43 reviews
Quite a special and singular film! I was not expecting the movie to go the route it did but I was very glad it did. Most films that go down the absurd path that this did usually end up somewhere in a pool of camp or B-movie status, but this movie has enough plausible meaning, and is written, acted, and delivered with such impeccable talent that it holds ground as a film that can be taken seriously thoroughly in all regards. The concept is quite brilliant and daring and it was pulled off in a manner that is only more impressive as the movie continues - there is intelligence behind it. I was thinking through most of it how it surprisingly didn't remind me of most other British films or even British humor that I have observed - the only thing I could really place it with is some of the more bizarre Australian books, shows, and films I have taken in over the years. Richard E. Grant honestly gives an Oscar worthy performance in this - he is a maniac, and his range deserves immense praise. The film does feel somewhat inconclusive, but I really don't have many complaints about it... I am excited to check out the director's most notable film, Withnail & I, soon.
- Stay_away_from_the_Metropol
- Mar 30, 2020
- Permalink
Just like having dandruff, B.O., and/or bad breath, having boils (especially one that has a bad attitude and can talk) is certainly no laughing matter, or is it?
It would be an understatement to say that having a lippy, ego-centric carbuncle can make one extremely unpopular at any social function.
So you can well-imagine the unpleasant predicament advertising whizz-kid, Dennis Bagley, found himself in when, sure enough, he discovered a sizable, jabbering boil growing out of his shoulder, at the base of his neck.
For the most part, I found 'How To Get Ahead In Advertising' to be quite a novel and entertaining look at the ill-effects of job-related stress, paranoia, and split-personality disorder.
Offensive, insulting, quirky, & bizarre - Actor Richard Grant (and all of his agitated and haywire ranting & raving) delivered a hyperactive, adrenaline-rush performance as Dennis Bagley, the hilariously irritating ass from "Boil Busters".
Even though this 1989, British comedy wouldn't suit everyone's tastes, it still does contain enough genuinely comical moments to make it worth at least one honest viewing.
Yes. This film definitely hit its fair share of bona-fide bum-notes, but, generally speaking, its cynical and sneering look at the advertising business was quite a frank, and, yes, even refreshing one, at times.
It would be an understatement to say that having a lippy, ego-centric carbuncle can make one extremely unpopular at any social function.
So you can well-imagine the unpleasant predicament advertising whizz-kid, Dennis Bagley, found himself in when, sure enough, he discovered a sizable, jabbering boil growing out of his shoulder, at the base of his neck.
For the most part, I found 'How To Get Ahead In Advertising' to be quite a novel and entertaining look at the ill-effects of job-related stress, paranoia, and split-personality disorder.
Offensive, insulting, quirky, & bizarre - Actor Richard Grant (and all of his agitated and haywire ranting & raving) delivered a hyperactive, adrenaline-rush performance as Dennis Bagley, the hilariously irritating ass from "Boil Busters".
Even though this 1989, British comedy wouldn't suit everyone's tastes, it still does contain enough genuinely comical moments to make it worth at least one honest viewing.
Yes. This film definitely hit its fair share of bona-fide bum-notes, but, generally speaking, its cynical and sneering look at the advertising business was quite a frank, and, yes, even refreshing one, at times.
- strong-122-478885
- Aug 1, 2014
- Permalink
If you want nuance, you'll not find it here, subtlety, pah!!! No, it's laid on with a shovel as advertising executive Richard E Grant discovers advertising is more shallow than a paddling pool, and like said pool, if a toddler was unable to contain a lavatorial need, full of....well,you know what! The trouble is, although we see Grant having his breakdown, becoming obsessive and growing a boil which becomes his alter-ego, we do not see his journey, he's dubbed a success by everyone, but we do not see him succeed. We merely witness the repercussions of his desultory realisation that he's been part of the problem, rather than the solution.
