day
» » How I Won the War (1967)

How I Won the War (1967) HD online

How I Won the War (1967) HD online
Language: English
Category: Movie / Comedy / War
Original Title: How I Won the War
Director: Richard Lester
Writers: Patrick Ryan,Charles Wood
Released: 1967
Duration: 1h 49min
Video type: Movie
This film features former Beatle John Lennon and Roy Kinnear as ill-fated enlisted men under the inept command of Lieutenant Ernest Goodbody. The story unwinds mostly in flashbacks of Lieutenant Goodbody who has lower-class beginnings and education which make him a poor officer who commands one of the worst units of the army.

Videos

Cast overview, first billed only:
Michael Crawford Michael Crawford - Lt. Goodbody
John Lennon John Lennon - Gripweed
Roy Kinnear Roy Kinnear - Clapper
Lee Montague Lee Montague - Transom
Jack MacGowran Jack MacGowran - Juniper
Michael Hordern Michael Hordern - Grapple
Jack Hedley Jack Hedley - Melancholy Musketeer
Karl Michael Vogler Karl Michael Vogler - Odlebog
Ronald Lacey Ronald Lacey - Spool
James Cossins James Cossins - Drogue
Ewan Hooper Ewan Hooper - Dooley
Alexander Knox Alexander Knox - American General
Robert Hardy Robert Hardy - British General
Sheila Hancock Sheila Hancock - Mrs. Clapper's Friend
Charles Dyer Charles Dyer - Happy-Trousered Man

John Lennon wrote "Strawberry Fields Forever" while shooting this movie in Spain.

This was the first time John Lennon wore his soon-to-be-trademark granny glasses in public.

John Lennon found the Spanish location quite boring, so Ringo Starr flew out to keep him company. However, Lennon also found working on the project a refreshing change from his increasingly arduous and isolated musical career with the Beatles. Namely on set, Lennon was just another cast member, and a relatively minor one, who could interact with others largely as a normal person with the crew. As such, Lennon insisted on attending the production every day even when he was not required on set as a learning experience.

The intended concept of the film was that archival black and white footage of each battle was to be tinted specific colors. The soldiers who died in that battle continue to accompany the unit silently with their uniforms now the color of the battle they died in. However, when the final answer print was sent from the principal lab in England to the labs in Los Angeles subcontracted out to make the release prints, the LA labs assumed that the tinted footage was a mistake, and graded it back to black and white without notifying anyone until the whole batch was struck. The version of the film shown on "Retroplex" from Starz has the battle scenes tinted different colors and the soldiers who die in a battle become that color.

The glasses worn by John Lennon were known as "metal British National Health Service (NHS) style frames". The standard issued eyeglasses were covered by the "free" British health care system. John Lennon was "blind as a bat" claimed fellow Beatle Paul McCartney. While making the movie, he felt a sense of liberation being able to see while not worrying about how he looked in them. The glasses, which at the time were the farthest thing from being fashionable were a keeper. They have now become known as John Lennon glasses and are available in most optical store in the western hemisphere.

John Lennon recorded all post-synchronization work for his character in the film from December 28-29, 1966, at Twickenham Film Studios in London, England.

The making of the film is central to the plot of delightful Spanish comedy by David Trueba "Vivir es facil con los ojos cerrados/Living is easy with eyes closed", 2013.



Reviews: [25]

  • avatar

    Whitemaster

    Although (unfairly) ravaged by critics at the time and so generally dismissed ever since, HOW I WON THE WAR is both a brilliant anti-war film and anti war film film (much more so than the usually heralded M*A*S*H). Filled with biting satire and brilliant performances from Michael Crawford, John Lennon, Roy Kinnear, Ronald Lacey, Michael Hordern and, well, the entire cast, HIWTW was perhaps a bit too odd for 1967 audiences who expected perhaps a more madcap adventure, but today it deserves not only a rethink - but a reissue on DVD. (Why this wonderful movie is not available on DVD (at least in the US) is yet another slap in its face.) Richard Lester and writer Charles Wood (who also wrote HELP! for the Beatles) have crafted a brilliant black comedy that easily stands with Dr Strangelove. It won't be everyone's cup of tea, granted, but if you forget your preconceptions and let it wash over you, you will be richly rewarded. RELEASE IT ON DVD!
  • avatar

