The Sandwich Man

This is quite a strange and eccentric movie and parts of it will look very strange to modern audiences.

In particular, the racial stereotyping which nowadays will be regarded by many as 'politically incorrect' to say the least.

The humour is rather zany but you need to remember that Michael Bentine was a member of the Goons: http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0298349/ which itself was rather surreal.

I think that this is a gem of English cinema.

It contains lots of old English character actors, most of whom are, sadly, no longer with us.

Most of the performances are of the 'cameo' type, lasting only a few minutes.

It is set in the Swinging Sixties and shows London at the time. Because London was like that (although not as eccentric!).

Many people nowadays will consider the movie to be 'lame' but it is enjoyable for those with an interest in social history and the actors of the time.

I enjoyed this film very much - in a simple-minded sort of way. It's a very strange mixture of different types of comedy, in fact you could guess that the "script", such as it is, was written to fit whichever film and TV actors Micheal Bentine could persuade to do turns for him.

There are some longeurs, especially a sequence about a heavy-handed motorcycle cop, but never mind because a few minutes later another famous face pops up to amuse us. My favourite characters were the Sikh jazz musicians ("De Sihkers" - groan !) and Norman Wisdom's Irish priest, who tries to instruct a group of boys about gymnastics. Half the fun is in realising that in today's politically correct world, characters like these would never reach the screen - more's the pity. Incidentally, I can imagine Spike Milligan coming up with both the above stereotypes, so maybe the falling out between him and Bentine was more to do with personalities than material.

This film seems to have been made entirely on location around London (and I spotted Tolworth Tower in the escapologist sequence, which is near where I grew up), and you can tell it was made in a great hurry with very little money.

But who was the intended audience? Surely in 1966, at a time when adult cinema-goers were getting used to more sophisticated and subversive films, this one couldn't have held much appeal. In fact its resemblance to the Children's Film Foundation shorts (also funded by the Rank organisation) makes me think that this was intended to be shown at "Saturday morning picture shows" for kids. There is nothing here that a child couldn't understand (though I'm not so sure about the comment,"He's buying me a black jacket, not a red one ! He's kinky, not a communist!"). And what on earth are those wrestlers at the very end all about ???

This film is now available on DVD, curiously in 4:3 picture ratio - is this the only print available ? and it's 90 minutes of innocent fun. If you're still not sure what sort of comedy it is, think:

The Beatles' film "Help". The TV silent classic "The Plank". "Some mothers do 'ave 'em"

Recommended

My score is generous, don't get to imagining that this is anything like as funny as the makers intended or the cast suggests. It's just that it all has such a good feel to it and as a picture of how London was 40 odd years ago, absolutely indispensable. The release date of 1966 and references in the trailer, imply that this movie embodies the nebulous concept of, 'Swinging London'. The truth is, however, that this movie is just on the cusp. It may be that it took a couple of years to put together and almost completely misses out except for a couple of little touches including a mostly hidden very short dress glimpsed in the last of Bernard Cribbins' photo sessions. Significant also in that the lovely girl being photographed is Suzy Kendall, more or less at the start of her career and set to make many classic, cult and giallo films. Everybody else with the possible exception of Ian Hendry is on the wane. As the 'swinging sixties' take a hold, all of these lovable old characters will disappear, being far too representative of the 50s for the groovy boys and birds. Michelangelo Antonioni seemed to capture the coming wave in the same year's, 'Blow Up' and that is either because he was particularly perceptive or that being an outsider, gave him greater perspective to spot the changes. in any event a must see film for anyone interested in the stars or the city.

I was surprised that I had never seen this film before. I particularly enjoy films of the period, perhaps in part for the nostalgia of seeing the world that I was born into. This captures the period very well, appearing to have been filmed entirely on location.

The story is a little dull and not particularly funny, but does contain some interesting cameos. In the opening minutes, a collection of racial minority characters are introduced but thankfully it doesn't stray into the politically incorrect stereotypes much of 60s and 70s film and television did, and ends up being an early introduction to multicultural Britain

I would highly recommend this film to anyone interested in seeing a nicely shot, high quality representation of 60s London, but as a comedy, it's average and it's not particularly entertaining.

Bentine was right when he said it suffered from poor editing.

His character was the connecting thread on which to hang various short sketches or skits, some better than others.

Bentine's character is mostly a bystander to the action, mainly cut shots showing his reaction to what's going on, which is a shame as he's not really given a chance to shine.