User reviews

It's probably fair now to include Timothy Spall in our current list of national treasures where actors are concerned. I had the great pleasure some years ago in attending a screening of Pierrepoint where Tim gave a talk afterwards and a small auction was arranged where he signed a DVD that I won. Stanley, A Man of Variety is a brave attempt to show off his many talents for comedy although be warned, it's very surreal. He has collaborated with writer and director Stephen Cookson on a series of sketches depicting a prisoner who has spent so long in his cell he starts to hallucinate various characters, all played by himself. Wisely, the film only runs about an hour and twenty minutes, as I'm not sure if it's a real attempt to create something artistic (the sort of thing Jerry Lewis used to do I remember) or whether it's just a vanity project. I'll err on the artistic but I would have liked to give it a higher rating. The best part is trying to guess the characters he's playing, some I thought very good, others i missed, like Tony Hancock. The best ones are Max Wall, Max Miller, Noel Coward, George Formby, Alastair Sim and Margaret Rutherford, all of whom are instantly recognisable for those of us with long memories. If you are a real Spall fan and like a bit of artistic creativity on the screen, you could do worse than give this a try.

A prisoner seeks release on the anniversary of his daughter's untimely death, but first has to find out the nature of his crime with the unwelcome assistance of the variety acts who fill his mind.

First! An amazing spin on the whirligig of madness. Beautifully conceived and produced, and performed by a wonderful actor. Reminded me of Beckett, Gilliam, Kafka, Dickens, but it comes out uniquely grotesque. For something so difficult, the editing keeps it clipping along, and the sound design adds layers to the atmosphere, so I just lost myself in this and enjoyed it all the way.

Plenty of references that were new to me, but that just means it's worth watching again, and while I did get it, I don't pretend to have understood it. Just a little criticism in that there had to be two bits of written exposition on screen.

Some of the impersonations are more enjoyable than others, but they're all batty and sometimes chilling, with weird close ups and exaggerated facial movement. There's very black humour in a bathtub murder, and no sign of a body in a second murder - just spatters of blood: a heavy-handed event delivered with a light touch. In the end, the madness is an unsolved riddle.

Great movie, but with poor reviews. Obviously, I'm right.