After satirising Britain's education system in 'If....' and the British justice system in 'O Lucky Man!', Lindsay Anderson takes a look at the health care system in this final part of his trilogy with Malcolm McDowell. It is not as effectively dramatic as 'If....', nor is it as delightfully whimsical as 'O Lucky Man!', but even if slightly inferior, this is a good film in itself, full of fascinating ideas and colourful characters. It is quite interesting to watch throughout, although a bit excessively disgusting and over-the-top at times, and in general it is a fairly solid conclusion to perhaps the oddest trilogy that has ever been filmed.
33 Reviews
A Relic of old Black Comedy.
jwild4927 September 2007
It's sad to see that there are no directors like Anderson these days. In fact, there never was a director like him and I doubt there ever will be one like him ever.
To start, I must warn any potential viewers that this film is a hand full. If you turn your head for more than 2 minutes you might be totally lost. To understand the humor of this film don't expect the kind of humor we find in today's comedy's or satires.
There's something genuine about this movie. Anderson has created his own little universe with his Mick Travis Trilogy and expect the unexpected when watching this film.
Overall, I say it was a good watch. It certainly intrigued and impressed with it's multiple characters. Mark Hamill has a hilarious part, and so does Malcolm McDowell. It's too bad they weren't in the movie more.
Anyone who loves weird movies will have to give this one a watch. It is simply one the best of its breed and will never fail to entertain. It gets slow in some parts but the scenes with McDowell pick the film right back up. His characterization of Travis is just brilliantly funny and odd. The ending scene is as epic and classic as any scene you'll find in cinema.
To start, I must warn any potential viewers that this film is a hand full. If you turn your head for more than 2 minutes you might be totally lost. To understand the humor of this film don't expect the kind of humor we find in today's comedy's or satires.
There's something genuine about this movie. Anderson has created his own little universe with his Mick Travis Trilogy and expect the unexpected when watching this film.
Overall, I say it was a good watch. It certainly intrigued and impressed with it's multiple characters. Mark Hamill has a hilarious part, and so does Malcolm McDowell. It's too bad they weren't in the movie more.
Anyone who loves weird movies will have to give this one a watch. It is simply one the best of its breed and will never fail to entertain. It gets slow in some parts but the scenes with McDowell pick the film right back up. His characterization of Travis is just brilliantly funny and odd. The ending scene is as epic and classic as any scene you'll find in cinema.
Once you check in....
funkyfry4 October 2002
Warning: Spoilers
Anderson's dark satire on politics within a hospital (perhaps after the apocalypse) falls slightly flat only for those familiar with the 2 exceptional films that this one is ostensibly a sequel to. The humor here is even more extreme and grotesque than in "O Lucky Man" -- at one point the hero's head is cut off and placed on a substitute body. Hamill is amusing as a news technician too stoned to save MacDowell, or even himself, from the lunacy. Unfortunately, the script relies on "joke jokes" and has too little of an emotional center (MacDowell's character is taken out of the center of things here for some reason, perhaps budgetary). Nice photography. Fans of sadistic humor should get a great kick out of it, but "O Lucky Man" and "If....." are in every way superior.
Why did he bother?
Aidan_Mclaren17 July 2006
I mean really what was the point of this film in Lindsay Anderson's eyes? Britannia Hospital stands for Britain and the problems in it, including bowing down to corrupt dictators, allowing monstrous experiments, easily-swayed union-leaders, cradling the rich and just general madness.
The film does not do as well as the last two as it seems rushed, you don't go as deep as you would like and the black humour and satire is unsubtle, obvious and boring quite frankly.
Mick Travis is not given enough time as he should have been other than being turned into a Frankenstein creation and dying. I often thought why did he put him in? Probably to continue the sequels.
The good points of the film include the acting and the cinematography, by far the best scenes were the ones including Graham Crowdan as the mad doctor.
The ending may have prevented this being a bad movie in general, as it eloquently notes by a brain that when man tries to be God, the result can be indescribable. There is no solution to this problem we have as the brain says and thus sums up the whole trilogy's message and Lindsay Anderson's view on the human race.
But other than that, he took a huge nose dive compared to his other two masterpieces and he really didn't need to feel that he had to make a sequel to "O Lucky Man!" as it said pretty much everything this did and better.
The film does not do as well as the last two as it seems rushed, you don't go as deep as you would like and the black humour and satire is unsubtle, obvious and boring quite frankly.
Mick Travis is not given enough time as he should have been other than being turned into a Frankenstein creation and dying. I often thought why did he put him in? Probably to continue the sequels.
The good points of the film include the acting and the cinematography, by far the best scenes were the ones including Graham Crowdan as the mad doctor.
The ending may have prevented this being a bad movie in general, as it eloquently notes by a brain that when man tries to be God, the result can be indescribable. There is no solution to this problem we have as the brain says and thus sums up the whole trilogy's message and Lindsay Anderson's view on the human race.
But other than that, he took a huge nose dive compared to his other two masterpieces and he really didn't need to feel that he had to make a sequel to "O Lucky Man!" as it said pretty much everything this did and better.