    Zahisan

    This challenging film is in a class all of its own. It's as if Samuel Beckett had written a screenplay filling it with low slapstick and very smart commentary. Lester's ultimate point seems to be that war is merely just an extension of class war. Michael Crawford is excellent as the clueless, Bertie Woosteresque squad commander; always trying to piece things together with a seemingly high class education that does him absolutely no good in the thick of war's irrationality. The fast-paced gags come in rapid succession, punctuating each working class soldier's senseless death with great comic absurdity. And yet, armed with his upper class and horribly thoughtless "sacrifice for King and country" paradigm, Lt. Goodbody forges ahead on a completely senseless mission inadvertently causing the deaths of all of his men.

    It's perfect that in the end the only person he can relate to is his German upper-class captor. His ultimate "winning" of the war by simply purchasing the only bridge left crossing the Rhein (with a bad check, no less) is the perfect metaphor for the film's main idea; that it's not even money that separates the classes - it's just the collective illusion of the classes that separates them. And it's this illusion for which the working class are forced to fight and die.

    A fantastic piece of anti-war theatre.
  • avatar

    Mullador

    An anti-war film in disguise... As a "fan" of war films but also a "peacenik" I love this movie. Aside from the fact that i am an overtly biased Beatles' fan this film is an intellectual riot. John Lennon co-stars with the star of Hello Dolly as members of a British military unit saddled with the ridiculous duty of building a cricket pitch during the invasion of North Africa! Filled with ironic black war humor, it suffers a little from the predictable muddle of most 60's films.

    Something interesting to note is that John Lennon is first seen wearing his trademark round spectacles in this movie. Having been asked (for some reason) to wear the glasses for the film he continued to wear them for the rest of his life!

    This movie is a must for all Lennon fans.
  • avatar

    Neol

    'How I Won the War' has to be one of the most original, bizarre and imaginative war films ever made. I first saw it late one night as an impressionable kid and immediately was drawn by its unusual style and narrative. To have the film tinted in several different colours to show the stages of the war was both daring and cool. One gets the feeling of having witnessed something larger, more intimate and important than just a mere war movie.

    There are no real heros in this film, certainly Michael Crawford and his troop are pretty cowardly and inept, whereas the Germans are depicted, in the raid on the fuel dump scene, as being content with religious service and a bit of soccer.

    It is true that history is written by the victors and Michael Crawford's character, Goodbody, is one of only two survivers from his regiment. He proudly states at the very end of the film that he "won the war". Maybe he did, but his actions and his balmy enthusiasm show us just how idiotic war can be.

    My favourite scene was the one with Goodbody and the German officer who befriends Goodbody for much of the film. Together, they talk about how cruel both the British and Germans are, and how the German officer has killed many Jews. Goodbody then talks about how he got his commission and why he is fighting. It ends with the German officer telling Goodbody that he (Goodbody) is a fascist. "Am I?", replies Goodbody, "but I don't particularly dislike Jews."

    When the very affable German officer, who is attempting to surrender, is blindly run over by an advancing British tank, we know that in this war the good, the bad and the ugly become mixed up and inseperable.

    I currently own a very worn out video of the film and am hoping it will be released soon on DVD here in Australia.
  • avatar

    Zut

    The first time I watched this film, it was because I was a big Beatles fan and wanted to see John Lennon's performance. I was in my teens and didn't understand much of what went on, but at least I made a valiant effort.

    The second time I watched this film -- about a decade later -- it was because I was now a big Richard Lester fan and wanted to see if I understood a little more of what was going on; I did. A decade spent honing my sense of irony and a crash course in classic British comedy helped out there.

