when the friend, whose flat alec is staying while in the city, comes home, he is furious that alec had a woman there. why was he mad? because alec was married and he didn't approve of his infidelity? or was there another reason i'm missing?
thanks!
I don't know specifically that Alec's friend, Stephen, disapproved of infidelity but I tend to think he did, whether he acknowledged as much or not. His main objection seemed to be with Alec using his own flat for such illicit purposes without having told him his intent. He may have remarked to Alec that they were both 'men of the world' (implying that he was okay with extra-marital affairs) but if he truly approved of infidelity, it doesn't seem likely that he would have objected to Alec using his flat for the purpose. IMO, Stephen acted as though he found the entire business all rather sordid, a woman sneaking out by the back entrance and leaving her scarf behind, and as though he was disappointed with Alec for his behaviour here.
shareI agree w/roghache. Alec kept his intentions to himself, of course. This scene was used to show that Alec, also had to lie and deceive others and keep things under wrap, so to speak. Alec presented himself as "upright", married and so his friend finding this out made Alec feel like a "scussy heel". His friend Stephen's sly look and cheap remarks was not disapproval at infidelity but at his friend's 'rightousness'. This happening might show Alec that he needed to get away and leave Laura, etc..
shareI think Stephen is gay, and might be a bit jealous, but so what? I should think anyone, gay or straight, would be annoyed at a friend using his flat for a back-street affair, or such things without permission. It's imposing on your friend, and also involves Stephen if things blow up to a scandal. Whether he's gay or straight or indifferent, Stephen has a right to be treated with respect, and by an old friend.
Alec's behavior (highlighted by the woman fleeing like a lower-class floozy-brave it out, already!) was a bit low-mannered, and Stephen was disappointed in him for that.
I thought this is rather obvious.
Alec's friend is a homosexual. He is middle age but unmarried and he speaks with a slight effeminate twang. Obviously, Alec is having an affair with his friend, since he has the key to the apartment. Therefore, the friend is angry at Alec for bringing someone into their love nest.
This gay subtext isn't that ridiculous, considering that it is written by Noel Coward.
Thank you for the responses to that scene. ho-aaron, i was wondering about the homosexuality angle but wasn't sure. it did seem pretty overt to me, but i didn't think they'd "go that route" in a movie back then.
I don't know if I agree that Alec and the friend were having an affair, but I definitely go the vibe that the friend felt "jilted".
Very interesting insights, thank you.
Obviously, Alec is having an affair with his friend, since he has the key to the apartment.
The scene between the two men is said to have been the inspiration for Billy Wilder's The Apartment, a story of a junior executive of Madison Avenue who tries to advance professionally by loaning his apartment to his bosses for their extra-marital flings. Wilder said that he wanted to shoot the story from the perspective of the man (in Brief Encounter) who had to climb back into that bed. I agree with roghache that Steven was angry at his flat's use (or attempted use) for that purpose. I'd be angry if a "friend" tried to use my residence to have an affair.
Learning is what most adults will do for a living in the 21st century.
- S.J. Perelman
That's an interesting tidbit about The Apartment, Carolyn. I've never actually seen this movie but will keep on the lookout for it on TCM!
Alec would have made Steven something of an unwitting party to the affair by using his apartment -- and his car (Steven mightn't have been thrilled about that either!). There was the potential embarrassment to Steven if he had arrived at his own flat unexpectedly while the two of them were in bed (if it ever got that far). Alec seemed to play pretty fast and loose with his "friend's" possessions generally, both the car and especially the flat, which made me not have a whole lot of respect for him. I didn't blame Steven in the least for asking Alec to return his key.
I agree, roghache! I recommend The Apartment, too.
Learning is what most adults will do for a living in the 21st century.
- S.J. Perelman
I have to say for some reason that is one of the most fascinating, terrifying scenes I have ever watched in a movie. The more you see of Steven, the scarier he is. Perhaps it's to do with his weird about-turn where he seems to condone Alex's behaviour then in the same breath condemns him. I think he did fancy Alex. What genius to cast career creepy-guy-to-be Vallentine Dyall in that role.
shareAlec's friend is a homosexual. He is middle age but unmarried and he speaks with a slight effeminate twang. Obviously, Alec is having an affair with his friend, since he has the key to the apartment. Therefore, the friend is angry at Alec for bringing someone into their love nest.
I'm sure Stephen was meant to be gay but the hints were subtle, as they had to be in those days. Remember his arch look at Alex when he says that the restaurant "caters for all tastes"? The line doesn't make sense taken literally. Combine that with his petulance over his place being used for a (hetero)sexual liaison, his self proclaimed disappointment, effeminate voice and mannerisms and we have a man with a crush on his friend.
