Only When I Larf

Just saw this on Talking Pictures TV, which shows old films and TV. And some of their content is well wort watching, albeit from yesteryear, but of course in with some good stuff are some right clunkers, and this is one. I see one reviewer calls it "well worth watching" -- Lord knows why.

The paper called it a 'comedy' in the TV listings, I presume they think Chekhov was a riot of one-liners and gags?

This is a 60s caper movie, several episodes of con-men playing tricks, and it's the most dreadful tosh -- I've no idea why anyone would care about any character, and I'd guess that any audience for it were misled by Len Deighton's name, and the lead actors. The players to be fair do their best (though Hemmings always seemed to me to play the same character), and as several have said, those off camera know their stuff.

But it's all essentially pointless, and very hard to care what happens at all. And for anyone who thinks that it might be worth a look, due to the 'comedy' description, well, don't expect Cary Grant or P G Wodehouse. I think it's probable the 'Larf' in the title was satire, it certainly wasn't accurate. Oddly enough there was a TV sitcom (UK) of the same name, set in a hospital, with Richard Wilson (later Victor Meldrew), James Bolam (Likely Lads), and Peter Bowles (lots of things). That WAS quite funny, but don't get it muddled with this twaddle!

Essentially this is a 3 episode caper movie shot in exotic places exhibiting all the worst attributes of swinging sixties britain. The worst is the score by Ron Grainer,whose claim to fame is the Dr Who score.The music is far too obtrusive,particularly in the first 20 minutes.I could hardly hear the dialogue.

A very slick, glossy and well-paced opening got my attention. The accompanying whistling score was unique and enjoyable, and added to the feel of a professional, military-like operation. Fifteen minutes in, I was transfixed and had high expectations. Sadly, the story quickly falls apart. The cool and efficient team, gone; in its place, incompetence and betrayal, leading to an unsatisfactory second and third act, which were mostly pointless and predictable. It was almost a film in reverse.

Great locations, well shot, good performances, very much of its time. Thematically, I couldn't help think this may have been the inspiration for the 2004-2012 BBC series, Hustle, which had a similar concept (wise veteran, cool younger man, glamorous woman, who con greedy and unpleasant marks). Overall, worth a watch. With a better script, it could have been a classic.

A poor title for what turns out to be a rather uninspiring film. A good, brisk and smartly-directed pre-title segment sets the scene - here we have a group of smart grifters conning greedy or immoral 'marks' out of hefty chunks of cash and living very nicely off the proceeds. As far as an over-arching story goes, things are pretty thin and we only see it at the very end, after a rather episodic series of cons. Attenborough is good, Hemmings is cheeky but not very likeable and Stewart is attractive and supplies the final twist. There's nothing much else to say about it.

Richard Attenborough, David Hemmings and Alexandra Stewart are three con-men in this enjoyable late 60's comedy/drama. The plot is episodic: There's a great pre-credit con in New York and a couple of other cons which aren't related, but the core of the story is the relationship between the three.

Attenborough and Hemmings work well together; the old, seasoned pro and the young pretender who come from different backgrounds but who clash not only about life, politics and who's got the better ideas, but over Stewart who is very attractive, sexy and alluring (and who has plans of her own).

The direction is taut, the dialogue sparkles with little gems, the look is very glossy for its time and the acting is top notch. Like a lot of 60's caper films, it's great fun to watch.