    This film is right up there with "Dr. Strangelove" as far as black comedies about the insanity of war go. And any film where John Lennon gets to say, "Can I rub your ball, sir? It gives me great pleasure." is okay in my book.
  • avatar

    Dolid

    Wow, it is not everyday that one comes across a right-wing essay on the IMDB as one of the posters did in regards t this film. First of all, I am delighted to have finally seen this. Aside from "The Royal Flash" and "Cuba," I believe I have seen most of Richard Lester's films which are of significance. I think too look at this film from a mere political pov is a mistake. It is a good statement first of all about how utterly ridicilous the war process is. Sure, there are awful people like Hitler and Mullah Omar, out there who threaten the world at large but by and large, the war process rarely leads to any resounding political solutions and long-term peace and understanding. I think even people who generally support their government's wars would agree to this sentiment. Lester does a brilliant job of poiting this out through the course of this film, and he is helped by some great acting- including a surprisingly brilliant John Lenon to achieve this great satire. Lester, who was actually born in Philadelphia, has a great sense of man's moral faults and he reflects that in this film, as well as in "Petulia"- which is considered to be his best film. I think Lester's genius can even be seen in his two most blatant commerical ventures, "Suprman II" and "Butch and Sundance: The Early Years" as well as the Beatles movies. He deserves more respect, and I think one day he just might get it.
  • avatar

    Tinavio

    War is the noblest of games, specially for the Queen's musketeers. Lt. Ernest Goodbody with his ready learned and endless banalities about duty, heroism and just about anything that comes to his mind is in his clumsy foolishness in a league of his own.

    Jokes come in such rapid fire that this war comedy has to be viewed several times in order to all of them be taken fully in. The pace of cutting, scenes and clever dialog is really fast. Dick Lester directs the story from mad screwball comedy to short moments of even madder reality -combat, wounding, deaths- and back again without losing any of the films evident power. The continuous use of different film techniques may strike some as tiring or pretentious. I liked the rich variation, because it just somehow fits so well and Lester is never in danger of loosing the scarlet thread of irony. Some of the best moments are sprung by satiric takes on war movies and documentaries. A mission for the crew involves them to build a cricket field in the desert to impress their officers. So, under burning sun the convoy duly drags along a field roller across the dunes while the soundtrack is blaring unmistakeably recognizable music from 'Lawrence of Arabia'. Some of the training sequences brought to mind bits from Laurel and Hardy comedies.

    At times situations begin to reach a point of surrealism. The soldiers already fallen in battle follow along the crew as ghosts of different colors. The oldest and most experienced man in the crew starts to dress and act like a circus clown. The changes and surprises just keep coming.

    Watching the scene where John Lennon as soldier Gripweed gets killed in a German field has now an enormous effect for reasons easy to understand. As he sits there bleeding, faces the camera and says something like "You know this would happen", it really makes an extra strong comment on violence now. Stronger than the writer, director or any other ever had in mind. For a thirty years old black comedy this movie still has an awful lot to say.
  • avatar

    superstar

    Maybe true heroism is less than heroic. "How I Won the War" is a very funny movie that in its own surreal way depicts very real and less than heroic motivations for war. The setting is North Africa and Europe during WWII. The insinuations of absurdity could be any place and any time. Aptly portraying the soldiers is a cast that includes a young Michael Crawford playing the group leader -- bumbling, patriotic, and self-possessed of a desire to be rewarded. Roy Kinnear competently plays the jolly and slightly addled, clear-thinking (albeit mumbling) realist. Michael Hordern is the Blimpo commander with the proverbial blinkers on, never letting his men down when it comes to providing them with exhortation. There is also John Lennon who renders a very capable job of portraying a naive pessimist (perhaps a reflection of his feelings at the time about his role as a member of another group). No one ever really dies in this movie; they merely change colors. And in the end, the entire experience of war is capsulated into a home movie. Look for Alexander Knox playing an American general.
  • avatar

    Owomed

    Simply and absolutely one of the most boring and self-important films ever made. When it came out in 1967, director Richard Lester made no secret of his conviction that he'd produced the greatest antiwar statement since 1930's All Quiet on the Western Front. In reality, it's one of the worst films of any kind since 1930.

