davidholmesfr Reviews

Marlowe (1969)

Noir - in all its colours

[6/10 · 29 June 2011]

This is a mish-mash where the original cynical Marlowe of the late 40s meets the laid-back and careworn private detective of the 60s. We move from all those shadows that dominated the noir films to the bright lights of the swinging 60s. And it doesn't really work; nor should it. To me, it comes over more as a satire on the originals with plenty of good one-liners and a surreal couple of scenes with Bruce Lee.

The storyline is too complex to set out here and I suspect there will be many differing versions of just what the story actually is. Not that that matters too much as I think it may be better simply to see it as a satire or, perhaps, a parody.

Gayle Hunnicutt was out of place although Rita Moreno maybe makes up for that. Garner is, well, Garner. See it as a curiosity rather than as something that is important or significant in the history of film.

Humoresque (1946)

Good - but not great

[7/10 · 27 June 2011]

Given the somewhat clichéd and thin storyline (from a short story rather than a novel), the film just about hold up. This seems to be due to Negulesco's balancing act between some of the overwrought passions and the basic telling of the story.

Joan Crawford came to this following on from her Oscar-winning success in "Mildred Pierce". No doubt she, and the studio, thought that this would be "her" film. But John Garfield's performance actually overshadows Crawford; may this be a testament to method acting? I found it difficult to muscle up much sympathy for either of the main characters and this probably accounts for my comparatively Luke-warm conclusion. Both characters seemed devoid of any humour but fortunately we have Oscar Levant's one-liners to relieve some of the emotional tension. The extensive music performed in the film will be a plus for many, especially as much of it is from the Romantic era of classical music.

It's certainly worth watching if you're interested in film history; if you're not then I suggest you wait for a wet Sunday afternoon when it's on TV.

Camille (1936)

Essential Garbo

[8/10 · 23 June 2011]

I must confess to approaching Camille with some trepidation. The story had been done so many times in opera, theatre and cinema that my question was simple.What would MGM bring to the party that others hadn't, especially in those years between the Depression, the growth of fascism in Europe and the outbreak of World War II? The answer is, of course, a wonderful cast, great direction and sumptuous sets and costumes. My fears that this would be given an overly-sentimental Hollywood treacle treatment were wholly unfounded. It was interesting to see how the film gets the message across that Marguerite is a courtesan ("hooker" just sounds too down and dirty for Garbo!). No overt mention of her trade is made in the dialogue although in the titles we are informed that these women are "girls of discretion". But the way Garbo moves, reacts to events and speaks leaves us in no little doubt as to her profession.

Robert Taylor plays a touching Armand, Henry Daniell is outstanding as the Baron and Lionel Barrymore skilfully manages a blend of severity and compassion in the comparatively short, but crucial, scene in which he appears with Garbo.

Any downsides? Well,maybe a scene or two could have been shorter, or even excluded but this is a minor issue. Not quite a masterpiece but essential viewing for anyone interested in the history of film.

The Road (1954)

Is it really that good?

[7/10 · 19 June 2011]

It's always risky to write a critical review of a revered film that is over 50 years old (or, these days, over 5 years old!). But I do wonder about La Strada. On the face of it, a film that folds us into its inner content, of poverty and hope, but from this distance does it not all seem rather contrived? The two main protagonists are so opposites that they never come close- so how to deal with their relationship? As David Thomson (2008) says in his short essay on this film 'it's my hunch that not many people could endure La Strada today without some numbing potion'. The key character in the film seems to be the "fool" - a far more interesting person than either the Quinn or Masina characters. Gelsomina (Masina) is a simpleton and although we might love her to bits (mainly because of her innocence and her smile), she remains just that - a simpleton. Zampano is a simple male bully who needs no sympathy from us - not even at the end.

In the 1950s I can see that this was breaking new ground and, as such, is to be admired. But does it hold today? I doubt it given the extreme (and characterised) positions of the two chief protagonists.

