If you've seen Sleuth on the stage, or know the twists and tricks from the Olivier-Caine film of Shaffer's original story, you'll be pleasantly surprised by this. This is Harold Pinter rather than Anthony Shaffer, especially in the second half. Without giving too much away, at this point Pinter departs completely from Shaffer's original conception. Jude Law really comes alive here (he's rather wooden and too 'actorish' in the first half or so.) Caine is superb throughout - and I was reminded of a workshop he did on TV some years ago. The actors he was teaching didn't realise that on the big screen (watched on TV and even more so at the cinema) every twitch and grimace and facial expression is important. One's face is blown up to huge proportions, and one can say, or hint at, a thousand feelings - without having to say a word. (James Stewart was a master at this - think of 'Rope,' for instance).
There are some changes, of course. Caine is much less of a snobbish faux aristocrat than Olivier's Andrew Wyke - no mention of Wyke's equally 'aristocratic' detective (a poor man's Lord Peter Wimsey)- and it's rather hard to imagine this Wyke as a writer at all. Jude Law pulls off the central part of the plot (always easier to achieve in the theatre than on film) very well - better I think than Caine did back in the Seventies.
The original play ends with everything tied up neatly, but this is Pinter -so ambiguity is everywhere. I was rather reminded of Joseph Losey's 'The Servant' in the second half. Things do eventually come to an end - kind of - even though one is still left thinking, 'What next?' (Pinter was a great writer - shame about his politics.) In twenty or thirty years, will Law play Wyke?
There are some changes, of course. Caine is much less of a snobbish faux aristocrat than Olivier's Andrew Wyke - no mention of Wyke's equally 'aristocratic' detective (a poor man's Lord Peter Wimsey)- and it's rather hard to imagine this Wyke as a writer at all. Jude Law pulls off the central part of the plot (always easier to achieve in the theatre than on film) very well - better I think than Caine did back in the Seventies.
The original play ends with everything tied up neatly, but this is Pinter -so ambiguity is everywhere. I was rather reminded of Joseph Losey's 'The Servant' in the second half. Things do eventually come to an end - kind of - even though one is still left thinking, 'What next?' (Pinter was a great writer - shame about his politics.) In twenty or thirty years, will Law play Wyke?