Savage, Unsubtle satire with plot holes and needless characters
smiths-420 March 2005
Firstly i must note that If.... is one of my favourite films and within that film Malcolm McDowell is Mick Travis, as good a character as Alex De Large (Clockwork Orange) and one which he makes his own. I found that film to be beautifully shot, excellently acted and the satire to be pinpoint accurate. It was a very important British film and is one of a few classics from the sixties (Saturday Night Sunday Morning, Loneliness of the long distance Runner, Billy Liar etc).
Next came O Lucky Man, with Travis out of school and working as a coffee salesman. We see his rise and fall and eventual rise again as a accidental film star. I also think this film is very important with a extremely gifted cast including Arthur Lowe in several roles and Graham Crowden as a mad experimenting doctor. The music by Alan Price greatly contributes to the film (lesser so Price's attempt to act!).
Finally, the 80's and Britannia Hospital. A great cast, an interesting premise but alas a flawed film. The major characters, bar Graham Crowden have little to do (McDowell, Rossiter, Hamill,) and i found myself feeling no empathy for anyone. The pickets and protesters were annoying but were outdone by the upper class visitors to the hospital and as for Mick Travis, an ignoble end. It is never explained why McDowell is there (why isn't he investigating the luxury treatment of the African Dictator which is causing everyone else so much grief!.....why does the nurse decide to continue his work/was she an insider who gave him info on Crowdens project??). The idea that the Queen would be allowed to visit the hospital in such inhospitable(pardon the pun) times is ludicrous etc etc.
But perhaps i am being to empirical about the film, what of the satire? About as subtle as a punch in the face! The upper classes are still treated differently to the working/middle classes be it in the workplace or in health care....wow, what a revelation!! Anyway, there is some joy in watching it unfold if you disengage from the satire element and enjoy the face spotting (John Gorden Sinclar, Robbie Coultrane, Robert Pugh, Richard Griffiths, Brian Glover, Arthur Lowe, Alan Bates, Roland Culver, Jill Bennett etc) and general mayhem of it all. I suppose Travis had to go somehow but why like this? My recommendation is to watch If.... and O Lucky Man and if you are satisfied with the ending to the latter film, leave it at that.
Next came O Lucky Man, with Travis out of school and working as a coffee salesman. We see his rise and fall and eventual rise again as a accidental film star. I also think this film is very important with a extremely gifted cast including Arthur Lowe in several roles and Graham Crowden as a mad experimenting doctor. The music by Alan Price greatly contributes to the film (lesser so Price's attempt to act!).
Finally, the 80's and Britannia Hospital. A great cast, an interesting premise but alas a flawed film. The major characters, bar Graham Crowden have little to do (McDowell, Rossiter, Hamill,) and i found myself feeling no empathy for anyone. The pickets and protesters were annoying but were outdone by the upper class visitors to the hospital and as for Mick Travis, an ignoble end. It is never explained why McDowell is there (why isn't he investigating the luxury treatment of the African Dictator which is causing everyone else so much grief!.....why does the nurse decide to continue his work/was she an insider who gave him info on Crowdens project??). The idea that the Queen would be allowed to visit the hospital in such inhospitable(pardon the pun) times is ludicrous etc etc.
But perhaps i am being to empirical about the film, what of the satire? About as subtle as a punch in the face! The upper classes are still treated differently to the working/middle classes be it in the workplace or in health care....wow, what a revelation!! Anyway, there is some joy in watching it unfold if you disengage from the satire element and enjoy the face spotting (John Gorden Sinclar, Robbie Coultrane, Robert Pugh, Richard Griffiths, Brian Glover, Arthur Lowe, Alan Bates, Roland Culver, Jill Bennett etc) and general mayhem of it all. I suppose Travis had to go somehow but why like this? My recommendation is to watch If.... and O Lucky Man and if you are satisfied with the ending to the latter film, leave it at that.
shocking satire about world collapse
frankbannister-19 October 2005
Lindsay Anderson was several years ago one of my favourite directors and then, 5 years ago, I thought that this film is possible his best. Since then I saw again Britannia Hospital at least five times - and it didn't worked always - in contrast Anderson's If..., which is better and better with every watching. However, Britannia Hospital is still a very good film, but its content maybe too disturbing for a lot of viewers. I mean, not only its details (for example, eating pieces of brain, by the way, didn't Hannibal - the movie - discover it), but the consequences of the whole film. This film's dark and painful thoughts about mankind and our future are very frightening, because they - if we can face it - almost (or entirely?) the reality. Although Lindsay Anderson's satire is focused on Britannia Hospital, where the most of the plot plays, this parabolic form is about the whole world: from the poor people to the rich, from the caretaker to the mad scientist. Britannia Hospital is full of moments of horror and black comedy (namely its subplot is parody/paraphraze of Frankenstein-story), but its strongest parts are when its laughing (or crying) on the figures of government and other leaders (the master of BH, the main strikers, even the Queen). The solution is Britannia Hospital - in a paradox way - there is no solution for mankind. Maybe the speech of the professor at the end is a little didactic, but at same time quite honest; but not he has the last world in the film. For those who have already seen this film, it is known, what I'm talking about; for those who are going to see BH, let it be a surprise. It's unforgettable, but extremely sad moment: a shocking last shot to Britannia Hospital.
