Anton Diffring – Fabian/ Headmaster — Fahrenheit 451 (film)

"Jeremy Spenser – Man with the Apple"

"[to Linda] You spend your whole life in front of that family wall. These books are my family. When did we first meet? And where?"

"Most books don’t make people think, and print is not in itself a danger to totalitarianism. That is a crotchety little librarians view of books. Print is as neutral as the television screen. And so were back from the primitive appeal of the gimmick to the Orwell vision of censorship and terror. And yet such is the power of the gimmick that I swear I heard people in the theatre murmur at the astuteness of that nonsensical explanation for book-burning. Youd think theyd never read a book, theyre so willing to treat books as magical objects. And that is, of course, how the movie treats them: the gimmick turns books—any books—into totems, and this is part of the gimmicks appeal to educated audiences, and its probably a stronger appeal than a more rational treatment of the dangers of censorship could make."

"The movie is so listless we have what we should never have in a gimmicky thriller: time to notice inconsistencies. People know how to read; why are they taught? Why are the book people hiding libraries in town instead of smuggling them to the woods? (Do they have a secret lending library?) Why are we shown the hero revealing his guilt to his co-workers (in scenes like his inability to go up the fire-pole) if it doesnt lead to any consequences? Why are we shown an antagonism between Werner and another fireman (Anton Diffring) which never develops into anything functional in the structure? Why is it so easy to escape to the woods? Couldnt Truffaut or anyone think up a better contrivance to bring the book girl back than the need to retrieve an incriminating list of names (of people who memorize books!)? The actions in this movie dont flow from the theme; O.K. we can accept that if, at least, theyre ingenious. But theyre not. Still, all the holes in the plot would just make it seem lacy and airy if the movie had rhythm, if it moved purposefully, if the moods surprised us or intrigued us. Why doesn’t it?"

"IF François Truffaut were trying to make literature seem dull and the whole hideous practice of book-burning seem no more shocking than putting a blow-torch to a pile of leaves, he could not have accomplished his purpose much better than he unintentionally has in his first motion picture made in English, Fahrenheit 451. Holy smoke! What a pretentious and pedantic production he has made of Ray Bradburys futuristic story of a fireman in a hypothetical state where all reading matter is forbidden and the fire departments job is to police the citizens who try to keep books in hiding!"

"A woman who bravely reads books is more likely to be socially constructive than one who is hung on TV. And the contrast arranged by Mr. Truffaut—a homely bookworm versus a beauteous TV fan—is a suitable one for illustrating the austerity of dedication to books.But it makes for pretty dreary entertainment when you have to sit there and watch a frozen-faced Mr. Werner piously turn away from a long-haired, voluptuous Julie Christie and go marching off down the railway tracks in quest of the bleak, bobbed-haired Miss Christie who has gone to the land where the book-people are."