6 user 6 critic

Decline and Fall... of a Birdwatcher (1968)

M | | Comedy | 26 January 1969 (USA)
A naive young man, sent down from university, blunders through a series of bizarre adventures in which his participation is always innocent, although others don't think so.



(adaptation), (additional scenes) | 2 more credits »


Learn more

People who liked this also liked... 

Drama | Mystery | Thriller
    1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 6.8/10 X  

The down-at-heel lodger in a seaside boarding house is menaced by two mysterious strangers, who eventually take him away.

Director: William Friedkin
Stars: Robert Shaw, Patrick Magee, Dandy Nichols
Drama | Romance
    1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 6.8/10 X  

The wife's affair and a death in the family hasten the demise of an upper-class English marriage.

Director: Charles Sturridge
Stars: James Wilby, Kristin Scott Thomas, Richard Beale
Decline and Fall (TV Mini-Series 2017)
    1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 6.8/10 X  

The series sees Paul Pennyfeather as an inoffensive divinity student at Oxford University in the 1920s, who is wrongly dismissed for indecent exposure having been made the victim of a prank by The Bollinger Club.

Stars: Matthew Beard, Stephen Graham, Douglas Hodge
Vile Bodies (TV Movie 1970)
    1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 -/10 X  

Satire on the life of the Bright Young Things of the British aristocracy in the 1920s, where Adam tries to marry Nina, but finds himself constantly thwarted in his attempts due to a lack of money.

Director: Alan Cooke
Stars: Richard O'Callaghan, Celia Bannerman, Vivian Pickles


Cast overview, first billed only:
Robin Phillips ...
Paul Pennyfeather
Solomon Philbrick
Robert Harris ...
Sir Humphrey Maltravers
Captain Grimes
Margot Beste-Chetwynde (as Genevieve Page)
Chief Warder
The Prison Governor
Arthur Potts
Flossie Fagan
Otto Silenus
Kenneth Griffith ...
Mr. Church


A naive young man, sent down from university, blunders through a series of bizarre adventures in which his participation is always innocent, although others don't think so.

Plot Summary | Plot Synopsis


"See that diamond-crusted, double-breasted bird over there?...that's mother. She wants to meet you."




M | See all certifications »




Release Date:

26 January 1969 (USA)  »

Also Known As:

Decline and Fall  »

Company Credits

Production Co:

Show detailed on  »

Technical Specs


Sound Mix:

(Westrex Recording System)


See  »

Did You Know?


Last film of Sir Donald Wolfit. See more »


Prendergast: [after using his starter's pistol at the school sports to shoot a pupil in the leg] First blood to me!
See more »


Referenced in Brewster McCloud (1970) See more »


Men of Harlech
See more »

Frequently Asked Questions

This FAQ is empty. Add the first question.

User Reviews

Extraordinary attempt at adapting Waugh
29 May 2015 | by (United Kingdom) – See all my reviews

When choosing to adapt this film, why would you throw away many of the gifts (easy wins, five-yard tap-ins, call them what you will) that Waugh's novel offers the film-maker? The dialogue sparkles on the page, and the set pieces come thick and fast, but the film misses much of the good stuff out, particularly early on in the action, or simply botches it. Waugh's characters also offer plenty of scope for effective adaptation to the screen, but the film makes a rather mushy attempt at most of the character portrayals too, despite the efforts of a strong cast.

Waugh's biting humour is dulled and debased from the start, reaching almost "Carry on"-like levels of simplicity. Paul is spuriously turned into a birdwatcher for about four seconds at the start of the action for the purpose of making smutty hints at a sex comedy that the film doesn't deliver (see also the publicity posters). The potential for sexual transgression that shimmers under the surface of Waugh's writing is also botched; the film spells it out rather demurely (this was the 1960s, when censorship was still very strict), while aiming desperately for superficial titillation.

There are so many simply baffling choices in terms of character and action that it's hard to know where to start. That's not to say a film can't be successful if it doesn't stick close to the source - of course it can, but it has to add something new or interesting or unusual, or stand on its own two feet as a piece of art. This extraordinary effort does none of these things.

The film is almost rescued by some of the settings (but not the ludicrous prison, with its gurning, overacting warders), by the luminous Genevieve Page, and by the occasional neat touch. But surely it's time for somebody like Stephen Fry to show (again) how a Waugh adaptation should be done? A film to watch for Waugh completists only,I'm afraid. Just shield your eyes from the worst of the butchery.

0 of 1 people found this review helpful.  Was this review helpful to you?

Contribute to This Page