Sad ending to Mick Travis
EdgarST4 November 2002
"Britannia Hospital" was not exhibited (although advertised) in Panamá in 1982, so I didn't have a chance to see the last part of the Mick Travis trilogy, created by Lindsay Anderson and David Sherwin. In the early 1990's I found a video copy of the film, but not until now have I seated to watch the film, after enjoying two Ealing comedies ("Kind Hearts and Coronets" and "The Man In the White Suit") that surprised me one more time for the pleasant way that social and political issues are usually treated in British cinema. (MILD SPOILERS) Social issues are all over "Britannia Hospital", the most saddening conclusion I have ever seen of a character, though luckily not affecting the admiration I have for the two previous films. "if...." (1968) introduced Mick (Malcolm McDowell) as a rebel in a public school; in "O Lucky Man" (1973) he was a young man seeking a job in the capitalist world, and in this final appearance, Mick has returned from the USA and apparently works as a spy -with a mini video camera- for an American TV station (represented by Mark Hamill, completely stoned inside a mobile unit) in the coverage of the anniversary of Britannia Hospital (metaphor of the United Kingdom) and the launching of a sinister Frankenstein-type project, while the workers are on strike, militants demand the exit of an African dictator from the hospital, with his wives, children and staff, and Her Royal Highness is on her way to the festivities. The riot takes place, but what is really violent is the way Mick is dispatched. In the previous films, there were elements of fantasy handled beautifully, even in a poetic way, but this time writer David Sherwin turned the story into a Stuart Gordon fest, which Anderson relished with a scene right out of "Re-Animator". This impression is so strong, that it casts a dark shadow over the final sequence when the Genesis project (which recites Shakespeare) is presented to all. Many familiar faces were welcome (Alan Bates, Joan Plowright, Graham Crowden, Jill Bennett, Liz Smith, Vivian Pickles, Marsha A. Hunt, and Robin Askwith), but it's a pity that Anderson and Sherwin decided to end the trilogy in such an extreme and rude fashion.
Life is a comedy to those who think, a tragedy to those who feel!
Snoggett21 November 2003
"The absurdities of human behaviour as we move into the Twenty-first Century are too extreme - and too dangerous - to permit us the luxury of sentimentalism or tears. But by looking at humanity objectively and without indulgence, we may hope to save it. Laughter can help." Lindsay Anderson
Britannia Hospital, an allegory for what was transpiring in England at the time, was released in 1982, and is the final part of Lindsay Anderson's brilliant lose trilogy of films that follow the adventures of Mick Travis as he travels through a strange and sometimes surreal Britain. From his days at boarding school in If.... (1968) to his journey from coffee salesman to film star in O Lucky Man (1972), Travis' adventures finally come to an end in Britannia Hospital which sees Mick as an investigative reporter investigating the bizarre activities of Professor Miller, played by the always interesting Graham Crowden, whom he had had a run in with in O Lucky Man. Checkout the Pig Man scene (This is well before Seinfeld.)
As is usual with an Anderson film the acting, by a top notch cast, most of whom had been in the previous two, is uniformly good. It is professionally shot by Mike Fash, although his work doesn't have the same feel to it that Miroslav Ondricek brought to the proceeding instalments, and is well produced. All three films have recurring characters from each. Some of the characters from If...., that didn't turn up in O Lucky Man, returned for Britannia Hospital. The film was lambasted by the English critics on release, although Dilys Powell listed it as one of the films of the year.
From its opening scene where an elderly patient is left to die on a gurney to its final revelatory scene of Miller unveiling his greatest scientific achievement, the film is choc full of surprises. One character is played by a dwarf and another by a man in drag. Yet one of the more pleasant surprises is the performance of Robin Askwith as Ben Keating, the school bully from If...., Askwith's film debut. Keating has organised a strike by the kitchen staff in retaliation for Potter ordering sixty-five ambassador class lunches from Furtnums. Askwith handles his role with skill, making Keating quite a likable character.
Over the years Britannia Hospital, as with the other two, has been revaluated and is now considered another classic from the Anderson stable. I, as did Dilys Powell, could have told them this when I first saw it back in '82.
Britannia Hospital, an allegory for what was transpiring in England at the time, was released in 1982, and is the final part of Lindsay Anderson's brilliant lose trilogy of films that follow the adventures of Mick Travis as he travels through a strange and sometimes surreal Britain. From his days at boarding school in If.... (1968) to his journey from coffee salesman to film star in O Lucky Man (1972), Travis' adventures finally come to an end in Britannia Hospital which sees Mick as an investigative reporter investigating the bizarre activities of Professor Miller, played by the always interesting Graham Crowden, whom he had had a run in with in O Lucky Man. Checkout the Pig Man scene (This is well before Seinfeld.)
