The Punch and Judy Man (1963) User Reviews (26)

A brave try at something different

[vaughan-birbeck · 7/10 · 9 February 2005]

When 'The Punch and Judy Man' was released Tony Hancock had been one of Britain's favourite radio and television comedians for about seven years. His work was brilliantly written by Ray Galton and Alan Simpson who worked many of Hancock's own quirks into his screen character.

Unfortunately Hancock's intellectual pretension came to the fore as he began to feel limited by Galton and Simpson's writing and decided he would try more serious comedy on the lines of Chaplin and Jacques Tati. We can see this ambition in the film's titles: starring Tony Hancock, screenplay by Tony Hancock (and Philip Oakes), based on an idea by Tony Hancock. Apparently Hancock also wanted to direct and photograph the film but Associated British vetoed this.

Ultimately Hancock lacked the intellectual depth and discipline of his heroes and his public didn't want to see him in an unfamiliar role. The result was a box office dud.

Forty years later we can see the film more objectively. The frustration is that the viewer can sense what Hancock was aiming for: a satirical look at celebrity and snobbery within the confines of a fading marriage. For example, the name of the fictional location - Piltdown - suggests the intellectual fraudulence of the town's middle-classes, being based on a faked primitive man which fooled the scientific establishment for half a century.

Unfortunately other elements creep in, such as the pathos of a little boy slipping his hand into Hancock's as they walk along a rain drenched sea-front. Until this point their relationship has been one of mutual irritation (the boy attends all Hancock's Punch and Judy shows and corrects him when he gets the plot wrong) which is much more satisfying.

The best moments occur with Hancock's gleeful anarchy as he annoys the 'Yaks', self-serving members of a secret society who dominate local business and politics. The ice-cream eating scene is excellent. The final scene with the wife is quite touching a we see them reach new understanding and mutual respect.

Despite good things the film never quite comes to the boil, but the good things are worth watching the film for, such as Lady Jane Caterham's speech to the good people of Piltdown - as wicked an impersonation of the Queen's delivery as I've ever heard.

A last word. For some reason the video release I have cuts two short but crucial early scenes: Hancock shoving a bunch of artificial flowers up the rear of an ornamental china pig to show his frustration with his marriage, and of him raising his hat to the Mayor while actually giving the 'V'-sign with his fingers. Perhaps this was to ensure a 'U' certificate but it seems a poor reason to chop a film.

Hancock

[dave-2438 · 7/10 · 18 November 2006]

As mentioned by someone else, this film has matured with age. I watched the Punch and Judy man because I was a Hancock fan. Sadly this is not classic Hancock but I don't think the movie was meant to be HANCOCK.

The thing with Tony Hancock was that he was always trying to not be Tony Hancock, the trouble was he could never get away from being the Lad From East Cheam and he couldn't understand why. Which in the end led to him taking his own life.

The movie itself feels like the Two sides of Hancock. The start is the Hancock he wanted to be, dramatic, and the end the Hancock we all knew and loved. the comic.

Hancock at the crossroads

[chrismartonuk-1 · 6/10 · 30 May 2008]

This film occupies a significant stage of Hancock's life and career - the moment it all went wrong. His first post-Galton and Simson project has gone down as the moment when hubris ran rampant and he fatally cast himself adrift from the totems that had secured his success. Hancock probably thought that a distinguished writer such as Philip Oakes was a step-up from Ray and Alan, but the art of TV comedy writing is a very difficult, considerably underestimated one. Galton and Simpson benefited from the break with Steptoe and Son but Oakes, and the others who followed, could not help but subliminally be influenced by their writing of the East Cheam buffoon, only - like those who followed Eddie Braben writing for Morecambe and Wise - their version was a shallow facsimile of the sparkling original that took the catchphrases but none of the depth or understanding. Whereas THE REBEL should nowadays be regarded as a minor classic of Britfilm comedy and a worthy glass display case of a considerable comic talent at the top of its game, THE PUNCH AND JUDY MAN is an interesting misfire. One can clearly see that Hancock was aiming for a more cinema verite style of comedy away from the Astrakhan coat and phrases like "stone me!". But the tone varies too much and the overwhelming sense of melancholy overwhelms the proceedings - especially when viewed in hindsight. Some gags are astonishingly vulgar and crude for the Lad Himself - the flowers up the china pig's orifice and the two-fingered salute. The scene with the boy in downing the ice cream sundae is worthy of Chaplin, but the one where Hancock dances about in the street and inadvertently wanders into a lingerie shop looks too much like inspiration running dry and devising a visual set-piece for the film's trailer. Elsewhere, the annoying of the Yaks with the hatches in the restaurant is a sequence that catches fire but the bread roll throwing at the finale falls flat (why not go the whole hog and use custard pies?