The Road to Corinth (1967)

All Greek to me

[6/10 · 22 July 2010]

Add Seberg and Greece to Chabrol and you'd expect something to sizzle. Unfortunately sizzle is not quite the right word - damp squib, maybe? The plot, such as it is, has been well set out by others so I won't rehash that. Whilst the story and the events are ridiculous, there is, nevertheless, a certain style here. The opening scene, where a magician enters Greece and the Greek border guards find the incriminating goods, promises a good film (I understand that this scene was cut from the version originally shown in the UK - as it's one of the best scenes goodness knows what it must have been like watching it back then). But sadly it's all downhill from there although the style and flair are still there. Who could fail to admire the dapper, but ruthless, killer in his white suit, white shirt, red tie and matching red-banded straw boater? Fortunately Chabrol returned to more masterful output a year later with "Les Biches", a film that is so far removed from this it's hard to believe it's the same director.

And who on earth dreamt up the dumb English language title for the US release? Surely "The Road to Corinth" would have worked.

The Man Who Loved Women (1977)

A late Truffaut misfire

[6/10 · 18 July 2010]

As an admirer of French cinema I came to this with high hopes. Sadly, they were not justified. This is a miserable experience concerned only with a dismal 41-year old man who seems incapable of loving but only of lusting. And the women seem equally bland and lacking in charm and affection once you cut past their external beauty. It's difficult to admire a film when virtually none of the characters justifies sympathy. In fact the only person in the film who I felt any sympathy with was the typist who undertook writing up the book; at least she got out before the end.

The structure doesn't help. I can deal with a flashback approach (the film starts with our "hero's" funeral), but then we get flashbacks within flashbacks, including some rather contrived pieces of early childhood and mother-son relationship. This led to some confusion about chronology although, to be honest, by that time I had lost the sort of interest that I always had for his earlier work.

Maybe Truffaut, who was himself rather fond of women, felt there was some autobiographical element in the story; or maybe he was trying to justify his earlier experiences with women. Either way it was a disappointment.

Fast Times at Ridgemont High (1982)

Of the genre - could be worse

[6/10 · 18 July 2010]

I'm not a fan of the teenage/high school genre, which seems to be a uniquely American thing. Thus I approached this with some trepidation and whilst my worst fears were not confirmed I remain unconvinced about the genre.

There is little by way of plot; just a few months in the lives of the characters who range across the usual types to be found in this type of film. As with teen movies the focus is firmly on the males - they are the only ones allowed any variation of character. The girls always seem to be the same one-dimensional cardboard cutouts whilst the males are allowed to range from crazy to lazy and nerdish to pervish. In particular, the scenes immediately before and after a visit to the abortion clinic suggest that undergoing such a process leaves no physical or mental scars and is about on a par with a visit to the dentist for a check-up. Thus it's fair to say that the film is sexist - surprising given that it's directed by a woman.

On the upside there are some good lines - particularly the comment about romance in Ridgemont: "In Ridgemont? It's not even easy to get cable TV in Ridgemont" (or something like that). And Sean Penn makes the whole thing tolerable.

Is age and generation something to do with appreciating this type of film? I am a great fan of "American Graffiti" - it's more or less my generation. And why did I find myself rooting for Mr Hand in his battle with Scipoli?! I tend to follow Roger Ebert's and James Berardinelli's reviews and it's interesting to compare them on this film as they usually tend to have similar reactions. Berardinelli was fine with it seeing it as a reflection of his own generation, whilst Ebert hated it. And, of course, Ebert is from a much earlier generation.

If you have 90 minutes and time is hanging heavy then you could do worse (unless, I suspect, you are an American at high school in the eighties in which case you'll probably appreciate it much more).

Pass the zimmer frame, nurse.

Land and Freedom (1995)

Politically and cinematic ally mature

[8/10 · 13 October 2004]

It is, perhaps, surprising that more films about the Spanish Civil War haven't been made. The Spanish landscape, the sheer ruthlessness of any civil war, and the perceived Spanish emotions all combine to make what would appear to be an attractive proposition for a film-maker. The names of Picasso and Lorca will forever have an association with the war, yet where are the artists representing cinema? All the more surprising then that it should have been British director Ken Loach who took up the cudgels. Loach is probably best known for his gritty portrayals of the British working class (and under-class), something that has, perhaps, made him more approachable outside his own country.

In tackling the Spanish Civil War any writer is faced with the overwhelming complexities that underlie the events. The regionalism (think only of the Catalan and Basque regions, let alone Galicia and Andalusia), the monarchy, the Catholic Church, landowners, trade unions, anarchists plus the leaderships of the Nationalist and Republican movements all combined to create a very tangled web. Add to that outside involvement, principally from Mussolini and Stalin, the vacillation of Britain and France and, of course, the omnipresence of Hitler, and anyone might wonder where to start.

