Bits and bobs and odds and sods

Continuing my trip up The Guardian's top 50 films of 2022

#43 : Brian And Charles

David Earl and Chris Hayward’s story of an inventor’s relationship with his creation blends Caractacus Potts with Victor Frankenstein to heartwarming effect.

I've heard this is charming, but don't really have the faintest idea what to expect from it.  Some ramshackle quirky English nonsense I suspect...

We start off by being introduced to Brian, an eccentric "inventor" who doesn't have a great line in successful inventions but he's ostensibly happy enough in his own little world - interacting with the village when required, but otherwise living a solitary existence.  Whilst rummaging through some flytipped rubbish, he finds a mannequin's head - which obviously results in him deciding to build a robot to be "big, strong and fast - and to help out round the house".  But, funnily enough, things don't quite work out that way...

His creation (the mannequins head, a washing machine body and some limbs of uncertain origin) is initially not a success, but somehow comes to life, reads a dictionary overnight and decides he likes the name "Charles Petrescu".  Initially Charles is a mix of a young child and a pet, being wildly curious and enthusiastic - but with increased knowledge comes increased demands (and moodiness - Charles spends one evening playing music loudly in his bedroom).  And, of course, the changes in Charles result in changes in Brian as he has to learn the role of a parent quickly - and so the odd couple go on their journey.

And that's probably enough to tell you, but I will say the story has more tenderness and more peril than I was expecting and it has a nice ending to it.  Brian is a cross between Joe Wilkinson, Bob Mortimer and Caractacus Potts - not exactly your average personality, but he's well drawn in his eccentricities and stays consistent, whilst also being allowed some growth.  He's well played by David Earl (who also co-wrote the screenplay) - and it's funny that I said Brian was part Joe Wilkinson because David has often worked with Joe.  Charles is also a well written character - I've never seen a more believable robot built out of a washing machine (well, it's true!) and he's played by Chris Hayward, the other screenplay writer.  He does an adequate job, but I'd struggle to say that he has much opportunity to display his emotions considering he has a large cardboard box over his head the entire time.

Everyone else in the cast does an acceptable job, but it's only really Louise Brealey as Hazel that has much to do, playing a role remarkably similar to her Molly character from Sherlock, but somewhat less pathological.  I'm also going to mention Colin Bennett as one of the minor characters, not for his work in this film but because Wikipedia tells me he graduated from RADA in 1972 as the most promising student, but is best known these days for playing Mr Bennett, the caretaker in Take Hart and Hartbeat and Zarquon in the BBC's version of H2G2.  Which just goes to show that you can never tell how your career is going to work out.

It's a much more beautiful film than I was expecting, with some absolutely gorgeous shots of the countryside (which I particularly wasn't expecting).  It also does a great job of (small) world building - Brian's house feels like it exists in another universe with cluttered rooms filled with failed inventions and their components (the opening shot in the garage is just beautiful).  There are also some really nice subtle little touches - like initially showing Brian's striped pyjamas drying on the line, but when Charles comes on the scene they have matching pyjamas, but obviously different sizes.  There are also a lot of amusingly titled books scattered throughout the film for you to notice if you're quick enough to catch them.

As you can probably guess from the above, this is a pretty quirky film and I can quite imagine a lot of people (eg my wife) just rolling their eyes at the ridiculousness of it all.  But, if you enjoy a bit of quirk, a bit of humour and a bit of emotion then there's a lot to recommend this - I thought the writers did a good job of getting the right balance.  It's also gorgeous to look at and it doesn't outstay its welcome - I really enjoyed it.  It's unlikely I'll watch it again, but if you want a gentle quirky comedy with a load of heart then there are far worse options out there.

At time of writing, it's available to stream on Sky if you subscribe and all the other usual places if you fancy paying for it.

#44 - Perfectly fine, but no more than that
#42 - I just don't get it