Instead of playing the overreaching buffoon with ambitions beyond his reach, Hancock played a character content with his lot in life - however trivial. He works well with Sylvia Syms and his comedic talents had yet to be irretrievably ruined by booze and his mental turmoil. But, even in the midst of the squalor that his later life became, it was impossible to dislike him and once can only respect the Lad Himself for attempting to broaden his horizons.

Sad, strange little film is a must for Hancock buffs.

[rudyardk · 27 November 1999]

A more serious effort from the star of the classic sitcom "Hancock's Half Hour". The boastful exuberance of his radio and TV days has been toned down.

Roundly panned at the time of release, the film looks better (though not perfect) today. "The Punch And Judy Man" sometimes stumbles in its attempts to play off scenes of gentle whimsy with those designed to show the lead character's life of quiet desperation, but the attempt to place Hancock's familiar persona in a more realistic (even somewhat grim) setting will be of interest to devotees of the lad from East Cheam.

HANCOCK'S WIDER ROLES

[m0rphy · 6/10 · 17 September 2003]

My cd came with "The Rebel" which I have commented on elsewhere on the Imdb.Many of Tony's old friends from his "Half-Hour" tv series were in this film, Hattie Jacques, Mario Fabrizi, Hugh Lloyd and of course John le Mesurier.The broader canvas of cinema allowed Tony to develop his humour around a story set in a typical early sixties English seaside resort run by a myopic town council led by Ron Fraser.It is refreshing to see Sylivia Sims playing comedy as his wife who has social pretensions of meeting the pompous lady who will open the town's illuminations.I don't believe Hancock is "married" in any of his other films or tv comedy and this gives him a chance to interact with her in the domestic scenes together, certainly a novelty.His friend John le Mesurier does beach sand sculptures with commentaries and with Mario Fabrizi, the beach photographer and his assistant in the Punch and Judy stall, Hugh Lloyd, they adjourn to the pub to annoy the local worthies.

This film has a gentle humour and Hancock gets away from the pseudo intellectual persona he so often played in his tv comedy shows and in "The Rebel".Highly acclaimed is the mime sequence in the ice cream parlour run by Eddie Byrne with the little boy fan.Do we assume this is the son he never had in the film?I believe viewers today are giving more generous ratings to this film than when it was first released in 1963.I rated it 6.

Ironic that Hancock did more for his supporting cast than himself

[vonnoosh · 7/10 · 3 July 2021]

This was supposed to be Tony Hancock's breakout role to world stardom. It did not pan out that way and Hancock would take his own life less than 5 years after this was released. The irony with this movie is how much better the supporting cast comes across than the star who cowrote the script. Mario Fabrizi, Hugh Lloyd, Ronald Fraser, John Le Mesurier all have a bigger collective impact in their scenes than Tony Hancock. Hancock has been accused of firing all his costars in Hancock's Half Hour because they either upstaged him or practically shared billing like a double act.

What is apparent when comparing this to The Rebel is how well Galton and Simpson wrote to Hancock's talents as a performer than Hancock could. Granted the comparisons between the two should end there since this is not a screwball comedy like The Rebel was. I think the writing team were mocking Hancock a little with that script. His artwork being the metaphor for his own talent and how well he ends up promoting someone else's hard work and talent that he just happens to be the face of by chance. The fact that it happens abroad instead of England is even worse since it mirrors Hancock's ambitions to be an international success. Galton and Simpson's script of The Rebel sounds like a vicious attack on Hancock if analyzed in that way.

The movie has nice scenes. It doesn't have a particularly severe plot. A man with a wife desperate to achieve status in the community demands her husband make an effort to do so with disasterous results. Others have noted that the movie can't decide what it is. Dark comedy, screwball comedy, drama etc. It feels like it drifts from time to time.

I love the location shooting the most but I still hoped this movie were set in the winter months. Della Pinner's motivations would be better understood during the cold slow months at the shore. I can image Wally and Edward's Punch and Judy act would be pushed indoors to different functions and schools. Community becomes all the locals and their focus shifts to each other when the tourists are not around. Everything makes much more sense off season. They try to make up for that with the town anniversary event bringing the locals together. Off season at a shore town can be extremely dreary so trying to be comic in that setting might be asking too much of anyone.