That's a 40s stereotype of homosexuality by the way, not mine.
Why would Stephen be jealous because he's gay when Alex is already married to a woman? He said caters to all tastes as he picked up the scarf she had left. Maybe he thought she was a call girl?
shareI really don't think Stephen was gay. I think that the fact that both Alex and Stephen are both middle-class doctors AND it is the 1930's, it was MOST improper to have an affair outside of marriage here in England. The middle class in England at the time were very 'proper' and Stephen's ire was just the disappointment coming out about his friend's very 'ungentlemanly' conduct. I think you have to be English to recognise this. Back then, in England, people behaved in a certain way. The class system is very much in evidence in this film and most of the characters in this film are middle class which means that 'being proper, good and correct' is very important. It is only the upper classes (the toffs) and the working classes (now known as 'chavs') that don't feel the need (ie are a bit more careless) to follow a moral code. Even now, the middle class in England try to behave properly although infidelity is tolerated a bit more. Back then it really REALLY wasn't. So, in my opinion, Stephen wasn't having a jealous tiff, he believed that an old friend of his was behaving amorally and this was enough to make him disapprove of his friend.
share[deleted]
"I thought this is rather obvious.
Alec's friend is a homosexual. He is middle age but unmarried and he speaks with a slight effeminate twang. Obviously, Alec is having an affair with his friend, since he has the key to the apartment. Therefore, the friend is angry at Alec for bringing someone into their love nest.
This gay subtext isn't that ridiculous, considering that it is written by Noel Coward."
What!? I didn't interpret it that way at all.
Johnson is here, Johnson is here! You're SUCH a good mate!
Having Dyall play Stephen the way he did and having him ask for his key back were clues as to the underlying relationship between the two men. I have come to the conclusion that our Dr. Alec Harvey is a bit of an odd chap. He prefers to spend his Thursday afternoons skiving off from his important job at the hospital to be with a married woman. He lives at an apartment rented by an old "bachelor" friend and is all in all a bit of a dreamer. A bit fly, as it were. Pointing to Alec's bi-sexuality spices things up no end.
He often admits that he is being foolish, but it doesn't stop him from sniffing around.
My sympathies are definitely with Laura, who is a bit swept off her feet by the obviously charming doctor. Johnson's performance is great. Those eyes!
Team Europe
Very interesting to see people still contesting the homosexual subtext here.
I mean, a middle-aged unmarried and effeminate male character created by a famously gay playwright skips out on his regularly-scheduled dinner date with another man (because of a sore throat, lol) so he can rush back home and spend the evening with the man to whom he's not only loaned his home but his car as well, only to turn exceedingly catty and snarky upon discovering a woman's scarf in the "service flat" he proudly and suggestively remarks "caters for all tastes," all the while saying that Alec needn't explain or apologize since they "live in the modern age" and have "been friends for years" and declaring himself to be "the most broad-minded of men" and essentially condoning his friend's unfaithfulness to his wife just before clarifying that he's "not angry, just disappointed" as he basically breaks up with him and demands his key's return before kicking him out for good.
Nope, no subtext THERE, lol.
Haha, great run-down, and convincing too.
shareIt says on Wiki that it wasn't written by Noel Coward, as he only produced it with others.
shareThis explanation had never occurred to me! But it would fit with the context of the scenes in the flat. I don't think it's obvious Alec was also gay though. Bear in mind it was illegal in those days.
shareI watched this film as a teenager and (as a then-terrified closeted homosexual) instinctively knew Stephen was gay.
I've never thought there was any intimacy implied between him and Alec, though.
- - - - - - - -
www.davidlrattigan.com
www.dictionaryofhammer.com
I didn't get the impression that Stephen was gay at all, though I suppose since this was Noel Coward there is that possibility. Certainly Alec and Stephen aren't having an affair--that would destroy all sympathy the audience has with Alec; he's not only cheating on his wife, but cheating on Laura as well, at the same time as saying he loves her.
Alec had the key because he specifically borrowed it from Stephen. He had borrowed Stephen's car that day to go out driving with Laura, which is shown onscreen and explained in the voiceover. Stephen gave him the key so that he could take the car back, and told him he wouldn't be home until late. There is no reason this needs to have homosexual connotations.