The idea of the talking boil is fun, but the scriptwriter/director didn't know whether to make it surreal, knockabout or farce, in the end sticking to what he perceives as satire. I'd have liked the themes to have been developed more - together with the two differing characters within the same body. We each see thousands of commercials on television, commercialisation is everywhere, referees and umpires have ads on their sleeves, I'm expecting the police to have sponsors' names on their trousers when they finally come to get me.
This needed a little more subtlety, more comedy with the beautiful wife, who seemed discomforted by having sex with the brash alter-ego - that could have produced an amusing scene or three.
It's much better that Robert Altman's unsuccessful parody of fashion, Pret-a-Porter, but uses a sledgehammer to lance a boil.
The idea of the talking boil is fun, but the scriptwriter/director didn't know whether to make it surreal, knockabout or farce, in the end sticking to what he perceives as satire. I'd have liked the themes to have been developed more - together with the two differing characters within the same body. We each see thousands of commercials on television, commercialisation is everywhere, referees and umpires have ads on their sleeves, I'm expecting the police to have sponsors' names on their trousers when they finally come to get me.
This needed a little more subtlety, more comedy with the beautiful wife, who seemed discomforted by having sex with the brash alter-ego - that could have produced an amusing scene or three.
It's much better that Robert Altman's unsuccessful parody of fashion, Pret-a-Porter, but uses a sledgehammer to lance a boil.
- michael-1151
- Oct 22, 2010
- Permalink
In Withnail & I, Bruce Robinson made one of the funniest films there is. Therefore it's always going to be hard for anything else he's made to equal his debut. However, in How to Get Ahead in Advertising he comes mighty close.
The reason why Robinson's second film fails to match Withnail & I is because at times it becomes too preachy. There are some great speeches in the film; some wonderful digs at consumerism, but occasionally it descends into uninteresting ranting. Yeah consumerism can turn us into unthinking automatons, and yeah big business is greedy, but you don't really need to point it out so blatantly. We already know this. The film works much better when illustrates the BS or when it jabs at it. It doesn't need to get on its soapbox.
One of my favourite bits in the film is when Bagley (Richard E. Grant) a cocky advertising executive who suddenly loses his magic touch when he has to sell boil cream is listening to a bunch of idiots talking about a newspaper article. As a person who makes a living out of lying, he's appalled that they believe what the press tells them. They then begin to argue (there's a great bit when an Irish priest insists that a woman in a vice den had peanut butter smeared across her tits; it was in the paper so it must be true) and the conversation quickly turns to the boil cream that Bagley has become obsessed with. "They're incurable, all of them. I know that and so does everybody else. Until they get one. Then the rules suddenly change." And then he has a dig at the priest. "They want to believe something works. He knows that, which is why he gets a good look-in with the dying." It's a great scene; it's funny as hell and it also has a good point to make: people consume less out of desire and more out of a desperate sort of hope, or even fear; they hope this product or that product will fill the hole in their lives. They hope it will be the answer to all their problems. And thankfully this scene refrains from the preaching that affects the latter stages. Instead it goes right for the jugular.
But my favourite scene of all is the one with the psychiatrist Bagley has quit his job and developed a hideous boil of his own, one that talks to him and one that has a face. He's talking to the quack with a big bandage on his shoulder. He rants for a while about the way advertisers have ruined television, and then all of a sudden, after silence, the boil speaks. The way it's presented in the film, the boil (at first) has a separate voice to Bagley's. He's not portrayed as Gollum with a satanic pimple; he's not talking to himself. But at the same time you're never really sure whether you're seeing things from Bagley's perspective. He's gone totally crazy, so he may very well be the one saying all this crap. Plus the boil only speaks when Bagley's not looking the other person in the face. But what I love about the scene is the filth the boil speaks and Grant's reactions. His hysteria is hilarious (there's another magnificent bit of hysteria in the film when the boil first 'speaks', Bagley is so shocked that he runs to the kitchen, shaking and spazzing like he's got St Vitus' dance. Grant is amazing at working himself up into a lather). And then the boil asks Bagley to tell the shrink about his grandfather. "My grandfather was caught molesting a wallaby in a private zoo in 1919." "A wallaby?" "It may have been a kangaroo. I'm not sure." "You mean sexually?" "I suppose so. He had his hand in its pouch." I haven't heard dialogue that funny in a long time.
