Showing posts with label Richard E. Grant. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Richard E. Grant. Show all posts

Saturday, 13 June 2015

Review CIX - How to Get Ahead in Advertising

Review 109
How to Get Ahead in Advertising (1989)

(Image from here featuring Ralph Steadman's crazy art)

I've already talked about how much I loved Withnail and I from Bruce Robinson. However, I always paired this film with How to Get Ahead in Advertising as it came out around the same time (two years after Withnail and I) and also stars Richard E. Grant. The two are not related, but after watching Withnail and I, I always knew I would have to check out How to Get Ahead in Advertising. Years passed and I finally decided to sit down and get a viewing. Somehow it seems fitting after watching whatever that last one was.

Denis Dimbleby Bagley (Richard E. Grant) is an advertising tycoon who is considered one of the best. However, if there's one thing he despises, it's boils. And now he's taken up a job for a pimple cream that is driving him off the edge.

How to Get Ahead in Advertising grew on me (not unlike the boil in the movie). When I watched it, I wasn't really sure how to take it. I mean, Richard E. Grant's performance was over-the-top and the messages were just thrown at you so blatantly. I sat on the fence for a while, but looking back on the film about a week later, I can say I enjoyed it, but it was not a favourite. Why did it take so long for me to decide? We'll get to that.

The movie is a criticism of the advertisement industry and a man who, while thinks he might be able to escape it, is forced back into it quickly. I like that. As Richard E. Grant's character explains at one point, the industry makes you believe what you don't need is what you want, and what you want is what you need. While Denis Bagley originally takes this in stride, he eventually sees the light and decides he's done with his job. Enter the malicious boil, his evil side. The film then gets particularly whacky, which was crazy, but expected from the farce it was. I mean, I didn't mind the whackiness, but I can't say I completely dug it. I guess maybe because I was expecting a different turn, it didn't meet my expectations, but not in the most positive of ways. It seemed like with the introduction of the boil, the film got all rushy and was all over the place. It never really look an easy path, though I remember thinking something similar of Withnail and I. Still, Withnail and I seemed to take it at a better pace than How to Get Ahead in Advertising. Consequently, I prefer Withnail and I.

The film may have been sporadic, but the message was definitely clear - the advertising industry is out to sell, not to help. How much do you really need all these products advertised to you? These diet packages and foods are not necessarily that great for you, but they show you how effective they are at helping you. Still, you could easily lose weight if you put on the proper mindset and did your own research. Or the advertisements that carry a jingle and make you think you need to go somewhere to be happy. Denis Bagley realises he is contributing to this spew of psychological manipulation and decides he's had enough. He could be a typical consumer who makes such an epiphany. However, in the end, Bagley's "bad boil" side comes through and, while now alone and separated from his wife, he doesn't care. The industry does not have room for those with a moral compass, said and done. Now, I won't say all advertising is bad, but there is definitely manipulation that people should be aware of. Psychologists are often hired in order to improve a company's advertising. There are certain tricks that have been established and if they get a product to sell, that's what the company cares about. But if you're aware of what's going on, you're safe. You don't take in the nonsense and you add an adblock on your browser. You don't have to become the all-evil persona of Denis Bagley - you can escape. Having that knowledge should at least put you a step above.

So I agree with the message of the film, great. But I don't like how the film so blatantly tells me its message. I mean, really, what did I expect from such a title. Obviously it would be about the moral standings of advertising, but still. I like a bit more of a puzzle-solver - I like having to think. How to Get Ahead in Advertising gets rid of that. It just straight up says what the advertising industry is doing and then points out what's wrong with it by making the "bad boil" only evil and manipulative. It also just reaffirmed points of view I already followed - it didn't teach me anything new. And again, it just went right up and told me the problem with everything. Thus, I got a sporadic film that got me laughing with Richard E. Grant's comical performance (I love when he pretends to be that woman in the office. I also love the scene where he talks through the box) that lectured me for about 90 minutes about stuff I already knew. It's not bad because at least it's trying to teach people a good message, but you don't really make thinking individuals by just telling them a message - you have to kind of bury it so they can find it themselves. It gives a longer lasting impression. In the end, the only thing that made me enjoy the film was Richard E. Grant's performance (and beauty, hehe) and the message I agreed with. But I can't say it's a film I would watch again because it lacks depth. I prefer it over the stupid crap that is basically an advertisement in itself, but sadly, it ended up just being a rather mediocre film.