    Here's Lester's antiwar strategy. Take a small number of British soldiers in a wear against Hitler and Nazism and show them to be a bunch of fools, cowards, and lunatics. Show that their mission - to build a cricket-pitch in enemy territory - is absurd. Show John Lennon's idiot minor character bloodily killed.

    That's it. Doesn't it make you hate war? Doesn't it prove that soldiers are suckers? Doesn't it make you want to protest Vietnam? Well, maybe all Richard Lester really wanted to do was make an amusing service comedy. Maybe his self-promoting comments were just trying to cash in on the antiwar feelings of the day.

    In that case he still failed. There are more laughs in five minutes of "Sgt. Bilko" than in this entire movie.

    I remember vividly being unable to stay awake watching this turkey in the theater forty years ago. I walked out, even though I'd paid good money. (Only two other movies in my entire life have had such a sleep-inducing effect on me, and "How I Won the War" may well be the worst of three.) A few years back somebody gave me the video. With access to coffee I managed to stay awake a just little longer. When I snapped awake I shut the thing off.

    Way back in 1967 I actually read Patrick Ryan's comic novel that was the basis of this film. It was funny in an aimless kind of way.

    This movie is unfunny in each and every way.
  • avatar

    mym Ђудęm ęгσ НuK

    Many people hate this movie because of how absurd and hard to follow it is. Really, IMO, it isn't as hard to follow as many people say. The characters are very well developed. Michael Crawford plays the inept Lt. Goodbody and Beatle John Lennon plays a fascist thief named Gripweed. The story, however absurd it may be, is actually pretty interesting. Goodbody's troop must set up a cricket pitch in the middle of nowhere.

    I think it's actually a very good movie. I bought it only because it has John Lennon but I love it now for so many more reasons.
  • avatar

    DrayLOVE

    After a string of solid film successes, director Richard Lester earned the right to join the ranks of the self-indulgent. Freedom can sometimes allow a director to show something artful, and sometimes not. In this case, you get a solid dose of the latter. Most obviously, Mr. Lester had the wrong war, time period, and esoteric. A black comedy about World War II, for an audience beginning to argue about what the United States was still doing in Vietnam (mentioned herein), wasn't what the doctor ordered. More importantly, "How I Won the War" wasn't very amusing or engaging.

    The story really only comes to life during the final scenes, by which time many viewers would had found something more stimulating to do with their time. War baby Michael Crawford (as Ernest Goodbody) performs up to the level of his character's name. Most notable among the "Third Troop of the Fourth Musketeers" is bored anti-war hero and musical artist John Lennon (as Musketeer Gripweed). Studio executives at United Artists, as well as the world at large, would have preferred another Lester-directed musical starring The Beatles. "How I won the War" was bound for disappointment.

    *** How I Won the War (10/18/67) Richard Lester ~ Michael Crawford, John Lennon, Roy Kinnear, Lee Montague
  • avatar

    Urreur

    Take a movie like this. You may have heard somewhere that it was pretty bad. But, being an inquisitive sort, you visit IMDb first anyway. Here, you are greeted with plenty of reviews that tell you that it's not so bad - some even call it a masterpiece and a hidden gem.

    Then, you watch it and the cold hard reality hits you - it's just not that good of a movie. The first half an hour seemed to take about four. Yes, there are "innovative" aspects such as tinting people and scenes differently, but ultimately this is cheap and adds little.

    There are far better anti-war films of the same period. "How I Won the War" with a big star (Lennon) was made in 1967. Steve McQueen's "The Sand Pebbles" of 1966 is, although a much longer movie, an infinitely better anti-war film that managed to convey all of the same philosophical points as HIWtW (and more) and do it with subtlety, class, and genuine humanity.

    The saving grace of HIWtW should have been comedy - absurdist or otherwise. The ingredients were there - war and military life are just asking for the application of ironic and observationalist British wit. Alas, while the characters spend most of the time speaking in that fast British way as if they were saying something as clever as, say, Monty Python or Fawlty Towers, what they actually say is substantially less interesting. Pity.