As is usual with an Anderson film the acting, by a top notch cast, most of whom had been in the previous two, is uniformly good. It is professionally shot by Mike Fash, although his work doesn't have the same feel to it that Miroslav Ondricek brought to the proceeding instalments, and is well produced. All three films have recurring characters from each. Some of the characters from If...., that didn't turn up in O Lucky Man, returned for Britannia Hospital. The film was lambasted by the English critics on release, although Dilys Powell listed it as one of the films of the year.
From its opening scene where an elderly patient is left to die on a gurney to its final revelatory scene of Miller unveiling his greatest scientific achievement, the film is choc full of surprises. One character is played by a dwarf and another by a man in drag. Yet one of the more pleasant surprises is the performance of Robin Askwith as Ben Keating, the school bully from If...., Askwith's film debut. Keating has organised a strike by the kitchen staff in retaliation for Potter ordering sixty-five ambassador class lunches from Furtnums. Askwith handles his role with skill, making Keating quite a likable character.
Over the years Britannia Hospital, as with the other two, has been revaluated and is now considered another classic from the Anderson stable. I, as did Dilys Powell, could have told them this when I first saw it back in '82.
messy, disjointed conclusion is the weakest part of Anderson's trilogy
OldAle121 April 2008
Warning: Spoilers
I've been wanting to see this, the last part of the "Mick Travis" (Malcolm McDowell) trilogy, for over a decade, and not sure why I waited until now. Perhaps it was unavailable back in the VHS days? Perhaps it was the relatively poor reputation in comparison with the two earlier films, If.... and O Lucky Man!, both of which I loved when I first saw them back in the 90s.
Well, perhaps I shouldn't have waited. Seeing this film in isolation didn't do it any favors in all probability. It's a jumbled mass of incoherent ideologies and ideas played out against the backdrop of "Britannia Hospital" which is getting ready for a visit by the Queen Mother while a strike rages and a mob gathers demanding justice for an African dictator residing in the luxurious "first class" room at the top of the hospital. The satire on British class couldn't be any more obvious, and the misanthropy is equal in savagery with the strongest of Twain's or Vonnegut's work though not nearly on a par in quality. It's fitting, and not really surprising, that Travis should die as he attempts to report on the goings-on of mad scientist Professor Millar (Graham Crowden, in the most entertaining performance in the film), but what is surprising is how bland and dull his character is, how meaningless his end as he becomes something of a Frankenstein creature. The finish to the film, as Millar addresses a crowd composed of all the principal groups that have been arguing and fighting throughout, is moving in its way but seems utterly out-of-keeping with the lunacy that has gone before, and the wrap-up far too abrupt and forced.
Honestly, I barely remember it a week later. A slightly positive mark for this DVD rental, because it did keep me entertained for a good chunk of it's running time, but that's probably being overly generous of me.
Well, perhaps I shouldn't have waited. Seeing this film in isolation didn't do it any favors in all probability. It's a jumbled mass of incoherent ideologies and ideas played out against the backdrop of "Britannia Hospital" which is getting ready for a visit by the Queen Mother while a strike rages and a mob gathers demanding justice for an African dictator residing in the luxurious "first class" room at the top of the hospital. The satire on British class couldn't be any more obvious, and the misanthropy is equal in savagery with the strongest of Twain's or Vonnegut's work though not nearly on a par in quality. It's fitting, and not really surprising, that Travis should die as he attempts to report on the goings-on of mad scientist Professor Millar (Graham Crowden, in the most entertaining performance in the film), but what is surprising is how bland and dull his character is, how meaningless his end as he becomes something of a Frankenstein creature. The finish to the film, as Millar addresses a crowd composed of all the principal groups that have been arguing and fighting throughout, is moving in its way but seems utterly out-of-keeping with the lunacy that has gone before, and the wrap-up far too abrupt and forced.
Honestly, I barely remember it a week later. A slightly positive mark for this DVD rental, because it did keep me entertained for a good chunk of it's running time, but that's probably being overly generous of me.
Disappointing
thechair19 May 2021
If not as good as if... and O Lucky Man, that doesn't mean it is worthless
zetes21 March 2005
This film completes the Mick Travis trilogy, of which the first two installments are if
(1968) and O Lucky Man (1973). You could say either that Britannia Hospital has little to do with the other two films or a lot. It depends on how you look at it. The political viewpoints are similar, but the style is much different. The three movies remind me much of Tati's first three Hulot films in the way they differ between each other while having interconnected themes. This would be Anderson's Playtime, in that, much like Hulot in Playtime, Mick Travis (Malcolm McDowell) becomes just one of a million different characters. Calling Britannia Hospital Anderson's Playtime oversells the film, unfortunately. The film does not work quite as well as if
and O Lucky Man, both of which are masterpieces, in my estimation. Britannia Hospital feels like it ought to be a masterpiece. There are just so many flashes of genius. You see images and scenes that Federico Fellini or Luis Buñuel would have killed to come up with, and the film's liberal politics, while definitely somewhat confusing, are far more potent than anything Godard ever put forward. It also contains one moment of gorgeous eroticism, when Malcolm McDowell is changing clothes and a nurse gently cups both of his buttocks from behind. By the end, though, instead of being moved I was rather scratching my head. The film would probably benefit if I were to watch all three installments in a row, because there are apparently a lot of characters that are shared between them (I only recognized Mick Travis and Professor Millar; it's been over two years since I've seen the other films). But, then again, seeing how this film has been completely tossed aside by so many people, I'm hardly the only one who is confused. On the other hand, a film with so much ambition and power ought never to be shoved aside. Its dismissal is more than a little unjustified.