Loach and Allen take their approach through the eyes of an unemployed Liverpudlian, David Carr (admirably played by Ian Hart) who, as a card-carrying member of the Communist Party, answers the call to fight for the Republic. We follow his exploits through a number of episodes, involving battles, falling in love, injury and, ultimately, a degree of disillusion as the reality of Stalin's views eventually come to dominate, and eventually destroy, his cause. The film is supremely well-made, highlighting the horrors, the camaraderie, and the political divisions. In particular, the debate amongst the militia about collectivisation after they have taken a small town takes no sides, but simply allows a number of valid arguments to be exposed within the context of the shifting sands of the war.

There is still ample material for the industry to go on to make more films on this important period in history. But Loach has set the benchmark.

Extreme Measures (1996)

An uneasy blend of thriller and morality

[7/10 · 12 October 2004]

Summary:

The dilemma that underpins this is whether or not it is right to sacrifice a few for the good of many, particularly when the "few" are represented by New York homeless down-and-outs, and the "many" by wheelchair bound accident victims. In tackling this dilemma a number of cinematic options are open and here the makers opt for the thriller genre rather than a story woven around personal tragedy. But in so doing the moral dilemma tends to take a back seat in order that the thriller approach can grab the audience's attention.

Dr Luthan (Grant) is a bright up-and-coming doctor working in the Emergency Room of Grammercy Hospital in New York. Gunshot wound and drug overdose victims are staple diet for this ER but Luthan's curiosity gets the better of him when one of his patients dies in mysterious circumstances. His subsequent investigation of this death see him drawn into a murky world equivalent to that of good old-fashioned body-snatching. Indeed, even the two police officers he comes up against are Messrs Burke and Hare!

His pursuits lead him into all manner of personal and career crises as he descends (literally) into the Hell beneath the city streets. This leads to his eventual showdown with Dr Myrick (Hackman) who has his own ideas about conducting medical research. And here we are presented with the moral question - to what extent should it be permissible to sacrifice the few for the many? It's also at this point that the use of the thriller genre as a vehicle for the moral question comes a bit unstuck. We have been rooting for Luthan throughout as he overcomes one difficulty after another and, as a result, it is difficult not to side with him when it comes to resolution of the moral questions. Although some efforts are made to help convey Myrick's viewpoint they are really shoe-horned into the scene in which the two doctors come up against each other on level terms. Here the audience is clubbed about the ears with Myrick's viewpoint, a viewpoint rather heavy-handedly reinforced by the presence of his pretty wheelchair-bound assistant.

The ending sees Luthan symbolically ascending the steps to his own "Promised Land", in sharp contrast to his earlier escapades in the nether world. Overall the film was not a bad attempt at involving its audience in the underlying morality issue. But the thriller format and the consequent need, in such circumstances, to have the audience firmly on one side, obscured objective consideration of the issues.

The performances in the main were excellent. Gene Hackman played a very cool and balanced Dr Myrick in such a way that although we are never sympathetic to him, we do recognise his intentions are good - the problem is with the means. Of Hugh Grant, what can be said? He again plays, well, Hugh Grant. He looks more like an amiable, slightly detached Notting Hill bookseller than an overworked ER doctor - but he does so in all his films! David Morse deserves a special mention for his mean portrayal of Hare (of Burke and Hare fame). The direction is well-paced and in the whole thing treats its audience with respect.

Drop Dead Gorgeous (1999)

The laughs come too cheap

[6/10 · 7 February 2003]

Most forms of entertainment render themselves liable to satire when performances are made into a competition. The music world satirises itself with the annual Eurovision Song Contest, an event which has achieved almost cult status through its sheer awfulness. Competitive ballroom dancing was beautifully targeted in "Strictly Ballroom" and the teen beauty pageant has been dealt with in Michael Ritchie's "Smile".

"Drop Dead Gorgeous", in attempting a further shy at the teen pageant business, goes for an in-your-face, sledgehammer approach. It's a mix of slapstick and odd characters, most of whom suffer from problems such as anorexia, obesity, paranoia and mental retardation. Given this line-up the laughs are inevitably bought at very low cost. That's not to say that there aren't some really funny moments (Becky Leeman's grotesque performance with a stuffed Christ attached to the Cross is but one). But such genuine comedy moments occur only in patches.