Bruce Robinson's How to Get Ahead in Advertising is not a bad piece of cinema, yielding an important take-home message, but its rather shallow story-telling of the matter and rather random and super-fast pacing makes it sub-par in the world of thinking films. Worth a watch for Richard E. Grant and the rather cool special effects.

Thursday, 20 December 2012

Review XXXII - Withnail & I

Review XXXII
Withnail & I (1987)

I received Bruce Robinson's Withnail and I as a Christmas gift last year after having been obsessed with it for ages. I've decided to make watching this film around the holidays a tradition (we'll see how long that lasts). The film stars Richard E. Grant (first thought is Spice World and Warlock - sorry), Paul McGann (the Eighth Doctor), Richard Griffiths (the Harry Potter franchise), and Ralph Brown. It has become a cult classic over the years, but does it really deserve its status? Let's find it!

The film opens to a man smoking, revealing the date to be 1969. Meet the "& I" character of the story (now often referred to as Marwood), played by Paul McGann, a neurotic and pretty crazy down-on-his-luck unemployed actor. Thankfully he has his good friend Withnail (Richard E. Grant), another down-on-his-luck unemployed actor who has a continuous craving for booze, to accompany him in the misery that is their lives. The two decide to escape the city life by bribing Monty (Richard Griffiths), Withnail's queer (in different ways) uncle, in order to stay in his cottage in the country. Things go astray quickly, but as long as the two have the finest wines known to humanity, they should make it out alive.

The first thing I will comment on is its amazing soundtrack. The first scene where Marwood smokes becomes hauntingly beautiful with the addition of the song A Whiter Shade of Pale performed live by King Curtis. Not to mention there does include Jimi Hendrix's version of All Along the Watchtower, his own song Voodoo Child, and The Beatles While My Guitar Gently Weeps. A little tidbit - this is one of the few films to actually include a Beatles song as the surviving members don't often allow their own version of their songs to be in films. The reason it was allowed in this film? George Harrison was a producer and allowed for it to be played. The other songs included are interesting too, but those were the ones that stuck out the most for me as they were the ones I recognised.

I've always been fascinated with the stories of people's lives, even if they are fictional. Films like these, ones just portraying the chaotic events of an individual and how they survived - I find I really enjoy. I feel it seems really biased for me to just judge the plot thus, but personally, I thought this was a really interesting film. Pain is ubiquitous, and it's interesting to see how each person can take it through the use of cinematography. The film also portrays a world I have never experienced - the sixties, for one, and it being in Britain is another. I get to experience life through one individual's anecdote while watching this film, and it's well done. It's well written, humourous, but not excluding the bittersweet end that will always appear eventually.

The acting was well done as well. I have only one complaint, and I've never been sure if this was just ignored or what. At the end of the film (don't worry, I am not going to reveal anything), Marwood at one point is reading a letter while Withnail laughs. It's obvious Paul McGann is supressing laughter, and while later he does actually laugh, I was never sure if this was deliberate or not... It seems odd that he would be laughing, but then again, given the circumstance, it's quite possible he would laugh. I have no personal experience so I wouldn't know. Anyway, besides that one scene where I've always wondered, the acting was great. Richard E. Grant and Paul McGann do great jobs, and Richard Griffiths really steals the show with his portrayal as Monty.

I'd give the film eight stars on ten. It's interesting if you enjoy just listening to a short story in someone's life, and the actors in the film really give you a feel for each character. I'd recommend it to anyone willing to give this quirky film a try any time of the year.

More holiday spirited films to come! (Hopefully!)

Pirate Bay torrent