BRITANNIA HOSPITAL (Lindsay Anderson, 1982) ***
Bunuel197623 August 2006
This is the last entry in The Mick Travis Trilogy (also comprising IF.... [1968] and O LUCKY MAN! [1973], all directed by Anderson, written by David Sherwin and starring Malcolm McDowell as Travis) and the only one I hadn't watched before; ironically, the film made it to DVD before the others which are still M.I.A. (being owned by the majors, Paramount and Warners respectively) though both have been rumored as being "in preparation" for what seems like forever!! As with HELL IS A CITY (1960) and THE CRIMINAL (1960), I had my eyes on the Anchor Bay DVD of this title for the longest time but only now have I finally taken the plunge to acquire it - though, in its case, this had more to do with the fact that the film was largely considered a failure, certainly in comparison with its more highly-regarded predecessors!
Actually, it comes off as quite underrated and its satire on British society at large - with the titular hospital serving more or less as a microcosm of all that was not well with the country during the early 80s - is just as harsh, if admittedly somewhat hit-and-miss (the "Frankenstein" scenes, for instance, and the fact that royal representatives are played by a midget and a man in drag are more tasteless than anything else!). The thing is, however, that the film became part of the trilogy by accident and, in fact, McDowell isn't really the lead character - so that it's not quite as focused as IF.... and O LUCKY MAN!, and even borrows elements from both of them (the revolutionary aspect from the former and the bizarre experiments, mentioned above, from the latter) which aren't as successful this time around!
Still, it's very funny - for those who can take its unbridled savagery - along the way and the cast is brimming with talented character actors (Leonard Rossiter, Graham Crowden, Joan Plowright, Jill Bennett, Peter Jeffrey, Brian Pettifer, Dandy Nichols, Richard Griffiths, Brian Glover, Robbie Coltrane, uncredited bits by Alan Bates and Arthur Lowe, and even unlikely appearances - in fairly important roles - by Robin Askwith and Mark Hamill!), many of whom had already appeared in the two earlier Mick Travis films. Unfortunately, the score by Alan Price (ex-member of The Animals) - whose O LUCKY MAN! soundtrack, including a number of songs, had been one of its major assets - is underwhelming and, typical of old British films, the dialogue is hard to grasp sometimes due to the limited sound recording and the actors' heavy accents!
Actually, it comes off as quite underrated and its satire on British society at large - with the titular hospital serving more or less as a microcosm of all that was not well with the country during the early 80s - is just as harsh, if admittedly somewhat hit-and-miss (the "Frankenstein" scenes, for instance, and the fact that royal representatives are played by a midget and a man in drag are more tasteless than anything else!). The thing is, however, that the film became part of the trilogy by accident and, in fact, McDowell isn't really the lead character - so that it's not quite as focused as IF.... and O LUCKY MAN!, and even borrows elements from both of them (the revolutionary aspect from the former and the bizarre experiments, mentioned above, from the latter) which aren't as successful this time around!
Still, it's very funny - for those who can take its unbridled savagery - along the way and the cast is brimming with talented character actors (Leonard Rossiter, Graham Crowden, Joan Plowright, Jill Bennett, Peter Jeffrey, Brian Pettifer, Dandy Nichols, Richard Griffiths, Brian Glover, Robbie Coltrane, uncredited bits by Alan Bates and Arthur Lowe, and even unlikely appearances - in fairly important roles - by Robin Askwith and Mark Hamill!), many of whom had already appeared in the two earlier Mick Travis films. Unfortunately, the score by Alan Price (ex-member of The Animals) - whose O LUCKY MAN! soundtrack, including a number of songs, had been one of its major assets - is underwhelming and, typical of old British films, the dialogue is hard to grasp sometimes due to the limited sound recording and the actors' heavy accents!
Just dreadful
kieran-wright7 July 2017
I really wanted to like this movie, but in the end couldn't even bear to watch it to the end. The one redeeming feature was Leonard Rossiter and I found myself wondering whether even he would have doubted his sanity in signing up to this when he saw the final rushes. Malcolm McDowell, whom I considered to be a good actor, was reduced to little more than a 'Carry-On' performance. The juxtaposition of farce and horror to me seemed miscalculated. Just dreadful and one I'm trying to forget... Tip: don't watch this whilst consuming food.
Mick is back...
dave13-110 February 2012
School rebel (If...) and coffee salesman (O Lucky Man) Mick Travis is back, this time as a reporter checking out a government funded hospital which is about to receive a Royal visit from the Queen Mother. He encounters vicious hardhat strikers, greedy and unscrupulous union bosses, mad scientist medical caregivers and a hospital administrator (Leonard Rossiter) whose heart is in the right place, but who finds himself having to descend time and again to the brute level of everybody around him. The picture painted of UK society here is grim and mean and there is less of the cheeky fun of O Lucky Man here, making the film more successful as satire but less so as madcap comedy, although that is clearly it is clearly intended as both. Britannia Hospital has its entertaining moments, though, especially with the brilliant chief of surgery (Graham Crowder) who turns out to be clearly insane and when government protocol officials show up to instruct hospital workers on the correct forms of address for the Queen Mum and nobody can understand their elite, upper crust accents! Worth a look for fans of O Lucky Man and social satire movies in general.