Once a couple of the "bad" characters are dealt with about two-thirds of the way through the rest of the film becomes a desperate search for the inevitable ending in which good must prevail over bad. Throughout all this the performance of Allison Janney shines out. She steals every scene she's in, portraying a character not a thousand miles removed from that of Joanna Lumley in TV's "Absolutely Fabulous".

The laughs are there, but often only because the targets are so soft. By the benchmarks of "Smile" or "Strictly Ballroom" this falls short.

Tumbleweeds (1999)

A Pleasant Surprise

[7/10 · 31 January 2003]

The premise of a film about a mother and 12 year-old daughter on the road is not necessarily attractive to everyone. But this was a refreshing example of the genre, mainly because the director allowed character development. Mother and daughter have characteristics both endearing and infuriating (like all of us; something that Hollywood so often forgets) and, as a result, we're not forced to take sides with one against the other. Rather we find ourselves looking out for opportunities for them to both lead a more stable existence. Inevitably in a film of this nature there must be a great temptation to play on sentimentality and help boost Kleenex sales. But fortunately that doesn't happen; in fact the only tearful moment comes from one of the male characters recounting the loss of his wife. The two leads react well to each other, something which was essential for the film to work.

An entertaining approach to the genre for which the viewer doesn't have to suspend rationality.

Broadcast News (1987)

Beware of TV news!

[7/10 · 31 January 2003]

Essential viewing for anyone who watches TV news as it may help to become a little more sceptical, or even cynical. On a personal note I recall taking a course some years ago about being interviewed for TV - what to do, what not to do. The course instructors impressed on us that TV news was a "branch of show-biz". That depressing view, which is probably even more valid today than when it was made, is reinforced by this film. Never mind journalistic integrity, what counts is the ability to look good and smile nicely. And make sure you don't sweat on camera.

The interactions between the three main characters form the centre-piece, each with his or her own ambitions, capabilities and beliefs. Brooks takes these differences and sets them into the volatile setting of a TV news studio, and adds more than a pinch of love interest to the mixture. The result is a complex, if somewhat overlong, portrayal of how we compromise every day in order to meet our ambitions and take others with us. It is always entertaining, although the final scene was, perhaps, unnecessary given everything that had gone before.

The Girl in the News (1940)

Courting Prejudice

[6/10 · 31 January 2003]

Core to the plot is the extent to which a justifiable acquittal at a trial nevertheless prejudices the accused's future life. Given modern day concerns over sensational press coverage this is an issue as valid today (probably more so) than it was in war-time Britain. But the film does not follow this line, rather it presents us with a good old-fashioned courtroom drama, culminating in a finale of which Perry Mason would have been proud. Quite how the hero lawyer manages this stretches the judicial imagination somewhat, especially with a flawed witness, whose evidence clinches the outcome, not having to testify from the witness box.

Despite these reservations this is an enjoyable enough production which canters along at a good pace without any pretensions to high art. And it was nice to see some early work from two actresses, Irene Handl (particularly malevolent as the first "victim") and Kathleen Harrison, who both went on to greater things in post-war British TV.

Ed Wood (1994)

Plan 9 misfire

[6/10 · 28 January 2003]

It's not unusual for great artists to have to wait many years after departing this life to achieve fame. But it's less common for such a fate to befall a really inept artist. Wood's enthusiasm far outstripped his abilities as a film-maker but sadly this attempt at telling his story doesn't do Wood the justice he probably doesn't deserve.

The root of the problem is in Depp's portrayal of the central character. Wood comes across as a genial, caring optimist who loves movie-making despite his (in)abilities. Nothing wrong with that although there are some moments in the film when Depp almost verges on the Beetlejuice or Scissorhands characters from his earlier outings. But there must have been more to Wood than an eternal optimism. He loved movies - witness his brief conversation with Orson Welles - thus he must have known how excrutiatingly bad his productions were. There was a story to tell as to how Wood reconciled these opposing characteristics. Yet Depp, presumably at his director's command, gives us only a skin-deep portrayal and the opportunity was lost.

Martin Landau's impressive performance of Bela Lugosi in his last agonising and desparate months overrides Depp but leaves us asking why the director chose to portray Lugosi with such sympathy and depth but leave his main character only at a surface level.

