This drama is well acted and beautifully shot, with gorgeous, dramatic lighting and some interesting camera angles and movement. The story is cleverly written as a thriller, keeping the audience guessing, and building up sympathy for the characters before explaining their "abnormality" (probably a necessary tactic in 1961). Like other British movies of the time period, the film is not action-packed by today's standards, but the suspense is maintained, and I never found my attention wandering. Some of the dialogue is didactic, but is usually well-enough handled that it doesn't destroy the line of the story.
I didn't agree with another IMDB viewer that the movie portrayed homosexuality purely as "an affliction": my impression was that the writers were trying to show the common view of the time. Certainly most homosexuals in that era would have been affected by the general attitude and internalized the idea that they are abnormal and shameful, and the movie shows this. (Some of the dialogue may be difficult for gay people today to watch, since it is very insulting.) However, I wasn't convinced the authors fully agreed with the straight characters who were sympathetically condescending, partly because of the pains they took to create strong gay characters, and also because of the glimmers the film offers of a better future. [NEXT SENTENCES may contain slight SPOILERS] Listen to the trio of characters Bogarde confronts toward the end of the film: are they all filled with shame? What about the reaction of Bogarde's law assistant? The handling of a particular photo also supports this idea: it is hidden for most of the story, and then turns out to contain a more poetic and sympathetic image than we'd expected.
Some viewers think "Victim" is no longer socially relevant, but I disagree: not only are many parts of the world still very anti-homosexual, but the idea that homosexuality is a choice is current in America, and this movie is one of the few I've seen that explores what happens when someone tries to force himself to lead a "normal" life. Is that character happy in his "choice"? Are the people in his family better off because he made that decision? The film presents a complex story and lets the viewer decide.
One thing I did find outdated was the impression the authors give that homosexual men are more sensitive and fragile than straight men. However, this provides an opportunity for several scenes involving tears or held-back tears, which are well-acted. I can understand why some people thought the film had too many secondary characters, but I thought most of them were colorful and interesting, so I wouldn't have wanted to cut them out.
All in all, an interesting movie for those who like to consider social issues.
I didn't agree with another IMDB viewer that the movie portrayed homosexuality purely as "an affliction": my impression was that the writers were trying to show the common view of the time. Certainly most homosexuals in that era would have been affected by the general attitude and internalized the idea that they are abnormal and shameful, and the movie shows this. (Some of the dialogue may be difficult for gay people today to watch, since it is very insulting.) However, I wasn't convinced the authors fully agreed with the straight characters who were sympathetically condescending, partly because of the pains they took to create strong gay characters, and also because of the glimmers the film offers of a better future. [NEXT SENTENCES may contain slight SPOILERS] Listen to the trio of characters Bogarde confronts toward the end of the film: are they all filled with shame? What about the reaction of Bogarde's law assistant? The handling of a particular photo also supports this idea: it is hidden for most of the story, and then turns out to contain a more poetic and sympathetic image than we'd expected.
Some viewers think "Victim" is no longer socially relevant, but I disagree: not only are many parts of the world still very anti-homosexual, but the idea that homosexuality is a choice is current in America, and this movie is one of the few I've seen that explores what happens when someone tries to force himself to lead a "normal" life. Is that character happy in his "choice"? Are the people in his family better off because he made that decision? The film presents a complex story and lets the viewer decide.
One thing I did find outdated was the impression the authors give that homosexual men are more sensitive and fragile than straight men. However, this provides an opportunity for several scenes involving tears or held-back tears, which are well-acted. I can understand why some people thought the film had too many secondary characters, but I thought most of them were colorful and interesting, so I wouldn't have wanted to cut them out.
All in all, an interesting movie for those who like to consider social issues.