The Homecoming (1973)

In a dreary North London flat, the site of perpetual psychological warfare, a philosophy professor visits his family after a nine-year absence and introduces the four men - father, uncle and two brothers - to his wife.

Director:

Peter Hall

Writers:

Harold Pinter (play), Harold Pinter (screenplay)

Stars:

Paul Rogers, Ian Holm, Cyril Cusack

Nominated for 1 BAFTA Film Award.

Cast

Cast overview:
Paul Rogers	...	Max
Ian Holm	...	Lenny
Cyril Cusack	...	Sam
Terence Rigby	...	Joey
Michael Jayston	...	Teddy
Vivien Merchant	...	Ruth

Storyline

Max is a surly pensioner who alternately venerates and vilifies his dead wife. Sam, his brother, is a supercilious chauffeur. Lenny is a smiling, snake-like pimp. Joey is a thick-witted, would-be boxer. These four men live together in a North London flat, the site of their perpetual sadomasochistic battle of words and sometimes physical violence. And then after nine years, Max's third son, Teddy, a philosophy professor living in California, comes back home for a visit. He brings his wife, Ruth. She is immediately drawn in to the family's ugly psychological games and quickly proves a worthy opponent. Soon, the game involves both of Teddy's brothers taking extreme liberties with Ruth, as the coiled Teddy obstinately refuses to spoil the malicious fun by objecting.

---

Plot Keywords:

professor | pensioner | chauffeur | pimp | boxer | 

---

Taglines:

The share the house. They share the food. They share Teddy's wife. Such a nice happy family.

---

Genres:

Drama

---

Certificate:

PG

Details

Country:

UK USA

Language:

English

Release Date:

16 April 1977 (France)

Also Known As:

Harold Pinter's The Homecoming

Company Credits

Production Co:

Cinévision Ltée, The American Film Theatre

Technical Specs

Runtime:

111 min

Sound Mix:

Mono

Color:

Color (Eastmancolor)

Aspect Ratio:

1.78 : 1

Did You Know?

Trivia

Ian Holm won the 1967 Tony Award (New York City) for Supporting or Features Actor in a Drama for "The Homecoming" as Lenny and recreated in this filmed production.

---

Quotes

Max: Look what I'm lumbered with. One cast-iron bunch of crap after another. One flow of stinking pus after another.

User Reviews

Harold Pinter's play of ugly psychological warfare within a family proves to be excellent movie material

Max (Paul Rogers) is a surly pensioner who alternately venerates and vilifies his dead wife. Sam (Cyril Cusack), his brother, is a supercilious chauffeur. Lenny (Ian Holm) is a smiling, snake-like pimp. Joey (Terence Rigby) is a thick-witted, would-be boxer. These four men live together in a North London flat, the site of their perpetual sadomasochistic battle of words and sometimes physical violence. And then after nine years, Max's third son, Teddy (Michael Jayston), a philosophy professor living in California, comes back home for a visit. He brings his wife, Ruth (Vivien Merchant). She is immediately drawn in to the family's ugly psychological games and quickly proves a worthy opponent. Soon, the game involves both of Teddy's brothers taking extreme liberties with Ruth, as the coiled Teddy obstinately refuses to spoil the malicious fun by objecting.

At first the dialogue in Harold Pinter's play, little changed for this American Film Theatre production, seems arbitrarily elliptical and the characters' behavior perversely unmotivated, but the thing is so compelling that we realize there must be something more. There is a mad method to the characters' madness. The actors know what their characters are up to. Pinter knows what they're up to. They just don't hand us all the answers on a platter. Maybe Pinter is saying something about families and maybe he's saying something about women, but I think he simply created a set of very real characters and let them do their thing without bothering with a lot of explanations.

The director, Peter Hall, does a good job at staying out of the play's way. His camera does a few clumsy things that draw attention to itself, but mainly he gives the play the space to be what it is. This movie proves yet again that the confined space of a play can often be an advantage on the screen and doesn't necessarily need to be opened up.