot's lover in La Mandarine.
Instead we get a character study, one of the best films of the last three decades. Daniel Hirsch is drowning in respectability; a Jewish doctor who can't muster the courage to come out because the congregation wouldn't understand, so resigns himself to matchmaking attempts by his mother. Alex Greville works with high level job candidates, whom she can sleep with to chase the boredom away. She wants a husband, but her mother advises her to accept that half a loaf is better than none. Bob Elkin is the love object for both; a handsome and really shallow young man who thinks about his future a lot, and realizes that it doesn't involve either Alex or Daniel.
So many wonderful scenes: Bob and Alex visit friends for the weekend. Bob raids the fridge, finds some milk. Alex tells him it's mother's milk--phwoah! Daniel has a party; a woman starts yelling at her husband about the au pair girl he's been sleeping with. Bob wants to leave; his aesthetic sense is offended by this unseemly display of emotion. Daniel wants him to stay, to provide moral support, but Bob is just too selfish to listen. There is always the feeling that disaster is just around the corner, that the triangle will soon collapse.
Glenda Jackson and Peter Finch are just about perfect as the adults in this situation, and Murray Head, if he doesn't show any great acting ability, at least makes us believe in his desirability. He went on to perform roughly the same role as Annie Girardot's lover in La Mandarine.
- rgcustomer
- Apr 23, 2013
- Permalink
Even with The Code now a thing of the past it took the United Kingdom and a respected director from there to craft a film showing two men in a passionate kiss. When Peter Finch and Murray Head kissed like they meant it, it was untold generations of gay men felt like society was finally recognizing them. That Sunday Bloody Sunday came out two years after the Stonewall Riots was no accident. Probably before Stonewall, John Schlesinger might have had problems getting his film released on this side of the pond. And that's even after Midnight Cowboy.
Murray Head plays a shallow bisexual young artist who has a simultaneous relationship going with both Peter Finch and Glenda Jackson. Jackson is a thirty something career woman who can't find any great satisfaction in relationships beyond sex. That Murray Head supplies well and in abundance apparently, so much so that he can also service Peter Finch as well.
Jackson should have listened to mom's advice. Peggy Ashcroft who plays Jackson's mother says quite right that you never get 100%, so you get the best you can and make it work. Apparently this is something that Glenda can't or won't grasp.
For Peter Finch as the very closeted gay male the pressures are far worse. He's Jewish and he's a doctor and apparently it's true in both British and American Jewish scenes that if you're a doctor you'll have Jewish women throwing themselves at you and Jewish mothers ready to sacrifice all for a doctor as a son-in-law. And the idea of a forty something unmarried doctor who might be gay is just beyond all realm of possibility. Such a thing would be a SHANDA.
Peter Finch strikes a universal note in all gay males in any culture. Before the closet doors were open, Dr. Daniel Hirsch's story was played out a gazillion times all over the world. Thank the Deity we have reached a point where Daniel Hirsch's life path is not the only one open to us.
Sunday Bloody Sunday has no real plot, it's a character study of two people and their intertwining relationships because of a third party. There's no real plot here, but the characterizations are as deep as they can get. Sunday Bloody Sunday earned Oscar nominations for Peter Finch and Glenda Jackson as Best Actor and Actress, John Schlesinger for Best Director and Penelope Gilliatt as well for Best Original Screenplay. All that and no nomination for Best Picture?
I do kind of wonder where Murray Head's character is right now. Since this came out in 1971 Head was playing someone 25 which was his age at the time. He partied through the seventies, did he settle down with someone of either gender, did indiscriminate sex bring him in contact with AIDS in the eighties and nineties? Is he looking now for some young Murray Heads in his sixties? Was he really transgender and if so has he had the reassignment surgery or not? You can read all of that into his portrayal of a vacuous party boy.
In a way Sunday Bloody Sunday is about the tragedy of bisexuals in this society. They can't settle down to a monogamous relationship because they have sexual needs on both sides of the fence. Maybe that will change one day too.
Sunday Bloody Sunday is a landmark classic, especially recommended for a young gay audience who wants to see what life in the uptight days of the universal closet was like.
Murray Head plays a shallow bisexual young artist who has a simultaneous relationship going with both Peter Finch and Glenda Jackson. Jackson is a thirty something career woman who can't find any great satisfaction in relationships beyond sex. That Murray Head supplies well and in abundance apparently, so much so that he can also service Peter Finch as well.
Jackson should have listened to mom's advice. Peggy Ashcroft who plays Jackson's mother says quite right that you never get 100%, so you get the best you can and make it work. Apparently this is something that Glenda can't or won't grasp.
