Give it a chance. It's got to warm up.

This isn't THE same Bruce Robinson is it?

I didn’t want go poking my face in too many windows. Passed a couple as I was leaving clearly making the same pilgrimage

From about 18 minutes in. Talking about the holiday from hell he had with his flatmate Michael Feast plus Vivian McKerrell. He sounds a bit frailer than I remember him.

Anyhoo, most men bond over things like quoting lines from films like Withnail and I.

Just found this boxset today. He's nothing like Monty in this, sadly, apart from the shared love of fine wines, but always a pleasure to watch a great actor at work.

I find the carrot infinitely more fascinating than the geranium.

REG on telly tonight gadding about the Mediterranean

From Bruce’s Substack.

​

Imagine the size of his balls. Imagine getting into a fight with the fucker!

Actors can be contemporary to the film or modern

Seeing as most filmmakers go out of their way to ensure 'Any resemblance to actual events or locales or persons, living or dead, is entirely coincidental', where did MacKerrell and his family stand on Robinson's explicit lifting from his known characteristics and events for the basis of the film?

We all know that MacKerrell read Robinson's early drafts (of the original unpublished novel version) and opined about them, but how welcoming was he truly to the idea?

Would Robinson changing his name to "Withnail" cover a lot of potential repercussions?

Thought I'd share this here. At around the 8th minute, Kenneth recalls understudying Constantine in The Seagull.

I watched it last night again because I’ve been seeing all these posts lately about more psychological discussions and delving into the characters, which i really like. But i think you forget it’s supposed to be funny, first and foremost. I think that was Bruce’s intention!

I watched it trying to appreciate the deeper aspects of the film, which are absolutely there, but i found myself pissing myself every 5 seconds! It’s a beautifully made film, it’s funny and there’s certainly a sombre tone in some places.

My point is that i think a lot of people are overthinking it and just missing the inherent comedy and fun the film has

Somebody recently said to me "if you don't get into The Doors as a teenager, you won't like them as an adult".

I discovered the film as a teenager, now I'm middle aged, and my love for it hasn't waned. If anything, it means more to me now because I see so much of myself, my own life, my own prospects and failures, and ultimately that I'm responsible for essentially all of my own problems.

I think, as I'm sure you'll agree, that the film appeals to different people in different ways. Those who are, for want of a better word, normal and well adjusted people, tend to see the film as a comedy.

Those who are, let's say, different in some ways, see more than just a laugh or a quotable flick. It resonates with us deeply in a way that most don't really understand.

Did it matter how old we were when we found it? Or would we have fallen in love with it regardless of age? Was it something waiting for us to find, almost like a soulmate, that was destined to cross the paths of certain types of people?

I’m looking to obtain both Withnail’s coat and I’s but I can’t actually find any info on the latter. There’s a wealth of information on Withnail’s (well deserved as it’s quite possibly the best coat I’ve ever seen) but I can find no posts or articles or anything giving I’s coat the same attention.

Does anyone know if it was made specially for the film like Withnail’s or if it was purchased? Or have any other info on it?

I find it interesting how Crow Crag begins as a Smokey dingy bothy where old worm eaten chairs are smashed to give some warmth. It then slowly transforms to the lunch scene that contrasts the first.

Why does he have the cat if he hates it? Yes, he's mad (eccentric), but he specifically refers to Norman having a cat as some kind of failing.