O Diabo é Meu Sócio

Just watched it again and this time I get it. Thirty-four years ago the script was over my head and I missed most of the double entendres. 1967 was a great

year for them as censorship had just been slackened. The pop star sequence is in fuzzy black and white because it's supposed to be on TV - yes, that's what it used to look like. (Did people really dance like that?)

The script is brilliant but sometimes the delivery is so throw-away the jokes are missed. Maybe as Peter Cook wrote them he didn't think they needed

underlining. For example, when Stanley borrows George's red nightshirt and

says something like "Does it really suit me? Red's not my colour, I'm usually more conservative." Red for socialism, blue for the conservative party. George's red socks were sported by Labour voters well into the conservative 70s and

80s.

Little things you may not know: Victorian nightshirts and long-legged bathing suits were a fad in 1967. George and Stanley when being themselves speak in

working class accents (unlike God). Dudley really was working class, unlike

Peter Cook.

RIP to both. Let's eat a bowl of raspberries and cream in their memories. xxxxxxxxxxx

Bedazzled just gets better as the years go by, and especially after the fiasco of the Liz Hurley remake. This version was written by and stars Pete 'n' Dud, with Eleanor Bron as the soppy Margaret Spencer, waitress at Wimpy's, Barry Humphries (otherwise known as Dame Edna) as Envy, Raquel Welch as Lilian Lust ... through its segments relating to Stanley's wishes (the 'sophistate', the millionaire, the pop star, the fly on the wall, the leaping nun ...) it scores points on every level, as well as reflecting the time - the pop star segment is very Ready, Steady, Go, George Spiggott's club (like Cook's in real life but hopefully the real one was less sleazy), and of course, the depressing town street burger bar. It is a very funny film and a good vehicle for the leads (their other teaming in Hound of the Baskervilles misfired badly). And it is directed by Stanley Donen, who was partly responsible for a string of MGM movie musicals with Gene Kelly in the 1950s.

"Bedazzled", mainly because it's not available on DVD (and even VHS in the UK), has become something of a cult in recent years. This is also due to the simple fact that its a very good film, a very mannered and well-crafted high concept flick.

Dudley Moore and Peter Cook were still friends in 1967. They were two of British TV's most feted stars, and had also enthusiastically appeared together in a few ensemble comedy films. They were no slouches when it came to their first feature either. Stanley Donen was brought in a director, Cook toiled over the witty script, Moore did the perky score.

"Bedazzled" is slightly dated and is quite an uncommercial product overall, but its still a clever and interesting film. It doesnt deliver bellylaughs, but it is pretty thought-provoking and intelligent. There's funny one-liners ("Yes, Irving Moses-the fruitier etc), totally original ideas (the animated fly sequence, Raquel Welsh as Lust), slapstick stuff and a top pop parody with Cook as the indifferent "Drimble Wedge".

The pathos and sadness underpinning the movie is perhaps best summed up with the conned old lady's "Goodbye" as the Eyewash men leave. "Bedazzled" is very British and very 60s, but it still a well-made and well-acted fantasy, much better than the silly 2000 remake.

I came to "Bedazzled" with some trepidation, fearing an inconsistent, incoherent, over-indulgent sixties romp but was pleased at how well structured and directed it was. Seasoned Hollywood practicioner Stanley Donen taking on Britain's Anarchic Duo Pete and Dud looked from the outside a risky proposition but Donen does a fine job of guiding Cook's barbed, witty and funny screenplay into an enjoyable film entertainment.

Cleverly adapting the Faustian legend to modern day London it takes swipes at the convention of marriage, pop stardom, morality, religion (of course) and sex (also, of course) along the way. Framed by the device of the lovelorn Moore character's Stanley Moon's seven wishes, all to help him gain the heart of the remote Eleanor Bron character who works with him at the same greasy-spoon cafe, as granted by Cook's very chummy but always-one-step-ahead-of-him personification of the Devil, resplendent in his red socks, the film cleverly falls into a series of sketches like their TV series, taking in along the way personifications of the seven deadly sins for good (or bad) measure.

Most prominent amongst the latter of course as Lillian Lust is the new sex-bomb of the time, Miss Raquel Welch, who gets to flaunt her ample charms in a state of extreme undress in her barely (no pun intended) seven minute part. It being the swinging 60's and all, the sexism exhibited to females is pretty blatant and gratuitous which some today may find objectionable. Whilst I could have done without this cheap-thrill titillation, I found the rest of the film to be sharp, witty and amusing. Cook as the writer naturally gives himself the best lines, in particular his pop star spoof where he invents Neil Tennant twenty years in advance or when he topically sinks the Torrey Canyon oil tanker which was one of the main news stories in the U.K. that year, although the most memorable scene has to be Moore as a nun bouncing on a trampoline with a bunch of bopping Sisters behind him.

The chemistry between Cook and Moore is obvious but there's little sign of the spontaneous improvisation which sometimes prevailed in their TV shows ("Greta, Greta!") but it's no bad thing here as it keeps their performances sharp and to the point.

It's a pity there wasn't a follow-up to this film or indeed any other film collaboration between the two which is a shame because not only did I enjoy this outing but also I'm sure they could have repeated the success they enjoyed here (see what I did there!).

Not even going to discuss the movie at length - it's brilliantly funny; see it. I'll admit I DID have an additional comment or two to make, but then I read these IMDb reviews and sank into depression.

Do the people who "critique" 30, 40, 50-year-old movies by pointing out that "duhh, it's DATED!" imagine they're applying some kind of rigorous critical standard? Why not simply save valuable time, and pixels, by submitting a "review" stating, "This film cannot overcome the handicap of not taking place in 2003. Where are the SUVs? Where are the cell phones? And why wasn't it shot on the street where I live?"

And I'm fairly sure the guy who complained of the "snotty English accents" that ruined his BEDAZZLED viewing experience is the same fellow who lives in the White House and coined "strategery".