Brothers in Law

Newly qualified and wet behind the ears barrister Roger Thursby joins his flatmate Henry Marshall as trainee at a London law firm. After a bout of confusion, Thursby finds himself defending a case and is hopelessly out of his depth, where the only thing he wins is the scorn of the judge! Things are further compounded by the fact that both Roger and Henry have designs on pretty Sally Smith who lives on the top floor. But a chance encounter with 17 time offender Alfred Green is going to turn Roger's world upside down.

As British as Fish & Chips is Brothers In Law. Starring Richard Attenborough (Henry), Ian Carmichael (Roger), Terry-Thomas (Alfred Green) and brought to us by the supreme talents of Roy and John Boulting, it's a cheeky and charming satire on the British wig wearing legal eagles.

The film opens with Shakespeare's quote from Henry VI (Part 2), "The first thing we do, let's kill all the lawyers," from there we follow the sprightly Carmichael as he bumbles his way through a series of court encounters and a bad golf day with Judge Ryman (the irrepressible and elegant John Le Mesurier). Aided by a nice sub-plot that sees Attenborough and Carmichael chase the delectable Jill Adams as Sally Smith, Brothers In Arms is really just unfussy film making.

Things further gather a pace once Terry-Thomas arrives on the scene as Alfred Green. With a full head of hair and gap in tooth prominent as usual, the film, and Roger's fortunes, considerably changes. It should be noted, however, that Thomas is only in the film for a very short time, and he doesn't turn up until past the hour mark. So fans of his should not expect a Terry-Thomas vehicle, in fact that the film is included in the Thomas Region 2 Collection Box Set is somewhat perplexing.

Other notable British stars such as Eric Barker, Nicholas Parsons, Irene Handl and Leslie Phillips pop up along the way. While Benjamin Frankel's music has that lovely plink plonk comedy feel to really aid the charm on offer. Based on the novel written by Henry Cecil (himself a judge), Brothers In Arms achieves all it sets out to do. 8/10

This is a delightful, gentle, warm and witty little piece of old England. Public school accents, sedate lives and endless good manners all provide a wonderful antidote to the trash Hollywood is currently creating at a million times the cost! The stars are worth watching just because of who they are...Ian Carmichael, Terry~Thomas, Dickie Attenborough, Nicholas Parsons and the incomparable John LeMesurier. Select a soggy November day in England, get a cup of cocoa, don the fluffiest slippers possible and watch this with complete escapist delight.

A fun film about barristers who have just begun their careers. Ian Carmichael plays Roger Thursby, who is hired on as a "pupil" (an associate) and immediately he is in court. He fumbles along through some little mishaps in court, but finds his way eventually. Its a great cast, including Richard Attenborough and Terry-Thomas, amongst others. I can imagine any lawyer in Britain or anywhere else smiling through this, recalling their first missteps before a judge. The film moves along well, and the characters are both likable and well realized. The title threw me, I thought it was about a bickering family (I bought it because Terry-Thomas, who actually has a minor role), but it is about the law. A fun, amusing film, especially recommended for anyone remotely related to the legal profession.

The Boulting brothers never deny themselves even in comedies. They used to make very serious films dealing with social problems and vital events of universal interest, but gradually they moved over to comedies, and one of their comedies following this one was "Heavens Above!" with Peter Sellers as a priest in one of his best films. As always, their approach to the subject they are dealing with is deeply human, all their films are poignant studies of humanity, and this is no exception, although it deals with strict formalities at court and the difficulties with these that a young inexperienced lawyer encounters as he has to grope his way in total ignorance of what the rules are of the uncompromising formalities. Ian Carmichael is even more inept here than usual, but fortunately he has Richard Attenborough to help him - and one or other occasional lady. It's a great comedy and witty to the extreme, it's difficult to follow all the turns, but you will be rewarded in the end.

"Brothers in Law" is not comedy of the slapstick, laugh-out-loud, boisterous type of the late 20th century. Nor is it of the tongue- in-cheek, dour variety common in mid-century. The humor here is in the situations with very clever scripting and dialog. Of course, that is accompanied by the usual facial expressions, looks and glances.