For Peter Finch as the very closeted gay male the pressures are far worse. He's Jewish and he's a doctor and apparently it's true in both British and American Jewish scenes that if you're a doctor you'll have Jewish women throwing themselves at you and Jewish mothers ready to sacrifice all for a doctor as a son-in-law. And the idea of a forty something unmarried doctor who might be gay is just beyond all realm of possibility. Such a thing would be a SHANDA.
Peter Finch strikes a universal note in all gay males in any culture. Before the closet doors were open, Dr. Daniel Hirsch's story was played out a gazillion times all over the world. Thank the Deity we have reached a point where Daniel Hirsch's life path is not the only one open to us.
Sunday Bloody Sunday has no real plot, it's a character study of two people and their intertwining relationships because of a third party. There's no real plot here, but the characterizations are as deep as they can get. Sunday Bloody Sunday earned Oscar nominations for Peter Finch and Glenda Jackson as Best Actor and Actress, John Schlesinger for Best Director and Penelope Gilliatt as well for Best Original Screenplay. All that and no nomination for Best Picture?
I do kind of wonder where Murray Head's character is right now. Since this came out in 1971 Head was playing someone 25 which was his age at the time. He partied through the seventies, did he settle down with someone of either gender, did indiscriminate sex bring him in contact with AIDS in the eighties and nineties? Is he looking now for some young Murray Heads in his sixties? Was he really transgender and if so has he had the reassignment surgery or not? You can read all of that into his portrayal of a vacuous party boy.
In a way Sunday Bloody Sunday is about the tragedy of bisexuals in this society. They can't settle down to a monogamous relationship because they have sexual needs on both sides of the fence. Maybe that will change one day too.
Sunday Bloody Sunday is a landmark classic, especially recommended for a young gay audience who wants to see what life in the uptight days of the universal closet was like.
- bkoganbing
- Mar 22, 2008
- Permalink
With a title like Sunday Bloody Sunday, you'd expect something explosive. Instead, this is a very quiet and internal character piece, but it is surprisingly effective in a lot of ways. Daniel Hirsh (Peter Finch) and Alex Greville (Glenda Jackson) are two Londoners connected by their individual relationships with the young Bob Elkin (Murray Head). Both of them want all of Bob, but he refuses to let himself settle down with one and thus they both must settle for a portion of what they really want.
This is the focal point of the plot, but the film strives for a much more universal theme about the world and what true happiness actually means. It seems to say that it doesn't exist, or at least that to hope for it is futile. These two characters are forced to ask themselves the question of whether having no joy is better than having some, but not all. It's a very innovative character study that is ahead of it's time not only in it's themes, but also in it's honest portrayal of these characters (along with how it played a gay relationship in the same way that it played a straight one). There are never any melodramatic shouting matches or violent rages; everything is played in a much more honest and passive fashion.
Director John Schlesinger creates a compelling and fully lived-in tone, making us feel as though we are just watching human beings rather than actors portraying characters. This no doubt comes with the help of the superb performances from Finch, Jackson and Head. Finch and Jackson in particular are forced to have the whole weight of the film's theme on their shoulders, but their internal work is brilliant. Within them there is such heartbreak and the way they display their utter loneliness on their worn faces is wrenching, but there's also a slight hope to them by the end. Finch has a monologue at the end that brought a tear to my eye with it's simultaneous sensations of remorse and hopefulness.
The film sparingly uses flashbacks, but when it does they do a nice job of getting us into the character's heads without relying too much on them. Instead, Schlesinger lays the film on Finch and Jackson and they deliver in spades. Two tremendous performances in an excellently drawn film. It leaves a lot up to the audience, letting things play out naturally and without exaggeration. It's also got Daniel Day-Lewis in his brief, uncredited, first screen appearance.
This is the focal point of the plot, but the film strives for a much more universal theme about the world and what true happiness actually means. It seems to say that it doesn't exist, or at least that to hope for it is futile. These two characters are forced to ask themselves the question of whether having no joy is better than having some, but not all. It's a very innovative character study that is ahead of it's time not only in it's themes, but also in it's honest portrayal of these characters (along with how it played a gay relationship in the same way that it played a straight one). There are never any melodramatic shouting matches or violent rages; everything is played in a much more honest and passive fashion.
Director John Schlesinger creates a compelling and fully lived-in tone, making us feel as though we are just watching human beings rather than actors portraying characters. This no doubt comes with the help of the superb performances from Finch, Jackson and Head. Finch and Jackson in particular are forced to have the whole weight of the film's theme on their shoulders, but their internal work is brilliant. Within them there is such heartbreak and the way they display their utter loneliness on their worn faces is wrenching, but there's also a slight hope to them by the end. Finch has a monologue at the end that brought a tear to my eye with it's simultaneous sensations of remorse and hopefulness.