As to Stephen's anger, that's a little more mysterious. There could be some alternative, ulterior motives that are not explained. However, I think it seems pretty reasonable to assume that Stephen disapproved of Alec's infidelity. This was a different time and place, and the movie continually emphasizes the strict social rules, with both protagonists expressing fear of being caught repeatedly. This is the only time one of them is actually caught, and Stephen's reaction is exactly as they feared: He is irritated and resentful and self-righteous at finding Alec using his apartment as a place for sex behind his back. (Yes, they don't actually have sex, but Stephen doesn't know that.) This interpretation is supported by the way Alec tells him (paraphrase) "I'm sure you think this terribly vulgar and crude, but actually it's nothing of the sort." He is clearly fighting back against Stephen's moral opprobrium.
In a side note, I felt it was a good thing they broke up at the end. It's a shame they never found each other before now, but to run off and leave their spouses and children really would be wrong. Just because you think you've found personal happiness doesn't give you the right to hurt other people like that. Laura's husband was a good man and he deserved better.
Whew! When that poster said it was obvious Stephen was gay and he and Alec were having an affair, and then several people concurred that feeling, I thought I was going crazy!!
I didn't think he was gay, just a Brit from the 30s/40s. Almost all of them seemed gay, didn't they?
I thought he was just disapproving of Alec's infidelity, and resented that he was using his apartment for the tryst.
It's possible Stephen was gay, but even so, they weren't having an affair. As the other poster said, he just had a crush on his friend.
I agree with the English poster earlier. I think it's just hard for us Americans, especially in 2009, to picture things being so strict and proper once upon a time.
"I'm not trying to get in the middle of 'crazy'."
"I didn't think he was gay, just a Brit from the 30s/40s. Almost all of them seemed gay, didn't they?"
No, only to USians, especially ones who go on about Brits rather than Englishmen, Scotsmen et al, many such USians still think "Brits" seem "gay", as well as thinking there is something wrong with being homosexual.
"Nothings gonna change my world!"
I agree with SusanHampson. We must interpret the scene having in account that was England in the 40s, so that would be a normal reaction.
Maybe in today standards seems weird, but things were really different back there.
My guess is that Stephen IS Noel Coward. And dirtying someone's sheets without their permission is bad form, at the very least.
shareBut Stephen could have just shrugged it off in a more good-natured way, realizing that affairs happen. His stuffy reaction sucked, to coin a phrase.
shareWhen watching the scene the thought of Steve being gay struck my mind as well. With his mannerism and talking about being a man of the world. Still I didn't see them having an affair or anything. Also I believed him when he said he didn't mind what was going on precisely because he understands love need to hide sometimes.
I think he was sore, because his friend wouldn't trust him and be honest with him. That's how I, being gay, having straight friends, would feel.
Well, I read Stephen as gay for sure. I don't know why he couldn't have been, having been created by Noel Coward and all. If Lean/Coward were anything like Hitchcock then I feel sure there may have purposely been something coded to escape censorship.
OTOH, I had no reason to think the two men were having an affair or that Stephen was jealous. Interesting and arguable take though, IMO.
I think people see what they want to see, depending upon their own leanings. For me, I would agree that I would find it distasteful, the idea of a friend bringing a lover and possibly "using" my bed, especially without asking me first (which I would reject.)
shareI also thought that the friend was homosexual and feeling slightly jilted. I don't think there was ever any relationship between them however. I agree with other posters that we shouldn't read too much 2010 culture and preconceptions into the story, but even allowing for the English culture of 1945, I think the hint of homosexuality was clear.
- henry
I didn't see any gay subtext, and even though part of the resentment might be a crush on Alec, I think it's a matter of Stephen being annoyed that Alec was going to use his place for an affair that could possibly result in a public scandal.
Revenge is a dish that best goes stale.
He's an old fashioned prig. Times have changed, divorce wasn't sanctioned by the church back then and adultry was really frowned upon that class (the middle class). The fact that it was clandestine and involved his friend, in as much as he would have to look the other way, was tantamount to making him an accessory to something sordid. The homosexual angle is barking up the wrong tree, but very modern or current. The idea that there might be repressed homosexuality is open to speculation (Coward was homosexual. I don't know much about Lean.), but speculation here misses the point. I may be the only one, but I at least find the friends adhearance to principle, however sanctimonious, admirable.
shareA further thought on this scene, which struck me, when I first saw the movie: Is the purpose of the scene, and the haughty distaste, shown by the other doctor (I've always referred to him as "the other doctor") to remind us that this is two stories in one; a love affair, that ends in frustration, and a betrayal of a decent husband by his errant wife (a sordid escapade, as the other doctor might have it)? We aren't forced to chose, but we will likely do so in the course of the movie.
share