Just don't expect to laugh out loud a lot.
Just don't expect to laugh out loud a lot.
80s Britain Gone to the Dogs
Waerdnotte9 January 2014
Anderson attempts a rather heavy handed allegorical tale, his vision of a dysfunctional Albion. The working class flexing its muscle through organised labour, a pragmatic middle class, kow-towing to labour and the aristocracy, a ruling class oblivious to the chaos surrounding it, and a prying, amoral media. Anderson seems to have gone beyond his critique of capitalist imperialism and found himself buffeted from all sides by the chaos that was Britain in the early 1980s. His major coup is seeing the future of humankind as merely a pawn in the oncoming information industry.
The film was made towards the end of the first Thatcher government's electoral victory, when Britain was still in the grip of industrial conflict, and the there was still a debate about the possibilities of socialism. Nowadays this seems very dated and almost obscene, and its hard to imagine that the ongoing conflict betweenmanagement and labour was very real back then. However, because of Andersons obsession with class conflict, the story gets completely lost, and I found it hard to maintain interest in a story that had very little to empathise with. UK Films such as Gregory's Girl, Chariots of Fire and Ghandi were the big hitters, British directors like Ridley Scott were making Blade Runner. Anderson, like many others, was on the wrong side of the fence culturally and politically by the 1980s. People wanted something more than sledgehammer politics.
However, this is a loveletter to some of the great TV actors of the 1970s and 1980s. Leonard Rossitor is great, Robin Asquith more than holds his own. There's Joan Plowwright, Dandy Nichols, and Richard Griffiths. Alan Bates makes an appearance as does Arthur Lowe. Mark Hamill and Malcolm McDowell. The list is endless. So, a poor movie, but worth a watch just to catch the best of British acting from the era.
The film was made towards the end of the first Thatcher government's electoral victory, when Britain was still in the grip of industrial conflict, and the there was still a debate about the possibilities of socialism. Nowadays this seems very dated and almost obscene, and its hard to imagine that the ongoing conflict betweenmanagement and labour was very real back then. However, because of Andersons obsession with class conflict, the story gets completely lost, and I found it hard to maintain interest in a story that had very little to empathise with. UK Films such as Gregory's Girl, Chariots of Fire and Ghandi were the big hitters, British directors like Ridley Scott were making Blade Runner. Anderson, like many others, was on the wrong side of the fence culturally and politically by the 1980s. People wanted something more than sledgehammer politics.
However, this is a loveletter to some of the great TV actors of the 1970s and 1980s. Leonard Rossitor is great, Robin Asquith more than holds his own. There's Joan Plowwright, Dandy Nichols, and Richard Griffiths. Alan Bates makes an appearance as does Arthur Lowe. Mark Hamill and Malcolm McDowell. The list is endless. So, a poor movie, but worth a watch just to catch the best of British acting from the era.
If... you want to stay a Lucky Man, don't enter Britannia Hospital
Galina_movie_fan13 August 2007
Warning: Spoilers
After I saw during the last week the first ("If...", 1968) and the final ("Britannia Hospital", 1982) films of Lindsay Anderson's satirical Mick Travis trilogy, I realized the whole scope and magnitude of his vision. In his three films ("O Lucky Man", 1973, is a middle chapter), he had covered all aspects, politics, and institutions of British Society from 1968 to 1982 with its complex system of class and caste differences and privileges, including its public schools, its international politics, its law system, and its health care system, and he found out that something was rotten in the British Kingdom. The third and final chapter of the trilogy, takes place almost entirely in the Britannia Hospital, one of the oldest and most respectable English medical centers in London that celebrates its 500th anniversary and expects the Queen Mother herself to attend. But there are many troubles at the hospital that mirror the problems the whole society suffers from and may turn the celebration into a nightmare. Our old friend, Mick "Lucky Man" Travis (Malcolm McDowell) who had become investigative reporter arrives with his crew to cover the celebration but accidentally he becomes a witness and then an unwilling participant in the sinister human experiments that are conducted by Professor Millar. The "mad scientist" had promised to Mick in the previous movie that as a result of the experiment, he would become much better... Well, Mick is just about to find out if that is true.
Very clever, very British, filled equally with dry humor and horrifying shocking sequences, "Britannia Hospital" ends the trilogy with the bang. Its final 20 minutes are the combination of the darkest surreal comedy and the serious compelling futuristic satire of the long-lasting power. As for Mick, "Britannia Hospital" left no hopes for another Mick Travis chapter ever. After all, Mick may not be a lucky man but we are the lucky viewers that have been following him on his crazy and unforgettable journey where Lindsay Anderson sent us.