The film sparingly uses flashbacks, but when it does they do a nice job of getting us into the character's heads without relying too much on them. Instead, Schlesinger lays the film on Finch and Jackson and they deliver in spades. Two tremendous performances in an excellently drawn film. It leaves a lot up to the audience, letting things play out naturally and without exaggeration. It's also got Daniel Day-Lewis in his brief, uncredited, first screen appearance.
- Rockwell_Cronenberg
- Feb 2, 2012
- Permalink
I saw Sunday,BLOODY Sunday when it came out and own it in DVD format. Being born in 1949, I feel totally in touch with this story, its characters, and the superb way John Schlesinger translated it into film. I have seldom seen such a deep, adult treatment of human relationships. SBS is particularly sensitive to the smallest details of what it means to live and love in our times. The Penelope Gilliatt screenplay is so masterful in showing the many aspects of the personal universe of each character that every emotion is perfectly rendered, balancing dark and light moments in just the right way. Peter Finch, Glenda Jackson,Peggy Ashcroft and Bessie Love are a joy to watch, to say nothing of the other actors, all splendid. I treasure this film.
Schlesinger's direction with its abrupt cuts and odd camera angles screams "sixties" in every frame. Grows quite wearying.
The story is autobiographical in many ways. Like the protagonist Dr. Hirsch, John Schlesinger was both homosexual and Jewish and there is a medical background there, too. His father was a doctor.
As played by Peter Finch, Dr. Hirsch is the quintessence of English middle-class respectability. A sympathetic doctor, a good citizen, well-adjusted, even slightly dull--one never would suspect he is gay--or Jewish. (As proof of the latter he volunteers a closely guarded secret: a fondness for chopped liver.)
It is the straight people around him who seem to have all the problems. A married couple argues loudly and profanely at a party; children are left in the care of an unmarried couple while the parents go off to somewhere.
There are no young or attractive women in the film. The sex appeal is all in the male ingénue/love object played by an androgynous Murray Head.
The story is autobiographical in many ways. Like the protagonist Dr. Hirsch, John Schlesinger was both homosexual and Jewish and there is a medical background there, too. His father was a doctor.
As played by Peter Finch, Dr. Hirsch is the quintessence of English middle-class respectability. A sympathetic doctor, a good citizen, well-adjusted, even slightly dull--one never would suspect he is gay--or Jewish. (As proof of the latter he volunteers a closely guarded secret: a fondness for chopped liver.)
It is the straight people around him who seem to have all the problems. A married couple argues loudly and profanely at a party; children are left in the care of an unmarried couple while the parents go off to somewhere.
There are no young or attractive women in the film. The sex appeal is all in the male ingénue/love object played by an androgynous Murray Head.
Once-daring British melodrama has young man (Murray Head) dividing his time and affections between a gay doctor (Peter Finch) and a haughty female executive (Glenda Jackson). There is one man-to-man smooch...so much for all the controversy. Director John Schlesinger seems far more interested in the work-a-day rut of the characters than the human drama at hand. In fact, there are so many segues to the British switchboard, the viewer might happen upon the picture thinking it to be a commercial for the overseas telephone system! Brackish color, dull locales, lugubrious ambiance, however some solid work from the reliable Peter Finch almost makes it worth-seeing. *1/2 from ****
- moonspinner55
- Aug 4, 2001
- Permalink
- classicsoncall
- Jul 12, 2019
- Permalink
Sunday bloody sunday is a film that had potential to be a lot better then it was,but thanks to some not so quality storytelling and not interest in characters i didnt reached hights that film wanted for me to reach,for that time this film was maybe revolutionary and controversial but today we get so many films that deal with this subject that this film doesnt feel like something special,there are also some films that deal with same subject but they were able to show it better and potreyed it a better way,sunday bloody sunday was a film that had interesting premise but in end i didnt get what i wanted from it
- marmar-69780
- Apr 24, 2020
- Permalink
Amidst plenty of nude shots of Glenda Jackson, we are treated to the truisms that straight people argue all the time, they have boring friends, and they also have children who make a lot of noise and won't let you sleep. Either that or the only interesting thing in the world is sex.
Frankly, I'm not sure what the point of this movie is and only the high sheen of professionalism throughout kept it watchable.
Frankly, I'm not sure what the point of this movie is and only the high sheen of professionalism throughout kept it watchable.