    This film is not particularly worth watching.
  • avatar

    Pipet

    Sorry, Fab Listeners, but after almost 50 years of Beatlemania, it's time to get over the juvenile idea that everything done by, influenced by, or connected to one or more of The Beatles MUST be wonderful. Take John Lennon (whose role, BTW, is actually a minor one) out of this film, and you would remember it even less than the home movies your second cousin took of his daughter's 4th birthday party.

    In its favor, I will say that some of the battle scenes are rather effective. But aside from that, there is little worth watching here. The script is terrible, and the thick British accents and colloquialisms make half of the lines nearly incomprehensible to American audiences. Over and over, I found myself saying "Huh? What was that? What did he say?". The film's continual use of non sequiturs doesn't help matters, and after an hour or so, I was still trying to figure what exactly this movie was getting at. I was left to conclude that it was a rather feeble attempt to address the horrors of war in much the same comic way as M*A*S*H did, with far more brilliance and success, a couple of years later. No dice; this film simply does not cut it.
  • avatar

    Flash_back

    I just saw this film for the first time last Friday night at an American Cinematheque screening in L.A. I had pretty low expectations for it but was curious to see John Lennon in an acting role. You could see this film as a pre-cursor to M*A*S*H, but I think that's giving it too much credit.

    In short, the film succeeded in meeting my low expectations. I've seen my share of British cinema and particularly a lot of Monty Python, which this film vaguely recalls, and this was a challenging film for me to watch in terms of understanding the humor, the language, and the slang being used by the characters. The bits of slapstick are good, but there aren't enough of them to save the film. Michael Crawford is really the star of the film, and I discovered that a little of him goes a long way. Ninety minutes of him is too much. As for Lennon, he's mostly a small supporting character, although he's given virtually equal billing with Crawford. If you saw Help! or A Hard Day's Night, you know a little about John's personality, and it shines through in the same way here.

    I'd recommend watching this at home on video, where you can stop it and return to it if it gets tiresome, which it probably will. I understand that it's due for a DVD release sometime soon.
  • avatar

    huckman

    ...thought it was pure pony-and-trap! I reckon it was written in some bloke's lunch-time in the UK's swinging sixties when he was high on some form of psychedelic "Bob Hope". Someone had a laugh and wrote in his review: "a must all John Lennon fans"???? Rubbish.
  • avatar

    Nahelm

    Incompetent Lieutenant Goodbody leads a group of recruits who grow to hate their commander. They train in a mock up of WWI trench warfare. They land on North Africa to battle the Nazis. The biggest draw is John Lennon playing a supporting character. It's a surreal anti-war dark comedy. Director Richard Lester uses various methods including breaking the 4th wall and doing a faux documentary. I am often reluctant to rate foreign comedies when half of it is lost in translation. In this one, the thick British accents and unknowable foreignness make much of it incomprehensible. Mostly, it's not that funny. The bigger war footage is recycled while there are some smaller action. There is an anti-war message but it's a muddle of outlandish surrealism. On its most basic element, it's hard to follow and not that funny.
  • avatar

    CopamHuk

    American director Richard Lester's film How I Won the War is a bizarre, anti-war satire, set in the thick of World War Two. It does not only look at aspects of the ridiculousness of war, and the stereotypes of the war films, but also the ridiculousness of the British. Having been made by an American, the film takes a look at 'Britishness' from an objective view - as an outsider. Consequently, under close scrutiny it becomes apparent that this is not merely an anti-war film, it is an anti-British film, and, ironically an anti-war-film film.

    But this film is more than a satirical plot with farcical characters. There is a very serious element. Lester integrates morbid battle-scenes into the plot, spliced in amongst the comedic genius of the cast, whilst simultaneously claiming the soldiers as no more than actors playing a game, commenting on the way the war is often represented in cinema - with glory and heroism. This is the main point of the film. As Richard Lester himself said, "It does reflect a desperately sincere attitude towards the glorification of war by show business... One of the gross obscenities about the war is the war film itself ... like a big adventure with extras being killed in the way of a Western."