I also love the scene when Bagley is admitted to hospital to have the boil lanced. By now he's completely raving. He's going on and on about the evils of consumerism. So then the boil says, "You commies don't half talk a lot of s***." Magnificent! It's the sort of argument a Daily Mail reader would give. Criticise capitalism and you must be a goddamned Red. However, I can see where the boil is coming from. There are certainly times when Robinson is too militant. Like I said before, he really doesn't need to stand so high on his soapbox. But at the same time the film makes some excellent points. It's just that the film works better when it does it through comedy rather than rhetoric.
Another great scene, one that takes a poke at society's hypocrisy, is when Bagley argues with a feminist who thinks men should bleed. "And I think you're a vegan who eats meat in secret. You see, she doesn't deny it. She's a vegan who eats meat in secret." "I do not eat meat!" "But you'll eat fish, you'll eat fish until the cows come home." "Fish is allowed!" Of course, this enrages Bagley.
But although hypocritical lefties get a kicking too, the film, early on, raises an interesting point. If you're anti-consumerism, how do you spread your message without advertising? It's a bit of a kick in the teeth, that.
However, Robinson is smart enough to know that consumerism is here to stay. The film doesn't end with any hope. All we can look forward to is more advertising, more spending and more products. The world is one magnificent shop, indeed.
The reason why Robinson's second film fails to match Withnail & I is because at times it becomes too preachy. There are some great speeches in the film; some wonderful digs at consumerism, but occasionally it descends into uninteresting ranting. Yeah consumerism can turn us into unthinking automatons, and yeah big business is greedy, but you don't really need to point it out so blatantly. We already know this. The film works much better when illustrates the BS or when it jabs at it. It doesn't need to get on its soapbox.
One of my favourite bits in the film is when Bagley (Richard E. Grant) a cocky advertising executive who suddenly loses his magic touch when he has to sell boil cream is listening to a bunch of idiots talking about a newspaper article. As a person who makes a living out of lying, he's appalled that they believe what the press tells them. They then begin to argue (there's a great bit when an Irish priest insists that a woman in a vice den had peanut butter smeared across her tits; it was in the paper so it must be true) and the conversation quickly turns to the boil cream that Bagley has become obsessed with. "They're incurable, all of them. I know that and so does everybody else. Until they get one. Then the rules suddenly change." And then he has a dig at the priest. "They want to believe something works. He knows that, which is why he gets a good look-in with the dying." It's a great scene; it's funny as hell and it also has a good point to make: people consume less out of desire and more out of a desperate sort of hope, or even fear; they hope this product or that product will fill the hole in their lives. They hope it will be the answer to all their problems. And thankfully this scene refrains from the preaching that affects the latter stages. Instead it goes right for the jugular.
But my favourite scene of all is the one with the psychiatrist Bagley has quit his job and developed a hideous boil of his own, one that talks to him and one that has a face. He's talking to the quack with a big bandage on his shoulder. He rants for a while about the way advertisers have ruined television, and then all of a sudden, after silence, the boil speaks. The way it's presented in the film, the boil (at first) has a separate voice to Bagley's. He's not portrayed as Gollum with a satanic pimple; he's not talking to himself. But at the same time you're never really sure whether you're seeing things from Bagley's perspective. He's gone totally crazy, so he may very well be the one saying all this crap. Plus the boil only speaks when Bagley's not looking the other person in the face. But what I love about the scene is the filth the boil speaks and Grant's reactions. His hysteria is hilarious (there's another magnificent bit of hysteria in the film when the boil first 'speaks', Bagley is so shocked that he runs to the kitchen, shaking and spazzing like he's got St Vitus' dance. Grant is amazing at working himself up into a lather). And then the boil asks Bagley to tell the shrink about his grandfather. "My grandfather was caught molesting a wallaby in a private zoo in 1919." "A wallaby?" "It may have been a kangaroo. I'm not sure." "You mean sexually?" "I suppose so. He had his hand in its pouch." I haven't heard dialogue that funny in a long time.