A bit of a puzzle

[neil-476 · 7/10 · 29 November 2020]

A seaside Punch and Judy Show operator despises the pompous people who are on the council. His wife is a social climber, however, and arranges for the P&J show to be featured at a civic event, putting him in a difficult situation.

Tony Hancock, riding high on the back of a TV sitcom based on a specific characterisation of him as a sad but pompous loser and featuring classic scripts by Galton and Simpson, moves into feature films with something altogether angrier and more dour, into which he had considerable creative input.

It didn't do well. It didn't help that the undoubtedly highly talented Hancock was descending into alcoholism.

There are a couple of sequences which are driven by sound editing rather than dialogue - breakfast and ice cream parlour - but they leave one a bit puzzled as to what they were intended to achieve. The antagonism between Hancock and the ice cream man, for instance, would be more understandable if they weren't essentially in the same supplicatory position towards the bigwigs.

One can understand why it didn't hit the mark.

Self-Righteous Rubbish from a Very Talented Man

[vox-sane · 5/10 · 5 March 2007]

It seems (rather sadly) axiomatic that famous funny men want to be taken seriously. They don't all do, but a handful of notable cases stand out. One of the most notorious cases was Tony Hancock, who was a very funny man indeed, who had his radio show "Hancock's Half Hour" and a later television series of the same name. In his radio series, which was penned by the famous team of Ray Galton and Alan Simpson, Hancock was ably supported by talented actors (including, at various times, Sid James, Bill Kerr, Kenneth Williams, Moira Lister and Hattie Jacques). On his move to television, he slowly began stripping away his supporting cast, sparking a continuing debate as to whether he meant to get away from reliance on catch-phrases and tired gimmicks, or whether his inflating ego simply had no room to spare.

This debate is fueled by his second big-screen outing, "The Punch and Judy Man." His first movie, "The Rebel," was written by Galton and Simpson and feels like a stretched-out version of his television show: Hancock's character breaks free of his day job in a social-climbing attempt to be a famous artist (and acting like a buffoon when he becomes one). It is funny so far as it goes, but by the end credits of "The Rebel" one has the same feeling one has from eating too much marzipan: it was good when one opened the box, but one is glad to see the box closed up again.

After "The Rebel" Hancock sacked Galton and Simpson. In his second movie, "The Punch and Judy Man", Hancock inverts the premise of his first. Here, Hancock hates social-climbing and simply wants to perform his Punch and Judy shows to children, while his wife (Sylvia Sims), an avid admirer of royalty, insists that he perform in a celebration where Lady Jane Caterham (Barbara Murray) will be in attendance.

Despite the down-beat opening credits, "The Punch and Judy Man" starts out like a comedy, with Hancock making some of his trademark faces at various radio programs while he's dressing in the morning. Other moments of comedy break out in a scene were he downs a sundae, and when he is pestering the city councilmen in a pub. These moments only make the rest of the movie seem drearier. More frequently, "The Punch and Judy Man" lurches into self-important melodrama as it tries to get mileage on the trite concept that the upper classes think they're better than other people, while the lower end of the spectrum actually is the better. Typically, this conceit is given with a straight face, with apparently no realization of its implicit irony.

Then there is the theme of the brittle marriage of the Punch and Judy man and his wife. For most of the film one wonders how they ever came together in the first place. There is one moment of inspiration in the presentation of their relationship: at a dance near the end, one sees she might once have appreciated her husband's ability to make her laugh, and even join in the fun herself (before she became a social-climbing harpy). Had Hancock's character showed more flashes of humor in the movie, this might have been a moment of revelation. Instead, it comes off as an out-of-character to make the couple literally blunder into trouble. The big pay-off, the picture in the newspaper (which I won't reveal) might actually have been a hilarious climax in a funnier movie. Instead, like so much else in this misbegotten vehicle, solving the dual problems of the wife's devotion to royalty and her strained relationship with her husband. Instead, like so much else in the movie, it seems disjointed -- and, worse, forced.

famous faces of the time (John Le Mesurier, Ronald Fraser, Mario Fabrizi and Hattie Jacques – in the smallest of roles) and the future (Peter Vaughan) proliferate, so there's no shortage of supporting talent. With such talent, the movie might better have made its shallow statements if it had skewed more to the comedy. Nevertheless, Only Hancock has a role with any meat to it, and if this movie is any indication he confused seriousness with heavy-handedness. Comedians of Hancock's ilk appear unable to comprehend the power of humor. It's as if Hancock, fearful of being what he's best at, doomed himself by taking the most powerful weapon out of his arsenal.

