In Bedazzled, Peter Cook played the devil. Here he plays something worse; a man with a clipboard.
As the movie begins, Peter Cook starts following people at an ad agency, writing things down on a clipboard and introducing himself to everyone as Michael Rimmer. He claims to be an employee, yet he has to introduce himself to every single person at the company.
Soon Cook is a pollster, then a politician, each step preceding from the last, each move built on deceit in a world that accepts deceit as the norm, and Cook as one of them.
Cook is a mysterious character. We can see him manipulating events and working his way up the food chain, but there's never a sense of what it's all for. He seemingly just wants power, but it's never enough, and he never uses it for anything except gaining more power. This is interesting, but at the same time its distancing, leaving one intellectually engaged but emotionally disinterested.
The movie is at its best when it lays out the manipulations, as when a politician practices for a speech in an odd way, and then we see the speech and exactly what the rehearsal was all about.
The film is also interesting as a time capsule. It's strange to watch any non-war movie that is so man-heavy. While many movies of the time should men exclusively in business roles, there is usually a counterbalance of women in roles of emotional support. But in a movie all about power made at a time where only men had power, women are pure decorative, used for sex jokes and gratuitous nudity. This is true to what was going on at the time, although in a satire one always notices where the creators seemingly accept the status quo, and here there seems to be no thoughts for the ladies.
The movie didn't do well, but then, how often does satire do well? If you're one of those rare people who are drawn to satire this is a very worthwhile film.
As the movie begins, Peter Cook starts following people at an ad agency, writing things down on a clipboard and introducing himself to everyone as Michael Rimmer. He claims to be an employee, yet he has to introduce himself to every single person at the company.
Soon Cook is a pollster, then a politician, each step preceding from the last, each move built on deceit in a world that accepts deceit as the norm, and Cook as one of them.
Cook is a mysterious character. We can see him manipulating events and working his way up the food chain, but there's never a sense of what it's all for. He seemingly just wants power, but it's never enough, and he never uses it for anything except gaining more power. This is interesting, but at the same time its distancing, leaving one intellectually engaged but emotionally disinterested.
The movie is at its best when it lays out the manipulations, as when a politician practices for a speech in an odd way, and then we see the speech and exactly what the rehearsal was all about.
The film is also interesting as a time capsule. It's strange to watch any non-war movie that is so man-heavy. While many movies of the time should men exclusively in business roles, there is usually a counterbalance of women in roles of emotional support. But in a movie all about power made at a time where only men had power, women are pure decorative, used for sex jokes and gratuitous nudity. This is true to what was going on at the time, although in a satire one always notices where the creators seemingly accept the status quo, and here there seems to be no thoughts for the ladies.
The movie didn't do well, but then, how often does satire do well? If you're one of those rare people who are drawn to satire this is a very worthwhile film.