I also love the scene when Bagley is admitted to hospital to have the boil lanced. By now he's completely raving. He's going on and on about the evils of consumerism. So then the boil says, "You commies don't half talk a lot of s***." Magnificent! It's the sort of argument a Daily Mail reader would give. Criticise capitalism and you must be a goddamned Red. However, I can see where the boil is coming from. There are certainly times when Robinson is too militant. Like I said before, he really doesn't need to stand so high on his soapbox. But at the same time the film makes some excellent points. It's just that the film works better when it does it through comedy rather than rhetoric.
Another great scene, one that takes a poke at society's hypocrisy, is when Bagley argues with a feminist who thinks men should bleed. "And I think you're a vegan who eats meat in secret. You see, she doesn't deny it. She's a vegan who eats meat in secret." "I do not eat meat!" "But you'll eat fish, you'll eat fish until the cows come home." "Fish is allowed!" Of course, this enrages Bagley.
But although hypocritical lefties get a kicking too, the film, early on, raises an interesting point. If you're anti-consumerism, how do you spread your message without advertising? It's a bit of a kick in the teeth, that.
However, Robinson is smart enough to know that consumerism is here to stay. The film doesn't end with any hope. All we can look forward to is more advertising, more spending and more products. The world is one magnificent shop, indeed.
- Ricky_Roma__
- Mar 13, 2006
- Permalink
- Leofwine_draca
- Dec 25, 2017
- Permalink
Denis Dimbleby Bagley (Richard E. Grant) is an amoral British ad executive. He's willing to sell anything to anyone. His next product pimple cream makes him obsessed with boils. His wife Julia Bagley (Rachel Ward) is concerned. He starts breaking down and growing a boil on his left shoulder. He's in the hospital to have it removed when it starts growing into a new head. His real head is lanced and the boil takes over his life as the new head.
Bruce Robinson's previous directing/writing effort 'Withnail and I' is a British indie darling. Richard E. Grant returns with brilliant effect. It is a dark rant on the ills of consumerism and a little obvious. It would be great to have more plot rather than a diatribe. This would have been a great Twilight Zone episode. A story is needed around the zit cream. Otherwise, it's a good surreal effective satire.
Bruce Robinson's previous directing/writing effort 'Withnail and I' is a British indie darling. Richard E. Grant returns with brilliant effect. It is a dark rant on the ills of consumerism and a little obvious. It would be great to have more plot rather than a diatribe. This would have been a great Twilight Zone episode. A story is needed around the zit cream. Otherwise, it's a good surreal effective satire.
- SnoopyStyle
- May 6, 2017
- Permalink
- vertigo_14
- Apr 18, 2004
- Permalink
This highly original comedy was Robinson's follow up to the drunken crowdpleaser Withal & I. In comparison, there are equal one-liners here, with two Grants for the price of one and a strong stance against greed, consumerism and Margaret Thatcher. The transplant scene is awesome!
Only reason it's not 10/10 is that is gets a little too preach near the end.
Only reason it's not 10/10 is that is gets a little too preach near the end.
Hilarious, bitter satire of adverising, humanity, and personality. Ad exec Dennis Bagley gets so hung up on boils developing a "boilbusters" ad campaign that he grows a malignant boil which takes on its own personality and eventually takes over the show. Grant is perfect in the lead role, the direction and photography are excellent, and the effects cheap but grotesque. There are so many hilarious scenes, I found myself laughing out loud through most of the film even though I saw it by myself! I love the scene where Bagley explains to his wife why the boil only talks to her when she turns away : "He's waiting for you to do it!" A classic, should be sought out by all fans of sadistic humour(especially British, i.e. League of Gentlemen, Monty Python) .
Re-used a few withnail jokes... Funny at first, and then got rather serious in a way and ended abruptly and left rather too much unfinished.