As a result, "The Punch and Judy Man" becomes bleak and tedious. Even when praise is heaped on this movie, one often finds the caveat that it is admired for what Hancock "tried to do" – i.e., what he failed to do. This movie ended his attempt at big-screen success, apart from cameos in comedies like "Those Magnificent Men in their Flying Machines" and "The Wrong Box." With his ability to limn solid comic characterizations in short spurts, he should have been happy painting miniatures rather than attempting huge canvases.

Tony Hancock committed suicide in 1968 and the world lost a phenomenal comic talent. But he had killed off his career years earlier by presenting the public with half-baked rubbish like "The Punch and Judy Man."

Piltdown Man

[richardchatten · 9/10 · 5 March 2021]

John LeMesurier later recalled this as both the happiest and the saddest film he ever made. Happy because filming in Bognor was such a pleasure; sad because of the untimely deaths soon afterwards of several of the cast, LeMesurier citing Mario Fabrizi, Walter Hudd and, of course, Tony Hancock himself. (Although Sylvia Syms happily is still with us; her stock as an actress having risen considerably in recent years.)

While it's glossier, brasher predecessor 'The Rebel' had been the boxoffice hit - and more than half a century after Hancock's death remains the better-known of his two big screen vehicles - Hancock himself had dismissed it as "a fake thing". Despite 'The Punch and Judy Man's dismal boxoffice performance and mauling by the critics (which makes it still more melancholy to contemplate), Hancock felt a special affection for it and it's stature is assured for those that care.

Beautifully photographed by veteran cameraman Gilbert Taylor for Hancock's own company MacConkey productions. It's obvious everybody involved cared about the film; perhaps a bit too much, since the straining after effects is a bit too obvious. But you haven't lived till you've dropped into The Igloo for a Piltdown Delight.

A different Hancock, and it's not all bad.

[g-hbe · 7/10 · 24 August 2019]

Hancock wanted to move away from his 'East Cheam' character and ditched his normal team of writers (Galton & Simpson) in favour of a co-writing credit with Philip Oakes. Although the film is nominally a comedy, it can be bleak and grim as it explores the disintegrating relationship between Wally (Hancock) and his wife Delia (a fine performance by Sylvia Syms). There's a fine cast of established British actors on show, plus some faces in the early parts of their careers, and they all do a fine job with no-one stealing the show. I watched this film from DVD last night, the first time I've seen it for many years. Far from being the miserable flop I remembered, it was very entertaining and two scenes stood out for me. The first is the scene with 'the boy' in the ice cream parlour. Wally treats the boy to a top-whack 'Piltdown Glory', chocolate sauce, nuts and wafers, the whole lot, and gets one for himself. What follows is a wonderful 'fight to the finish', as Wally tries to keep up with the kid. The finale, with Wally flipping the cherry into the air and catching it in his mouth with obvious glee, is enough to have me cheering and winding back for another look. Hancock's grinning face as the pair leave the shop speaks volumes. The second one comes at the very end of the film, as Wally and Delia have a renewed understanding of each other's wants, needs and failings. It really is quite tender, and we can almost see their marriage blossoming once again. Then it's straight into the end credits which (behind the titles) shows Wally and Delia being waved off by his friends as they drive along the promenade, heading for pastures new. The triumphant music puts the lid on in style. EDIT: I'd like to add a little to this if I may. In the 'Piltdown Glory' scene, we get a bonus in the shape of Eddie Byrne, an actor who (like Sam Kydd and Michael Ripper) popped up in almost every British film of the period. Byrne plays the ice cream salesman and although he doesn't say much, his performance is almost a scene-stealer. Only Hancock's sparkling happiness at the end of the scene keeps him at bay. The other thing is the 'comedy set pieces' which tended to be overlong and look as if they were inserted because Hancock needed some laughs. They were not particularly hilarious and tended break up the flow. However, if they had been removed the running time would have been about 60 minutes and the film could easily have been presented as a TV play, perhaps with better results. Still an enjoyable film though.

Lacking in punch

[all-briscoe · 2/10 · 29 August 2004]

I first saw this film many years ago and was struck by the fact that for a "comedy" I found it not just utterly unfunny but couldn't actually see much attempt at humour at all. The tone just seemed very bleak and depressing.