In the end perhaps it doesn't matter too much. Do we really want to know what drove such an inadequate movie professional? Probably not, but if the attempt is made it should be made with some conviction and integrity. Cut, (not) perfect.

Sherlock Holmes (1932)

Interesting, if unusual, Holmes film

[6/10 · 28 January 2003]

Adapted from a stage play, rather than from one of Conan Doyle's books, this is a slightly odd portrayal of the great detective. Holmes finds himself about to be married to a society girl, a daughter of a wealthy banker. But marriage has to wait when the arch criminal Moriarty escapes the hangman's noose to unleash Chicago-style violence on the pubs of London. An "Americanised" story that will be unfamiliar to Holmes devotees (and, indeed, to students of London criminology) is, nevertheless, redeemed by some tight direction and excellent performances by Clive Brook as Holmes and Ernest Torrance, a villainous Moriarty. There's quite a memorable opening of Moriarty, in silhouette, being taken to and from the court for sentencing.

An interesting example of an early effort by the industry to put Holmes on the cinema map. And there can't be many films in which Holmes appears in drag!

Blue Steel (1990)

An opportunity wasted

[6/10 · 26 January 2003]

This film begins well enough, building to what looks like being a promising study of a psychopath pitted against a feisty, but vulnerable, policewoman. Drawing on fear as a driver of eroticism, the unlikely relationship between Curtis and Silver develops to the edge of what might have been a great film. But sadly, at the halfway point, the story becomes unbelievable as both characters undertake actions that render the plot risible.

Silver turns in an impressive performance as the deranged commodity trader and Curtis plays it adequately enough. But neither can do anything to save the plot line and the whole thing ends in a mess, with the hardware of weaponry taking over from the software of psychology that would have provided a far more intelligent film.

Sherlock Holmes (1932)

Elementary

[6/10 · 26 January 2003]

One of the earliest Sherlock Holmes films this is interesting if only for the fact that Holmes is about to get married as the film opens and even dons drag part way through. It may be best not to reflect too much on his relationship with Billy, the Canadian boy who Holmes is training in the arts of criminology. Dr Watson is relegated to an occasional appearance and the arch-villain Moriarty is played with a heavy leering menace that doesn't quite fit with the books. But there's not a lot here that does fit with the books although that does not necessarily detract. The impressive opening, with Moriarty cast in shadows as he proceeds to and from the courtroom for sentencing, sets an appropriate atmosphere which holds throughout. Not a great Sherlock Holmes by any stretch of the imagination, but an interesting example.

Me, Myself & Irene (2000)

Plotless in Rhode Island

[6/10 · 16 January 2003]

The Farrelly brothers (and Jim Carrey as an occasional RI Dirty Harry) tackling issues of schizophrenia can lead only to excessive political incorrectness and juvenile humour. But who would watch this expecting anything different? There is precious little plot, what plot there is being little more than a peg on which to hang a few typically gross visual jokes. Renée Zellweger jogs along without expending too much effort, but then character development is hardly a strength of this film, despite its supposed subject matter. The real stars are the Baileygates triplets, though don't ask where they acquired their ghetto talk in tranquil Rhode Island.

Several of the jokes work, several don't. Persist right to the end though, even after the credits have rolled, if only to find out the cow's fate. An enjoyable way to idle away a couple of hours, although a pair of scissors on some of the "plot" scenes might have been a useful addition as it runs about 20 minutes too long.

Windtalkers (2002)

An Opportunity Missed

[6/10 · 1 January 2003]

The underlying theme of the military use of the Navajo language should have presented the film-makers with an opportunity to explore an interesting fragment of WW2 history. Sadly the theme is used simply as a hook on which to hang yet another visceral war film. The result is a cliche-ridden piece which adds little to our knowledge of the war in the Pacific that hadn't already been provided by John Wayne and others. The film's makers may well have set out with the intention of creating a mix of entertainment and education but quickly succumbed to the temptation of presenting little more than pyrotechnics and the consequent blood and gore.

Monsieur Hulot's Holiday (1953)

Classic Humour

[9/10 · 1 January 2003]

The measure of a good film, like a good painting, book or any other work of art, is its ability to draw you back time after time. I first saw M Hulot's Holiday more years ago than I care to remember and loved it immediately. The humour is gentle (it's not a laugh-a-minute riot) with superbly crafted scenes such as a tyre's inner tube transforming into a wreath interposed between the on-going observational humour as portrayed by the strolling husband and wife.