Still worth owning. Richard E Grants performance is superb.
Still worth owning. Richard E Grants performance is superb.
- CaptainSick
- Dec 30, 2019
- Permalink
This is a severely underrated film. Richard Grant's more-than-capable slimeball antics are put to a very worthy test in this bitter little polemic about consumerism. It's very British, and very 80's, but its message is still as universal as ever, and the execution is wickedly original, affecting, and cough-out-loud funny.
The only negative point about the movie is the occasionally lax direction towards the end, but that's just a quibble.
Overall, this is definitely very cool, and highly recommended to fans of Withnail and I, Network, and Fight Club who want something nice and bitter at the end of the day.
This would make an awesome play...
The only negative point about the movie is the occasionally lax direction towards the end, but that's just a quibble.
Overall, this is definitely very cool, and highly recommended to fans of Withnail and I, Network, and Fight Club who want something nice and bitter at the end of the day.
This would make an awesome play...
- David Sticher
- Nov 19, 2000
- Permalink
What made good satire film? You might not have an idea. But everybody knows when they see a good one. Good satire film must succeed in good storytelling while making their statement. But it rarely to see a film that proudly calls themselves as a good one. As it might be a great chance that they couldn't find a right ingredient and then transformed into some kind of silly spoof or complete disaster (i.e. American Dreamz, Prêt-à-Porter, and The Bonfire of the Vanities). Anyway, there's an exception in some cases. This is a case that they don't particularly care much about story at all, and somehow it's still very intriguing to see. "How to Get Ahead in Advertising" is full-on sermonizing film that can talk you to the death. But the point that they wanted to make is so clear even you can't possibly not to appreciate by it.
Here is the best way to put social-commentary into the film. You build story around the massage that you want to convey, and then making it as ridiculous as possible. Dennis (Richard E. Grant) is an advertising agent and a career obsessive young man who can't find his way in the new pimple cream campaign. His ongoing stress is causing him a nervous breakdown as he rejects everybody around him including his wife, Julia (Rachel Ward), his boss, John Bristol (Richard Wilson). And his rejection finally causes him a boil that constantly growing on his shoulder. Not soon after, it starts talking to him and developing into another head. Eventually, it starts to take control his entire body.
What's wrong about Consumerism? Or Materialism? They may not give you the best idea about it. But at least they are absolutely right about what we have become or going to be. Personally, I think the film comes ahead of its time. We're talking about technology (i.e. Car, TV, Internet and everything) that plays a significant role in your everyday life. People can't possibly live without it. And we're constantly reminded by one thing called "an advertising". They will make you realize what you have missed in your life. But didn't the customer know that it doesn't really give a s**t about what your basic needs or what you have missed. All they care is selling whatever they have in the store.
As it goes along, the film constantly transformed itself from dark comedy into pure madness. If we're not judging a movie on a social-commentary point-of-view (which is the main point of this project), but instead, focus on character study, it's still a very good film. Because I think it also can be a battle between consciences Dennis and his devil inside. We saw that he kept this balance quite well at the beginning. But soon after his breakdown, he began to reject his job and all consumerism perspective in everyday life. And because of that, his devil inside, who takes a lead role in Dennis's life until now, tried to resist and began to reclaim the body. In the end, it really doesn't matter that who won. But all the remaining is a pure demonic living human.
All this, it couldn't be possible succeed if the actor who plays Dennis wasn't Richard E. Grant (whom, I think is awfully underrated actor working today). It's a daring and pretty intense role. With all the monologues (including one of the best and magnificent epilogue in movie history) and insane things he had to do, he nailed it and did it so powerful that we can't take our eyes off him. It's like, the director; Bruce Robinson took out his soul and his brain and put it in this amazing actor.
