I thought the movie was very sympathetic to Moon, also... not to the informant, but lots of detail has to be lost in translation to film. I felt there was no condemnation from the film (or Birkin) about Moon's homosexuality.
Vinnie is mentioned three times: at the beginning, when Birkin's having nightmares of the war and calling out for her, then when Moon asks Birkin if he's married and he says yes, her name is Vinnie, but she's left me for another chap; and then at the end, when Birkin gets a letter from Vinnie asking to get back together, Moon asks if he will, and Birkin smiles gently and replies, "I generally do."
I recently read the book and was amazed to find that I far preferred the movie: a rare thing for me, a reader. The movie is sparing and emotional with very few words. The book felt flabby after watching the film. I would love to split a bottle of wine with Pat O'Connor and discuss this picture for hours.
The end was slightly confusing to me because of the editing, making it seem as if young Birkin saw old Birkin... but I think that was unintentional.
One of my favorite films.
No, the movie didn't condemn Moon's homosexuality, but it veared away from the book by having the salesman condemn him. Dramatic effect? After I read the book I didn't see the point.
I felt the Old Birkin seeing the young birkin at the end was a strange ending, but I feel it was intentional if somewhat misguided. Birkin looked back on himself, and saw a man who had lost something twice...his innocence thru the war from which he seemingly recovered, and his soul mate from which, it was inferred, he never recovered.