    This film is clever - very clever - funny and bitter. A gem in the archives of the Cinematic Rennaissance. I doubt such uniqueness could ever be replicated.
  • avatar

    Kanal

    It has been reviewed; it has been explained. For almost forty years now this movie has been a mystery to a vast audience because the viewers and reviewers miss the obvious: "How I Won The Won" is comedy. When one has the opportunity to enjoy this movie one will find that the director and writer worked well together to bring us a movie that one can enjoy again and again. Much like "Duck Soup" thirty-four years earlier made a mockery of the Great War, "How I Won The War" mocks the "good" War (The Second World War.) Richard Lester's directing style brings this movie to his audience in a similar way that Brecht brought "The Three Penny Opera" to his stage audience. Lester has an ability to force you to laugh at times when you wished you hadn't laughed. Now circa 2005, it is a movie that has been re-discovered for its vitality and its humor. Let yourself go, relax and enjoy a classic movie experience.
  • avatar

    Androwyn

    I would have gave this film a 1 but the directing and camera work I though were pretty good. First off let me say this does not star John Lennon as they imply, he plays a small role in this film. This is a gag they use to sell a movie, Call it Murder (Midnight) with Humphrey Bogart comes to mind the only difference between the two is Midnight was a good movie. The movie jumps around a lot and is kind of hard to follow and if there is a message of anti war it's not a very clear one but this is the baby boomer era so you have to consider the source. There are some humorous parts to the film but for the most part it seemed to me that it was a bunch of rambling on by the characters in the movie with some Monty Pythonish humor thrown in. I was going to buy this film for my collection but was glad to see it on Netflix so I did not have to waste any hard earned dough. So if your looking for a lost classic you won't find it here, I would say check out Bogart in Midnight or currently going as Call it murder at least there for 1934 you will see great directing technique and a great film.
  • avatar

    inetserfer

    It is World War II. Lt Goodbody (Michael Crawford) is an officer because he comes from the right class: however, he is an idiot (a well brought up idiot, it is true, but an idiot nonetheless). The assignment he is given suits his abilities, and also the abilities of his troop (composed of slackers, incompetents, layabouts and the like) - to construct an unnecessary cricket pitch in the middle of the desert. Only his Sergeant, Transom (Lee Montague) is a "proper" soldier, and spends the entire film steaming with frustration at having to nursemaid this overprivileged ninny and his idiot charges. And, despite Transom's best efforts, members of the platoon are killed, one by one (and in one of many surreal touches, they remain with the platoon in spirit, albeit clad entirely in a unique pastel shade).

    Dick Lester's absurdist anti-war film is a challenging but entertaining experience, albeit you have to be in the right frame of mind for it. The cast list is a roster of the cream of British acting talent - we don't produce too many headliners, but by heck we fill up the cast with people who know their job.

    The elephant in the room is John Lennon. Having worked with Lester in the two Beatles features, and being ready for a sabbatical, Lennnon sallies forth in a straight acting role as the lazy Musketeer Gripweed. Seen for the first time with short hair and his (subsequent) trademark round national Health spectacles, it would be good to report that Lennon steals the show. He doesn't - his lack of acting experience and training shows too much for that - but he doesn't disgrace himself either.

    This film has become something of a rarity, yet it has something to say, and it says it eloquently and entertainingly while being quietly challenging at the same time.
  • avatar