I have yet to see Withnail & I (1987) which is the first collaboration between Bruce Robinson and Richard E. Grant. But if this film is an only film that Bruce and Richard did together, I won't be complaining about it. "How to Get Ahead in Advertising" is an honest film. It totally believes what it wanted to say. It might sound absolutely ridiculous sometime. But many times it perfectly precise. Tell me, don't you agree with our protagonist that "The world is one magnificent friggin' shop, and if it hasn't got a price tag, it isn't worth having"?
BloodyMonday Rating: 3/4
Here is the best way to put social-commentary into the film. You build story around the massage that you want to convey, and then making it as ridiculous as possible. Dennis (Richard E. Grant) is an advertising agent and a career obsessive young man who can't find his way in the new pimple cream campaign. His ongoing stress is causing him a nervous breakdown as he rejects everybody around him including his wife, Julia (Rachel Ward), his boss, John Bristol (Richard Wilson). And his rejection finally causes him a boil that constantly growing on his shoulder. Not soon after, it starts talking to him and developing into another head. Eventually, it starts to take control his entire body.
What's wrong about Consumerism? Or Materialism? They may not give you the best idea about it. But at least they are absolutely right about what we have become or going to be. Personally, I think the film comes ahead of its time. We're talking about technology (i.e. Car, TV, Internet and everything) that plays a significant role in your everyday life. People can't possibly live without it. And we're constantly reminded by one thing called "an advertising". They will make you realize what you have missed in your life. But didn't the customer know that it doesn't really give a s**t about what your basic needs or what you have missed. All they care is selling whatever they have in the store.
As it goes along, the film constantly transformed itself from dark comedy into pure madness. If we're not judging a movie on a social-commentary point-of-view (which is the main point of this project), but instead, focus on character study, it's still a very good film. Because I think it also can be a battle between consciences Dennis and his devil inside. We saw that he kept this balance quite well at the beginning. But soon after his breakdown, he began to reject his job and all consumerism perspective in everyday life. And because of that, his devil inside, who takes a lead role in Dennis's life until now, tried to resist and began to reclaim the body. In the end, it really doesn't matter that who won. But all the remaining is a pure demonic living human.
All this, it couldn't be possible succeed if the actor who plays Dennis wasn't Richard E. Grant (whom, I think is awfully underrated actor working today). It's a daring and pretty intense role. With all the monologues (including one of the best and magnificent epilogue in movie history) and insane things he had to do, he nailed it and did it so powerful that we can't take our eyes off him. It's like, the director; Bruce Robinson took out his soul and his brain and put it in this amazing actor.
I have yet to see Withnail & I (1987) which is the first collaboration between Bruce Robinson and Richard E. Grant. But if this film is an only film that Bruce and Richard did together, I won't be complaining about it. "How to Get Ahead in Advertising" is an honest film. It totally believes what it wanted to say. It might sound absolutely ridiculous sometime. But many times it perfectly precise. Tell me, don't you agree with our protagonist that "The world is one magnificent friggin' shop, and if it hasn't got a price tag, it isn't worth having"?
BloodyMonday Rating: 3/4
- bloodymonday
- May 20, 2008
- Permalink
This movie does not know what it wants to be. Above all, it should be a comedy, but there is a problem: it is not funny. Richard Grant and his typical overacting are so annoying that you do not care about what he is going through. No way this movie deserves the 6.8 stars it has now. It should be 3.8. Tops.
- Freethinker_Atheist
- Mar 22, 2022
- Permalink
How to Get Ahead in Advertising
The best way to get ahead in advertising is to know the devil.
Unfortunately, since the frazzled ad man in this comedy isn't acquitted with Lucifer, he will have to get a head literally.
With a growing concern over the ethical nature of his profession, ad executive Bagley (Richard E. Grant) becomes mentally unhinged.
While struggling to come up with a slogan for a zit cream, his mania is compounded by the appearance of a pustule on his shoulder that has begun to speak to him.
In addition to the power of verbalization, over time, the abnormal abscess develops a mouth, eyes and a face, which is strikingly similar to his own, save for the moustache.
A stimulating and surreal British satire, How To Get Ahead in Advertising is a paradigm of the psychological mindset needed to survive in marketing.
