A sad story that one is relieved to recognize as not likely to be true.

Rating: 6/10 (14 May 2008)

Being loved by two girls at once, as for example by two sisters, does not seem to be as much of a neat thing as this reviewer always imagined, never having had the experience himself. That is, it's not if one of the sisters has a mean streak and disposes with the common object of desire rather than seeing it being swept up by the sisterly rival. In this case, the means of disposal presented itself by a case of rape that, too, provided new insights into a heretofore murky area of human relations. It took place at night in the park of the manor when all members and guests of that multitudinous household were searching for two run-away boys. So there were a number of possible perpetrators; but it's curious that the victim had no clue which one it was, although she, like everyone else of the search party, was presumably equipped with a flashlight (or a "torch", as the British might say). It is even more puzzling that said perpetrator was able to carry out his deed with one hand over the girl's eyes (to prevent her from seeing him) and the other hand over her mouth (to prevent her from crying for help) - a properly dressed girl of the English upper classes. It is true, pantyhose hadn't been invented yet, and, this being the middle of summer, even those famous British knickers had been dispensed with (as we observed gleefully when the older sister took a dip in the fountain) - but still, the dresses were long and cumbersome. What comes across as not less puzzling is the English criminal justice system that gives more weight to a 12-year old girl of a known fancy disposition than to a series of character witnesses (which were hopefully heard) plus the fact that the accused was at the time of the crime in another area of the grounds actually finding the missing boys. If taking the story seriously, one begins to wonder in light of these puzzles, (i) whether the claim of rape was actually a cover-up of an inopportunely caught dalliance; and (ii) whether the British class system's preferred way of dealing with an unpleasant incidence is the quick conviction of a middle-class patsy, rather than an earnest investigation that might lead to the unfortunate discovery of one of their own. However, the film does not give strong enough hints that the story's author had such possibilities in mind.
However, while the film placed all the guilt and remorse on the young girl's shoulders and showed how she suffered under it for the rest of her life, it should certainly have shed some light on the thoughts and feelings of the rapist or surprised lover; whatever he was, he was the really guilty party. One might be led to think that he was completely oblivious to the harm he caused to others; but displaying this contrast clearly would have rendered the movie more complete, and possibly ameliorated those slightly unconvincing events at the beginning.
Speaking of unconvincing events: That the British were not further tackled by the Germans when they scrambled from the continent at Dunkirk is wondrous but historically true; that some (or at least one) of them got, in the middle of that cacophony, his feet washed by a French woman, must be classified as utter piffle. Or was that to be taken allegorically? Oh, stupid me.