    Thomeena

    There is a reason for the old theatrical axiom that satire is what closes on Saturday night: satire by itself is just not very entertaining. It has to be funny, too. The target here is war, and just how silly men get when caught up in the middle of it, and this is pretty obvious by the five minute mark of the movie. The production looks very good, recreating the appearance of WWII's North African Theater quite well, but the key weakness is the central story conceit: that a unit of the British Army would be sent into a hellishly dangerous area to set up a cricket pitch. The idea must have had some appeal on paper to somebody, since the movie got the go-ahead, but unless it had actually been based on a true incident or something, the idea is just too obvious and far a reach to build a movie around, and the occasional shots at army tradition and military thinking (there's an oxymoron) just aren't funny enough to keep things interesting while the absurd story plays out. Michael Crawford, a brilliant comedian in other material such as Some Mothers Do 'Ave 'Em, tries hard to keep an edge to his work, but the material for the large part just isn't there. John Lennon, for all that he is second billed, doesn't have much of a character or much screen time. He just pops up occasionally as a kind of PFC Greek Chorus to comment on the goings on. This would seem a good use of the eccentric and sardonic Lennon, but once again the problem is that he is simply not given much to work with. Richard Lester can be a funny and creative director, but here he isn't and as co-writer of the thing he should have realized that the material was lacking. He didn't. Not a terrible movie, but definitely lower echelon stuff. Catch-22 is a better and more ambitious movie, and so is Oh What a Lovely War.
  • avatar

    Yozshubei

    I saw this film on FLIX today (20 March 2006) for the second time, and appreciated it a lot more than I did when I first saw this in Syracuse, NY around 1981 or so. Not only do I see a parody of war films (such as Lawrence of Arabia, whose theme is used), but it seems oddly appropriate for America in 2006. By that, not only do I refer to the war in Iraq, but also the corporate mentality that pervades many quarters.

    John Lennon does steal the movie! Indeed, he had a better chance than Elvis Presley did when it came to a movie career, but Mr. Lennon declined the chance to do so. The rest of the cast is fine, particularly Michael Crawford, Roy Kinnear and Alexander Knox as the US General. This is one brave and prophetic piece of film-making.
  • avatar

    Bynelad

    No, this not a "lost gem", as some reviewers excitedly proclaim. Far from it.

    "How I Won the War? I Bored Them to Death". Main deficiency: a very boring movie. Another deficiency: the gags are practically all unfunny. It's a typical 60s British comedy; good cast, but an atrocious script. Well filmed, though; visually it's pretty decent. However, good for only one or two chuckles. And it was more like a hopeful chuckle, sort of like "I hope this is a sign that something genuinely funny is coming up soon". "How I Can Bore You" would be a more appropriate title. Very disappointing.

    A little word about John Lennon, for all you left-wing Lennon fans. (The music is great, hence that's not the issue here.) Lennon was a working-class kid with very little education and even less natural intelligence. His pathetic attempts at "spiritual contentment" - or whatever he used to call it - with that charlatan of an Indian guru sect-leader, plus his marriage to the even bigger charlatan, the totally talent-free Yoko Ono, prove this without an iota of a doubt. He was a very gullible person, what Americans would call "a sucker". But if that isn't enough, his meddling in international politics proved that he had also completely lost his mind by the time he left "The Beatles" and the 70s arrived. Drugs? Too much fame going to his head?

    He was also a stark-raving hypocrite, as most "do-gooders" are. All that the world's do-gooders care about is their fame and their image; after all, they have huge EGOS to feed. An example... Michael Caine, in his autobiography "What's It All About?", relates the following episode from the mid-60s when he met Lennon. They were in a luxurious French hotel, desperately looking for a bathroom. All the bathrooms were taken. So John went to a room and urinated from a window. Caine saw him and said angrily that John had stained the curtains. And what was John's reply to this?

    "They're rich. F*** 'em."

    Of course, the fact that he himself was rich at that point (not to mention later) was of no consequence. Because if someone had decided to stain HIS curtains, in HIS home with urine or excrement, I guess he would have blown his top, screaming injustice. And he'd probably have called the police. The "pigs". Yes, he was so anti-authority, except of course when he needed them to serve HIS little purposes. Just another "do-gooder" hypocrite...

    "All we are say-ing, is give peace a chance". If peace is responsible for "heroes" like Lennon, then I'm all for war.

    For my review of "Imagine", go to: http://rateyourmusic.com/collection/Fedor8/

    To make this IMDb's most unpopular comment ever, please click "No" below.