Unfortunately I don't see any need on review to be more generous. This is not to say that all comedy must be "laugh-a-minute" but this is very limp. I suppose the humour is supposed to be gently satirical, poking fun at the attempts at social climbing of Hancock's screen wife and the snobbery of the local dignitaries. However if this is so it really likes bite. Some of the more obvious attempts at comedy such as the scene in the ice cream parlour I find very irritating.

Possibly the film might be taken as an early attempt at comedy-drama. However as drama it also fails to hit the mark - it really is hard going. The contrast with Hancock's excellent previous film "The Rebel" is all too stark, and not just in the switch from vibrant colour to black and white. Maybe the often outlandish world of modern art made comedy easier in the earlier film but the problem is much deeper than that. In his TV shows Hancock had shown he could make great comedy out of mundane circumstances. The absence of Galton and Simpson as writers would appear to be the key problem. Hancock never made much impression without them.

This film will strike most viewers as evidence of Hancock's sad decline in the 1960's, although other comments suggest it does work for some. However there is much still to delight in his earlier work - a great legacy - and it is best to stick with that.

Always Forward Never Backward

[malcp · 8/10 · 27 January 2007]

Hancock's determination not to reprise the role that he had so successfully established on television, meant this film would always be doomed to failure at the box office. Undoubtedly the film is at its best where it is at its most subtle - John Le Mesurier's 'Strong' is a perfect example as is the opening scene in the Pinner house. I often wonder how much influence the director had on the less-effective scenes compared to Hancock or visa-versa. Perhaps I'm fortunate in that I saw this film long before I saw Hancock's Half Hour or knew of Hancock's unfortunate end and can therefore give Hancock the benefit of the doubt - something nobody else seems to want to do. No other film I have ever seen captures more perfectly both the highs and lows of the English seaside along with the petty aristocracy that was a more rampant feature in the UK in the 60s than Hippies or free love ever were. Rarely comfortable or even obviously funny, at times this is simply a work of art.

TV or not TV?

[JohnHowardReid · 6/10 · 11 October 2016]

I suspect that director Jeremy Summers is a TV man, and sure enough I see that he has done a substantial amount of work for television. You can always tell these guys because few of them realize that pacing in a movie has to be much faster than the deadly slow pacing on the boob tube. That is why, despite endorsements from critics who should know better, The Punch and Judy Man just isn't very funny. Undoubtedly, despite the film's publicity trappings, some of the sequences were not intended to be humorous, but even many of those that are, manage to misfire. They tend to come across as damp squibs, or they are simply too drawn out to become highlights of hilarity. We see far too much of Tony Hancock anyway, but fortunately there are some agreeable contributions by Sylvia Syms, Ronald Fraser, Hugh Lloyd and the ever reliable John Le Mesurier (pronounced "Messer-ah").

Terrible film - great supporting cast

[mokumhammer · 2/10 · 26 September 2019]

OInly the supporting cast acting made this film watchable - though I struggled to the end, I wouldn't recommend anyone else do

better than the Rebel? maybe

[didi-5 · 1 October 2001]

I am still trying to decide which one I like the most - this one certainly made me laugh out loud more than once - the scene in the ice-cream parlour is a brilliant example of comic timing at its best, the illuminations going wrong has that bizarre inevitability that all spectators know and love - but, yes, it is a strange and ultimately sad little film. And for that, with its well-observed little cameos and support parts, and its little gems of scenes, it just scores over Tony's other film. If you like The Rebel and the half-hours you'll probably like this cos you're won over already. This one just stands on its own and is all the better for it. It's also an interesting snapshot of a more innocent Britain which has gone for good, and it's very well done.

A totally different but very interesting Hancock film.

[alexanderdavies-99382 · 7/10 · 16 July 2017]

"The Punch and Judy Man" wasn't a success during its release in 1963. The box office takings were rather disappointing. I would say the reason for this, was due to the fact that this film was a rather a different one for comedian Tony Hancock. This isn't a typical comedy by any means, there are some dark and serious moments too. These result from the films plot about a seaside resort entertainer, who is resisting the attempts of his snotty wife in bettering himself by mixing with the local politicians and aristocracy. Tony Hancock is playing a different character in "The Punch and Judy Man." Unlike his Railway Cuttings persona, he isn't interested in improving his lot in life. He has this attitude because he feels that he should settle for what he's got. The opening scene shows the camera slowly moving along the seafront of Bognor, where the entire film was made. This first scene - accompanied by some slightly melancholic music - sets the tone for the whole film. The actual shooting was riddled with problems from day one. Hancock's marriage was nearing its conclusion and this was highlighted via the blazing arguments that occurred on the set with his wife. The leading lady of the film, Sylvia Sims, described how these confrontations created a tense atmosphere throughout. Hancock's drinking was becoming slightly out of control at this juncture, according to the scriptwriter Philip Oakes. One report stated that the comedian consumed about a crates worth of vodka during filming. "The Punch and Judy Man" proves that Tony Hancock was an actor as well as a comedian. He gives his character of Wally Pinner the seaside entertainer a lot of depth and shading. The dialogue is very good, as is the direction and the supporting cast. My late father and I enjoyed the scene in the Ice Cream parlour, very funny. The film finishes with Wally Pinner and his wife all the wiser after the dust has settled.

