I will not read any of the reviews for this movie (yet): I want to write my own. I saw this movie in my mid 20's (I paid to see it in a dark dingy theater): back then, it was somewhat wasted on me. Now, in my mid 50's, I suddenly recalled it, and realized what a chord it strikes (which is why I am giving it a rather high score). I won't be saying anything new here: it documents the disintegration of a wonderful relationship between a couple, but documenting it from present day, and going gradually backwards in time, up to the moment of the very first touch and kiss. If I can find this movie - I will see it again. PS: I was surprised that when I did a search of "Betrayal" on the IMDb database this movie did not show up: I had to find it indirectly by searching for "Patricia Hodge".

In 'Betrayal' the narrative is presented backwards, a gimmick employed later by Christopher Nolan in his breakthrough film Memento (2001). Here, we have the breakup of a relationship presented at the beginning and we come to learn later (unfortunately much later) what it was that got the couple together in the first place. (Please don't ask me what that was, because I've already forgotten.) To me, this bizarre form of narration is as pointless as it is exasperating. As 'Betrayal' unfolded, I felt bereft of any kind of causational narrative to cling to. The question being: why should the audience be making notes when it's only a movie and not a university lecture in semantics. The plot becomes so incomprehensible, that the point of the film is totally lost and the entire exercise becomes a pointless waste of time. I sit there in my living room and wonder: will an Edward Van Sloan character stroll on-stage as the proscenium arch is revealed and ask me questions about what I've just seen? And, worse still, expect me to have the answers? I think this is a relevant objection on behalf of the audience who are within their rights to question the methodology which 'Betrayal' employs to tell its so-called 'story': to me there is no story. Instead the film is a collection of fragments cobbled together. It just pretends to be a story, and this does not bode well as the correct method on which to present an entire movie.Written by Harold Pinter, 'Betrayal' stars Patricia Hodges as the woman whom Jeremy Irons is having a secret affair with over a number of years. Naturally they are best friends with the spouse of the other, both who seem to be (at least initially), blissfully unaware of the situation. Hodges and Irons continue their affair secretly in a very sad and dingy-looking apartment. The conversation between them is terribly tedious as we get to hear about the children and the jobs and the cloth-eared spouses who are foolish enough to keep on living with this pair's adulterous behaviour instead of throwing them both out on the street where they belong. Both Hodges and Irons come across as too grasping and selfish for the audience to have any connection with and the entire enterprise has at its core a very dead heart. The only thing in this film that makes any sense is that over a period of time their relationship is finally, if not found out, then at least suspected. I disliked the pair of them so much, I was almost glad. Ben Kingsley has a featured role as Hodge's creepy husband who correctly suspects the worst about what is going on, but it is left to the audience's imagination as to what he is may, or may not, do about it.Personally I sat there in my living room, wondering why 'Betrayal' got made in the first place as it is scarcely entertaining and not nearly as deep as it would like us to think it is. Instead it's nasty, incoherent and an extreme example of movie making at its worst. When a group of ambitious artistes like David Jones and Harold Pinter attempt to make false claims about the medium being a form of high art and attempting to hijack it from the mass audience, this to me is a warning sign of redundant intentions and questionable outcomes. As you may be aware by this review, I was extremely disappointed by 'Betrayal' and the effort fell on deaf ears since I was disengaged, disturbed by its portrayal of men as hypocritical misogynists, (which they probably are, but I don't want to watch it) and turned off by its loopy narrative that honestly, drove me completely up the wall. Not recommended.

It was the first movie I ever walked out of, too; in fact, I might have been cubear's date. I was with my girlfriend at the time, and we walked out about a half hour in. Horrible. A lot of hyper-dramatic dialogue presented out of chronological sequence so it was almost impossible to follow, and I just didn't care enough about any of the characters to make it worth the work of following the incredibly confusing sceenplay.Is Ben Kingsley always a great actor? Sure. But he has to have to have something resembling decent material to work with. Honestly, people were just discussing what was the worst movie ever, and - excepting truly laughable turkeys like Plan 9 from Outer Space - this was the movie I thought of.

Emma (Patricia Hodges) is married with Robert (Ben Kingsley), who is the best friend of Jerry (Jeremy Irons), who is the lover of Emma. The originality of this romance is the way it is told to the viewer, backwards, from the present to the past. Although being theatrical, it is supported by an outstanding cast and is a good entertainment. Basically there is no soundtrack along this drama. My vote is seven.