Furthermore, having two heads means there's always someone to make-out with. (Green Light)
The best way to get ahead in advertising is to know the devil.
Unfortunately, since the frazzled ad man in this comedy isn't acquitted with Lucifer, he will have to get a head literally.
With a growing concern over the ethical nature of his profession, ad executive Bagley (Richard E. Grant) becomes mentally unhinged.
While struggling to come up with a slogan for a zit cream, his mania is compounded by the appearance of a pustule on his shoulder that has begun to speak to him.
In addition to the power of verbalization, over time, the abnormal abscess develops a mouth, eyes and a face, which is strikingly similar to his own, save for the moustache.
A stimulating and surreal British satire, How To Get Ahead in Advertising is a paradigm of the psychological mindset needed to survive in marketing.
Furthermore, having two heads means there's always someone to make-out with. (Green Light)
- jaredmobarak
- Dec 9, 2006
- Permalink
- hohumdedum2
- Jul 21, 2004
- Permalink
This movie is a riot. Richard E Grant gives an amazingly intense performance. His entire role seems to consist of nothing but brilliantly scabrous monologues. His acerbic take on everything around him starts at a fever pitch and then giddily topples over into outright inspired lunacy. See this film if for no other reason than to get a glimpse of him naked save for a kitchen apron, gleefully stuffing raw chickens down the toilet drain and all the while explaining, " Everything I do makes sense, everything i do has a reason!"
I prefer this style of over the top attack much more than the drier and more subtle (!) mode employed by both writer-director Bruce Robinson and Richard E. Grant in their first collaboration, WITHNAIL & I.
The heights of comic outlandishness achieved in HOW TO GET AHEAD IN ADVERTISING is something that is rarely achieved by any film and it is doubly commendable that everything done here ( no matter how tastelessly crazy) still never stoops to the childishly vulgar levels that most American comedies regularly splash about in like mental asylum inmates happily playing with their own feces. Yes, despite everything this film attempts ( and achieves) it still retains a sense of sophistication that shows what thuddingly awful garbage ( i am looking directly at you AUSTIN POWERS, SCARY MOVIE, etc, etc) is usually regarded as the height of comedy.
I prefer this style of over the top attack much more than the drier and more subtle (!) mode employed by both writer-director Bruce Robinson and Richard E. Grant in their first collaboration, WITHNAIL & I.
The heights of comic outlandishness achieved in HOW TO GET AHEAD IN ADVERTISING is something that is rarely achieved by any film and it is doubly commendable that everything done here ( no matter how tastelessly crazy) still never stoops to the childishly vulgar levels that most American comedies regularly splash about in like mental asylum inmates happily playing with their own feces. Yes, despite everything this film attempts ( and achieves) it still retains a sense of sophistication that shows what thuddingly awful garbage ( i am looking directly at you AUSTIN POWERS, SCARY MOVIE, etc, etc) is usually regarded as the height of comedy.
- raegan_butcher
- Jun 9, 2006
- Permalink
This is really a pretty darn good movie until the ending. 7.0/10.0 I guess I was supposed to listen at the end and be fascinated by the dialogue. I really would have rather seen the two talking heads grow to the same size and be convicted of some crime and be the first double hanging for one person. Or one head could have bit the other in the throat thus causing murder and suicide at the same time. A nice satire but all the same, give me an ending I can sink my teeth into. Would have been nice to seen invasion of the boils from outerspace or a boil on his wife so they could all live happily ever after. Pretty off the wall humor but the ending was just too abrupt and unresolved.
- bellhollow
- May 2, 2004
- Permalink
This brilliant attack on commodification and the misuse of language to cajole consumerism is a must see. I don't like to give anything away so suffice to say that Grant is excellent as the near-schizophrenic hero (anti-hero) who's copy writer's block leads to his confronting the hegemony he operates within. The film mocks the abuse of semiotics in the media; one particularly hilarious scene has Grant battling his fellow-commuters over a newspaper story designed, per Grant's character, Bagley, to lead readers to directed conclusions. In the exchange about a heroin arrest reported in the paper, police allege that a bag containing heroin "may" have also contained marijuana. Bagley burst out with, "It may have contained a f***ing pork pie!" Hilarity ensues, but not devoid of a moral lesson...you may find the rendering of William Blake's "Jerusalem" at the film's conclusion particularly ironically amusing.