It was interesting to me that none of the reviewers of "Brothers in Law" took issue with any of the portrayals of barristers, judges and others in the British court system. One former barrister said that the film reminded him of his early years in law. Well I know nothing about how the courts function in England, beyond what I've seen in drama films that seem to be serious portrayals. But it is clear to me that this movie pokes a lot of fun at that side of the justice system. Yes, it's a comedy about the early years of young barristers; but it's also a very funny satire of the British courts. The satire is subtle, and the biting is camouflaged some by the humor. But it's there without question.

For instance, each of the judges in the film is mockingly portrayed. John Le Mesurier, as Judge Ryman, is the key instigator of a couple of the most hilarious situations in the film. Richard Attenborough and Ian Carmichael are very good as Henry Marshall and Roger Thursby. I hardly recognized Terry-Thomas at first. His portrayal of Alfred Green is very good, and funny.

One of the funniest and most clever scenes in the film is in a divorce case. Marshall (Attenborough) represents Mrs. Potter who is seeking the divorce. She is played superbly by Irene Handl. The presiding judge is Ryman (Le Mesurier). And, Thursby (Carmichael) is behind Marshall's bench as an observer. The case opens with Marshall questioning his client, the first witness.

Marshall, "Mrs. Potter, did your husband ever hit you?" Judge Ryman, "One moment. Please don't lead on essential matters." Marshall, "As your lordship pleases. Mrs. Potter, did he or did he not hit you?" Judge, "Really, Mr. Marshall, that's just as bad." Marshall, "With great respect, my lord, she could have said yes or no." Judge, "So she could to your first question. That was nevertheless leading." Marshall, "Very well, my lord. Mrs. Potter, how often did these assaults take place?" Judge, "Mr. Marshall! That's not only a leading question, it is a double question and in my view a most improper one. The witness has not yet said that her husband hit her." Marshall, "Well, madam, did he hit you?" Judge, "Mr. Marshall, there must be some limit to this." Marshall, "Your lordship tells me to ask a question and then when I do, your lordship complains." Judge, "That's a most improper observation." Marshall "Very well, my lord, I apologize."

Judge, "Well, let me suggest that you ask the witness how her husband treated her." Marshall, "Thank you, my lord. Mrs. Potter, how did your husband treat you?" Mrs. Potter, "Like a slave." Marshall, "Yes? … in what way?" Mrs. Potter, "Well, in every way." Marshall, "Well, uh, could you enumerate some of those ways?" Mrs. Potter, "Enumer what?" Marshall, "Give some examples?" Mrs. Potter, "It was always happening." Marshal, "What was?" Mrs. Potter, "Him treating me like that." Marshall, "Like what? How did he treat you?" Mrs. Potter, "Something terrible." Marshall, "We weren't there, Mrs. Potter. You must tell us about it." Mrs. Potter, "Well, it was going on all the time." Marshall, "What was?" Mrs. Potter, "What he did."

Just as I began to wonder how the cast could keep straight faces, I saw that they couldn't. Thursby (Carmichael) was clearly cracking up behind Marshall. He had to lower his head to conceal his laughter, and this continued as the hilarious dialog continued. Marshall, "Just tell us one thing he did." Mrs. Potter, "So many." Marshall, "It should be easy to think of one. Can you not tell his lordship one simple thing your husband did?" Mrs. Potter, "… Well, there was that time at Christmas." Marshall, "Yes?" Mrs. Potter, "… or was it at Easter?" Marshall, "Well, what happened at Easter then, Mrs. Potter?" Mrs. Potter, "Well … what was you saying again?" Marshall, "Something happened at Easter." Mrs. Potter, "Well, I don't think I'd like to tell the judge that."

I don't know if this film is an accurate portrayal of young barristers having to pay to be pupils of lawyers after they earn their law degrees. Or that it usually is years before new members of the law begin to earn much of a living. If that's the case, it's a far cry from the American system. Young attorneys are soon making very good livings in America. That may be because we're the most litigious nation in the world.

This film may seem slow to some. It won't be everyone's cup of tea. But for those who enjoy British humor, and who especially like satire, this should be a sure hit.