MoPoshy Absolutely brilliant

Nessieldwi Very interesting film. Was caught on the premise when seeing the trailer but unsure as to what the outcome would be for the showing. As it turns out, it was a very good film.

Calum Hutton It's a good bad... and worth a popcorn matinée. While it's easy to lament what could have been...

Lachlan Coulson This is a gorgeous movie made by a gorgeous spirit.

bobbie-16 A drunken and violent wife-beater, a man who falsifies his military record and molests women in movie theaters, a sleeping pill addict who wrecked her own marriage, a pathetically depressed and repressed girl, and a vindictive mean-spirited self-righteous old woman...if you would like to spend two hours with this bunch of losers and creeps, this movie is for you.We are meant to feel all warm and fuzzy about them, and I guess some viewers did in 1958 and some still do (to judge from the reviews). The writing is terrible and the characters are so pathetic that I walked out before the end.The only good thing about seeing this movie is that it shows there has been a bit of progress in gender relations since 1958: Wife-battering and groping women in movie theaters are now less likely to be seen as lovable little foibles.

JohnHowardReid NOTES: The Academy of Motion Picture Arts and Sciences' Award, Best Actor, David Niven, defeating Tony Curtis in The Defiant Ones, Paul Newman in Cat on a Hot Tin Roof, Sidney Poitier in The Defiant Ones and Spencer Tracy in The Old Man and the Sea.The Academy of Motion Picture Arts and Sciences' Award, Best Supporting Actress, Wendy Hiller, defeating Peggy Cass in Auntie Mame, Martha Hyer in Some Came Running, Maureen Stapleton in Lonelyhearts, and Cara Williams in The Defiant Ones.Also nominated for Best Picture (won by Gigi), Best Actress, Deborah Kerr (won by Susan Hayward for I Want To Live), Best Screenplay based on material from another medium (won by Gigi), Best Black-and- white Cinematography (won by The Defiant Ones), Best Scoring of a Drama or Comedy (won by The Old Man and the Sea).With a domestic rentals gross of $2.7 million, number 20 at U.S./Canadian ticket windows for 1959. Oddly, although it took good money, the movie was nowhere near as successful in the United Kingdom. In Australia, however, the picture was a colossal success, placing no less than 7th at the national box-office in what was an extremely difficult year for cinemas with that new novelty of television finally starting to really bite into capital city revenues. David Niven, Best Actor — New York Film Critics. David Niven, Best Actor — Foreign Language Press of New York. Deborah Kerr, Best Actress — Foreign Language Press of New York. David Niven, Best Dramatic Actor — Hollywood Foreign Press. Second to The Old Man and the Sea as Best American Film of 1958 — The National Board of Review. Best Film of the Year — New York Daily News. 7th Best of the Year — Film Daily annual poll of American film critics. 5th Best of 1958 — The New York Herald Tribune. 7th Best of 1958 — The New York Post. 2nd to Gigi as the Best Film of 1958 — The New York Daily Mirror. 4th Best Movie of 1958 — Filmfacts composite list. One of the ten best films of the year on the alphabetical lists published by The News Orleans Times-Picayune, The New York Journal American, and The New York World-Telegram. The above of course is merely a sample of the numerous awards and nominations accorded to Separate Tables.COMMENT: Originally presented on the West End (London) stage with enormous critical and public support, "Separate Tables" was re- staged with even more acclaim on Broadway. In fact, both the Broadway play and Rattigan were nominated for a Tony Award. It was inevitable that such a triumph be eyed by Hollywood. No- one, however, was more aware of the problems confronting a movie version than Rattigan himself. He felt that "Separate Tables" would not make a successful, or even a feasible motion picture unless its plot could be ingeniously reconstructed into one unified narrative. Therefore, when he sold the film rights to Hecht, Hill and Lancaster, Rattigan insisted that he be engaged to write the screenplay.In making this transformation, the somewhat downbeat and noirish elements of the original play have been modified. Nonetheless, the characters themselves have been strengthened and made more interesting so that players like David Niven, Deborah Kerr, Gladys Cooper and Wendy Hiller would have a field day.However, despite the well-merited adulation for Niven, Kerr and Cooper, I thought the players in the other segment of the movie, namely the other original one-act play, equally and perhaps even more deserving. Wendy Hiller figures in both episodes, but she is at her best in these other segment scenes. At the same time, Burt Lancaster never gave a better performance, while Rita Hayworth absolutely dazzles with her brilliance.

TheLittleSongbird After watching the Terence Rattigan DVD collection (with most of the adaptations being from the 70s and 80s) when staying with family friends last year, Rattigan very quickly became one of my favourite playwrights and he still is. His dialogue is so intelligent, witty and meaty, his characterisation so dynamic, complex and real and the storytelling so beautifully constructed.'Separate Tables' for all those reasons and how Rattigan brings emotional and psychological complexities to real life situations is classic Rattigan, to me one of his best. This 1958 film does it justice. Other adaptations of Rattigan did better jobs at opening out the source material, notable examples being 1951's 'The Browning Version' and 1948's 'The Winslow Boy', but keeping things confined here in 'Separate Tables' was in keeping with the characters' situations without being too stagy.The weakest element of 'Separate Tables' is that while Rod Taylor and Audrey Dalton are appealing their material isn't as interesting or as meaty as that for the rest of the characters. Otherwise there is little to complain about.Rattigan's writing shines brilliantly in 'Separate Tables', to me he was one of the great playwrights/writers of the 20th century who didn't deserve to go out of fashion (or so that seems to be the case). It has so much intelligence, insight, meaty complexity, emotional impact and the odd bit of humour (though much of the play bases itself around a serious subject). Is the film talky? Sure. Then again as was said for 1948's 'The Winslow Boy', the play is talky and Rattigan in general is talky.As well as clever, consummate storytelling, it's melodramatic but in an incredibly insightful, intricately intimate, honest and poignant way that tells so much about the characters and their situations, the film doesn't get overwrought or overheated and the ending is one particularly powerful scene.Production values are handsome, and wisely kept simple rather than going for big, grand, lavish spectacle that would most likely have been overblown and swamped the drama and characterisation which would have wrecked things completely. Didn't think that Delbert Mann's direction was bland at all, it's restrained and low-key but always assured.One cannot not mention the wonderful casting. Although not having the strongest characters, Taylor and Dalton are still good, but the more well-known names in more interesting roles dominate. David Niven received an Oscar for his performance here, despite his screen time not being long judging from his moving performance of a seemingly blustery character who darkens vastly in demeanour it was deserved. Deborah Kerr's performance as a meek, mousy character is deeply felt, she avoids too being too meek to be bland. Wendy Hiller is understated and sympathetic.Burt Lancaster has fun while also bringing intensity and vulnerability. Rita Hayworth, one of Hollywood's most glamorous beauties, has rarely been more heart-wrenching. One can't forget the superbly domineering Gladys Cooper either.Overall, a beautiful film and as good a film adaptation of 'Separate Tables' as one would find anywhere. 9/10 Bethany Cox

urbisoler-1 Actually, I would rate this film a bit higher than 8 if I knew how to do so. You wouldn't think that a film where the action takes place in virtually one room would qualify for greatness but the character studies alone make this film outstanding. One of the best ever. Fortunately, there is sufficient variety in character to keep one's interest at a high level. You don't have time for your mind to question why one behaves thus before the story is already involved with another character's dilemma. And, you don't have time to critique how well a character displays an emotion before the impact is felt elsewhere. If you are a collector of fine films, this one belongs in your collection.