Very clever, very British, filled equally with dry humor and horrifying shocking sequences, "Britannia Hospital" ends the trilogy with the bang. Its final 20 minutes are the combination of the darkest surreal comedy and the serious compelling futuristic satire of the long-lasting power. As for Mick, "Britannia Hospital" left no hopes for another Mick Travis chapter ever. After all, Mick may not be a lucky man but we are the lucky viewers that have been following him on his crazy and unforgettable journey where Lindsay Anderson sent us.
I really felt sick after watching this
author199519 March 2006
Warning: Spoilers
I couldn't decide whether this is a good movie or a bad one, but I don't think it will leave you unshaken. People die in the corridors (probably painfully) because of the staff's neglect, and I remember being very shocked by the sheer callousness of this (but that's satire, after all). But the thing that stayed with me was the experiment in the new wing - creating a new human being from parts. Even though it has been years since I saw the film, just writing about it makes me feel sick again. The mad doctor's ghoulish interest in his patients was shocking, and the despairing expression on the transplanted head's face was worse - but when the new man finally bit the doctor's hand and the surgery staff literally tore the body's head off to free the doctor was nothing but revolting. It's strong stuff, really strong stuff, and even though I sometimes wish I hadn't seen the movie because of that scene alone, I don't know... it was a learning experience, after all, that was nicely summed up in the final shot of the disembodied brain quoting Shakespeare: when man wants to play god, the result can be indescribable.
Brilliant black comedy
lizness30 August 2005
If you like films that leave an impression on you - then you'll like this. I saw this for the first time when I was quite young, I think my dad wished he'd known how weird it would get, or he probably wouldn't have let me watch it with him.
Whilst there is a riotous strike going on outside the hospital there is weirdness going on inside, as an eccentric doctor performs some truly sadistic acts on his patients to fulfill his own ambitions.
Its full of faces any 30-plus British audience will recognise, and if you're an Orbital fan you'll love the speech at the end which they sampled for Snivilisation.
A cult black comedy, with some quite horrific bits in, its quintessentially British, but definitely not in the vain the Full Monty or Four Wedding (thank god!).
Whilst there is a riotous strike going on outside the hospital there is weirdness going on inside, as an eccentric doctor performs some truly sadistic acts on his patients to fulfill his own ambitions.
Its full of faces any 30-plus British audience will recognise, and if you're an Orbital fan you'll love the speech at the end which they sampled for Snivilisation.
A cult black comedy, with some quite horrific bits in, its quintessentially British, but definitely not in the vain the Full Monty or Four Wedding (thank god!).
Doctor, NO!
writers_reign23 October 2016
Warning: Spoilers
Not for the first time and almost certainly not the last I find that I have apparently been watching a different film to the majority of people who have posted comments here, all seemingly fully paid-up members of the Lindsay Anderson For President club. It's strange - to me at least - how the BFI seemingly is unable to function without a deity to worship and with Ken Loach on his last legs they'll be burning the midnight oil on Southbank and laying in a supply of white smoke. Anderson of course preceded Loach and that poseur who came up with a trilogy about Liverpool and then had the temerity to think he was up to rewriting Terence Rattigan's The Deep Blue Sea. So be it. This effort can't seem to decide if it's a poor man's I'm All Right, Jack or an up-market Hammer horror either way it's well worth missing.
As subtle as a pair of hobnail boots
andrew-lamb-542-71661822 May 2010
I guess there are a lot of Lyndsay Anderson fans out there who are prepared to forgive their hero. Although, why they should forgive him for dropping the ball with this turkey I can't imagine. Personally, I thought this slice of "satire" was a dreadful crock of brown, smelly stuff. Coming on the heels of "O Lucky Man" I was fully in tune with all the surreality. Sadly the thing was painfully let down by all those bolt-on, tokenistic and grand-standing waves to the liberal gallery. I thought the scene where the pretty little protester offered the riot cop a flower was particularly risible. The implication being that the rioters were all a bunch of peace-niks and definitely not inclined to get down and medieval with the fuzz. As for Mick Travis' snogging scene with the nurse, well....... I've never seen a less convincing affair-de-coeur, Carry-on films included.
Now, that would be an idea for a subtle satire: "Carry On Anderson"
Now, that would be an idea for a subtle satire: "Carry On Anderson"
Criminally underrated film!
psychorobotape1 February 2008
That this movie has only achieved a rating of 5.9 out of 10 is appalling! Britannia Hospital brilliantly mixes the macabre, the comic, and the profound with beautiful imagery, wonderful production design, and Lindsay Anderson's astute sense of direction. The writing is flawless, the characters are flawless, the story is engrossing and the film is in my humble opinion the second best work of arguably the greatest director and visionary in British cinema history. I don't know who let the kindergärtners on here to vote but take my word - behind the wacky comic facade lies a powerful and intelligent film that should be ranked up there with the greatest films of British cinema.
Britannia Hospital: A Lindsay Anderson film which succinctly portrays some glaring deficiencies of British health care system.