Seeing it again for the umpteenth time it's as fresh as the first time I saw it. In fact having lived in France for the best part of two years it appears even funnier now that it did before, something which, no doubt, reflects my own observations of the French way of life.

Ever After: A Cinderella Story (1998)

Good Pantomime

[7/10 · 11 August 2002]

Cinderella. A classic winter pantomime in British theatres transferred here to the silver screen. No fairy godmothers here though and no magic pumpkins turning into golden carriages. Just Anjelica Houston and Richard O'Brien whooping it up in true pantomime style in medieval France. Oh yes they are, oh no they're not. Good fun, not Grimm, and worth a look in an inevitably happy ending way.

Once Upon a Time in the West (1968)

Sorry, but....

[10/10 · 10 July 2002]

Comments that litter the IMDb reviews for this film range from "best Western ever" to "one of my top five movies of all time". So readers of this review - I apologise for boring you but I agree with them.

I'll limit my comments to two of cinema's most memorable scenes. First, the vertical panning of the camera up and over the station when Cardinale arrives, revealing a thriving developing city in contrast to the apparent deserted rail-side. Second, and related to the first, the final shot with the railroad arriving from the east whilst Bronson rides off to the west, signifying the end of the "old" frontier mentality.

Brilliant in every way, unless, of course, you like your Westerns old-style Hollywood (ie no need to think). No more to be said.

Minority Report (2002)

Once In A While

[9/10 · 28 June 2002]

Cinema should be about entertainment, but without provoking some serious thinking it's as expendable as a pack of chips. Once in a while along comes a movie that justifies the very existence of the medium. Minority Report is one that does just that. I had no idea what this was about when I entered the cinema, killing an over-bearingly hot afternoon in, ironically, Washington. Then I sat spellbound for over 2 hours as Spielberg and his crew span a tale so pertinent to our time. A multi-layered movie that works on, well, every layer. Whether it's action, special effects, film noir, or just plain politics this is a film that is intelligent. It uses, rather than depends on, special effects and poses so many questions about freedom and security. How relevant at the moment, especially as it seems that US citizens can be put away for just thinking about "terrorist acts".

Somewhat episodic in its early stages, though well spiced with humour, it matures into a free-flowing thriller laced with political messages that we ignore at our peril. A must-see for any movie-goer with an ounce of intelligence.

Days of Glory (1944)

Hollywood, where art thou?

[7/10 · 28 June 2002]

The Russian German war was the greatest battle ever fought and strangely has been ignored by Hollywood. This film, made when the Russians had yet to reach Berlin, was probably a propaganda piece of its time and suffers from some sugary Hollywood treatment. The appearance of a Moscow ballet dancer, and her inevitable love affair with the local guerilla leader, glamourises what was, in reality, a dirty hard war. Whilst we can respect this well-directed movie we can also ask why Hollywood has yet to record its tribute to the amazing determination of the Russian people who were not particularly well led yet overcame such enormous odds. Never mind "Saving Private Ryan" - what about Ivan's story, Mr Spielberg? The Cold War is over, the archives are open, the film is there to be made!

The Hudsucker Proxy (1994)

Triumph of Style over Substance

[7/10 · 26 May 2002]

The primary attractions here are the art direction and photography, as you would expect with a film from the Coens. But despite some good running gags (the hula-hoop invention and "45 floors counting the mezzanine") this is screwball comedy that doesn't quite screw enough. As a satire on American business it works OK, especially in today's post-Enron world. But maybe that's the problem - it can't make up its mind whether to be satire or screwball, and in the end it finishes up suspended in a vacuum between the two.

Paul Newman, as usual, is excellent as indeed are most of the cast. Jennifer Jason Leigh does well with a difficult role. She starts out as a fast talking brash over-confident reporter, but about halfway through mysteriously evolves into something completely different, becoming very concerned about Barnes's (Tim Robbins) well-being. In fact the whole relationship between these two seems to have been forcibly manipulated in order to suit the overall plot.

See it for the visual treat it is, but don't expect too much in terms of message or belly laughs. Incidentally, British viewers might see a likeness between Tim Robbins and comedian Harry Enfield - surely Norville Barnes wasn't the prototype for Tim Nice-But-Dim?!