- greengene65
- May 8, 2006
- Permalink
This one is a little bit too far off the wall for me, it's almost on the ceiling and the boil is quite nauseating.
Mr. E really is quite freaky here too and this is one of those performances of his that puts me off of him sometimes. He was fine in 'Withnail and I' (198??) and his more recent work has been more tempered, but this is extreme, even for him.
The moral of the insanity and the big brother state force feeding people through advertising is quite valid, but it get's lost in all the craziness.
I do wonder if it would have worked better with maybe Patrick Stewart or someone of that more classic style in the lead role. Richard being slightly eccentric and OTT to begin with.
It should have finished when he was driving his Range Rover on the motorway. That would have been a clever ending.
It's far too weird for me. I won't be watching it again!
080.61/1000.
Mr. E really is quite freaky here too and this is one of those performances of his that puts me off of him sometimes. He was fine in 'Withnail and I' (198??) and his more recent work has been more tempered, but this is extreme, even for him.
The moral of the insanity and the big brother state force feeding people through advertising is quite valid, but it get's lost in all the craziness.
I do wonder if it would have worked better with maybe Patrick Stewart or someone of that more classic style in the lead role. Richard being slightly eccentric and OTT to begin with.
It should have finished when he was driving his Range Rover on the motorway. That would have been a clever ending.
It's far too weird for me. I won't be watching it again!
080.61/1000.
- adamjohns-42575
- Aug 24, 2021
- Permalink
I was so drunk the first time I saw the film, arriving very late at night, that I could not believe such a work had ever been produced. I searched for the original title for years, and recommended it widely. Later, when I got in touch with advertising and marketing professionals, I understood that any absurdity in the movie was only apparent. Indeed, it should be exhibited to every student considering an ad career. I still do not know whether it became a cult movie or not, but it certainly is very special for me. The inner conflicts that Bagley is thrown into, excellent lines thorough the movie, inspired camera placements, a certain do-it-yourself look, these things were perfectly blended to create a very intelligent work (with the exact amount of weirdness). Simply astonishing.
An advertising executive suffers a mid life crisis when a large boil growing on his neck starts to talk. Stars Richard E Grant.
Weird dark comedy about the negative role advertising plays in the modern world. Grant is wacky as ever.
This film was too weird for me.
Weird dark comedy about the negative role advertising plays in the modern world. Grant is wacky as ever.
This film was too weird for me.
Absolutely stunning tour de force for Richard E Grant, deeply moving, hilarious, superb script and impressive performances from all concerned.
Bagley's a complicated character : it's not fair to say that he was ever UNaware of what he was doing in advertising...... but certainly we catch him at a crossroads: he's decided that enough is enough and he simply can't carry on being the bad guy...... but times change again before it's too late, except his brief episode of goodness is enough to convince his wife that he's not worth living with........
tragic, beautiful, complex, with a great and moving film-score based in parts on Saint-Saens' organ symphony......
Bagley's a complicated character : it's not fair to say that he was ever UNaware of what he was doing in advertising...... but certainly we catch him at a crossroads: he's decided that enough is enough and he simply can't carry on being the bad guy...... but times change again before it's too late, except his brief episode of goodness is enough to convince his wife that he's not worth living with........
tragic, beautiful, complex, with a great and moving film-score based in parts on Saint-Saens' organ symphony......
- imdb-12257
- Feb 2, 2006
- Permalink
Its a brave, scathingly funny film that might be an acquired taste. This one definitely needs a memorable quotes section!! For a film made so long ago, its quite an accurate and eerie depiction of what the PR industry has mutated into...
- outsider-2
- Jan 19, 2003
- Permalink