FilmCriticLalitRao23 July 2013
It can be anybody's wild guess that most viewers would bring to their minds a sick nation which needs to be urgently cured come what may whenever they hear about a film with a wacky title-"Britannia Hospital". However, one has to bear in mind that "Britannia Hospital" is no ordinary infirmary as it is infested with numerous dubious characters intent on getting their personal agendas furthered at a time when the eponymous health establishment is getting all spruced up to celebrate its 500th anniversary. One can thus watch with customary mirth a scientist determined to produce the best brain in the world, an hospital official who would like to instruct its staff about the right manners in which British queen must be received, a reckless reporter who would like to stealthily film irregularities of an hospital etc. A long time before Romanian director Cristi Puiu burst on international scene with his absurd tale set in a Bucharest hospital, The Death of Mr. Lazarescu (2005), Lindsay Anderson-one of British cinema's greatest auteur had already made one of the best satires in the history of British cinema. Britannia Hospital is so brutal yet frank in its mission to expose horrendous absurdities of an hospital system that comparisons with Samuel Fuller's maverick "Shock Corridor" (1963) would not appear incongruous. Lindsay Anderson's film is a phenomenal treat for all Anglophobes/Britanophobes as he ruthlessly attacks whatever that is either dear to Britain or has a distinct British connection. Upon its release in 1982, a horrible time for Britain, this Lindsay Anderson film was butchered beyond recognition by some vested interests of British press. However, it is high time genuine film admirers make efforts to go beyond the realm of "Carry On" films as "Britannia Hospital" is the only perfect film which would make viewers jump with joy discovering why affordable,decent health care is still a matter of concern for most ordinary Britons.
Brittania Hospital - strange yet great
vinciblestimps5 July 2007
I just wanted to correct a few things said already.
Lindsay Anderson has stated (often) that the Mick Travis in each of the films is a different one. He's using the name "Mick Travis" instead of saying "everyman" or "any old sod". So, complaining about what Mick did or didn't do vis a vis "the last film" is sort of pointless.
The Royal in question here, right smack in the film is a Queen Mother impersonator and a great one at that. You're completely right that the Queen wouldn't stand for it... but that's why they put the half-mad happy dotty royal instead of her.. The Queen Mum would just go on and wait for her lunch.
The film is eccentric in a great way... sure it has some blood spatter but I can tolerate that. =) Anyway, I wish we had gotten more shots of Malcolm in less clothing, but hey, I'll just have to live with it. Overall, a great film.
Lindsay Anderson has stated (often) that the Mick Travis in each of the films is a different one. He's using the name "Mick Travis" instead of saying "everyman" or "any old sod". So, complaining about what Mick did or didn't do vis a vis "the last film" is sort of pointless.
The Royal in question here, right smack in the film is a Queen Mother impersonator and a great one at that. You're completely right that the Queen wouldn't stand for it... but that's why they put the half-mad happy dotty royal instead of her.. The Queen Mum would just go on and wait for her lunch.
The film is eccentric in a great way... sure it has some blood spatter but I can tolerate that. =) Anyway, I wish we had gotten more shots of Malcolm in less clothing, but hey, I'll just have to live with it. Overall, a great film.
A misanthropic master-comedy
t_atzmueller26 January 2013
Throwing stones at people may catch peoples attention but it's almost certainly not going to make you friends or further your career; a shame that young, talented director Linday Anderson never realized this, and that "Britannia Hospital" virtually obliterated his livelihood.
For many viewers – especially those English viewers being stereotypically depicted – the film was too vitriolic to be truly funny. Imagine an episode of "Carry On", directed by a misanthropist with an utter hate for the characters he's depicting. Indeed, apart from the coloured nurse, we do not get a single character that's amiable vaguely sympathetic. Corrupt, corruptible, greedy, self-indulgent, insane even, from the working-class buffoon to the cannibalistic African dictator – to the last person.
Is the movie funny? Well, as said, you'll need a certain level of cynicism, nihilism and misanthropy – I dare say, you need to see things as they truly are in order to fully appreciate the humour. You'd have to believe in the general rottenness of society and humanity as such and still be capable to crack a laugh.
If you're familiar with comic-books, you're likely familiar with the "Watchmen" comic-book, which has a character, the Comedian, state that: "Life is a joke – but it's not necessarily a funny joke." Get's 8 points from 10 from me.
For many viewers – especially those English viewers being stereotypically depicted – the film was too vitriolic to be truly funny. Imagine an episode of "Carry On", directed by a misanthropist with an utter hate for the characters he's depicting. Indeed, apart from the coloured nurse, we do not get a single character that's amiable vaguely sympathetic. Corrupt, corruptible, greedy, self-indulgent, insane even, from the working-class buffoon to the cannibalistic African dictator – to the last person.
Is the movie funny? Well, as said, you'll need a certain level of cynicism, nihilism and misanthropy – I dare say, you need to see things as they truly are in order to fully appreciate the humour. You'd have to believe in the general rottenness of society and humanity as such and still be capable to crack a laugh.
If you're familiar with comic-books, you're likely familiar with the "Watchmen" comic-book, which has a character, the Comedian, state that: "Life is a joke – but it's not necessarily a funny joke." Get's 8 points from 10 from me.
See also
Awards | FAQ | User Ratings | External Reviews | Metacritic Reviews