Disappointing drama/comedy

[Maverick1962 · 2/10 · 5 June 2022]

Be wary of the high marks for this weak film from TV director Jeremy Summers who was obviously inexperienced when it came to making this drab effort with Hancock. I grew up watching HHH and oh how we laughed each week. The problem though with Tony Hancock was that he thought he was better than Galton & Simpson his comedy writers and sacked them. The truth was, he was not, by a long chalk. Without G & S he was all at sea. Hancock was only as good as his material and although an accomplished actor, to bring out the magic that made him the funniest man on TV in the middle fifties, he really needed that chemistry that he had with those writers. He never had that with his subsequent work and I well remember his solo series after HHH had ended. I remember how let down I felt when the first episode was shown when he went solo without the great Sid James, a disaster. This film is no better in spite of some good supporting actors around him. Lovely Sylvia Syms acts her socks off as does Ronald Fraser. John Le Mesurier, Hugh Lloyd, Peter Vaughn, Barbara Murray, Eddie Byrne and Mario Fabrizi all did their best with weak material and bad direction. Summers was relegated to directing episodes of countless TV series and this film shows why.

Gentle Comedy

[andy-782 · 8/10 · 15 February 2004]

This gentle comedy features Tony Hancock as Wally Pinner, the eponymous entertainer, with Hugh Lloyd helping him run the show. His wife (Sylvia Syms) dreams of social advancement among her 'betters' who Pinner can't stand. Naturally, with Hancock involved, it all goes wrong. There are several of those British actors who were in everything but never starred such as Mario Fabrizi, Norman Bird, Michael Ripper and Eddie Byrne (the ice cream man in the brilliant 'Piltdown Glory' sketch) plus John Le Mesurier (and a brief appearance from his wife at the time, Hattie Jacques). It is paired on the DVD with The Rebel, Hancock's better-known film performance. The Punch & Judy Man is not quite up to the same standard but nevertheless is a very pleasant and nostalgic way to spend an hour and a half.

Not Tone's Finest Hour

[TondaCoolwal · 5/10 · 3 December 2020]

Although I loved HHH in all its incarnations I have never paid much attention to Hancock's big screen efforts. This film tells me I didn't miss much. The movie just doesn't work, either as a comedy or a drama. Set in the typical fifties seaside resort of Piltdown Bay (pathetic!. A name like Sunnyhaven or Brighthampton would have been more convincing) Hancock, as the titular character, is at odds with the pompous, pretentious town council who want to see the back of him. However, the Punch and Judy Man is eminently unlikeable and Hancock seems intent on defining "lugubrious" in cinematic terms, simply wandering from scene to scene being disagreeable to everyone. Even his presentation of the Punch and Judy show appears unnecessarily vicious. Portraying murderous domestic violence as entertainment. Sylvia Syms as his social-climbing wife doesn't have much to do and, again falls between two stools in what are intended as comic scenarios. The opening scene at breakfast left me waiting for the payoff, but it went nowhere. Likewise, there seemed to be no point to the extended ice-cream eating race. This was in spite of a superb supporting cast which includes John Le Mesurier, Ronald Fraser, Hugh Lloyd, Mario Fabrizzi and a host of others right down to Norman Chappell. The comedy element did liven up towards the end when Barbara Murray, as civic reception guest of honour Lady Caterham, delivers a patronising, cliched speech which is punctuated in all the wrong places as she turns the pages of her notes. The word gags involving the flickering illuminated signs were also quite funny. But, it was all too little too late. I wonder whether our Tony was ever as good as he thought he was? And if his TV persona as the wannabe intellectual was in reality, his true self. Had I watched the film at the cinema I would probably have walked out before the end.

Hancock's strangest half hour

[graham_525 · 8/10 · 25 April 2008]

This is a strange film. Hancock wanted to do something different and hoped he could have an international film career. It's hard to see exactly what Hancock was trying to achieve in this film. In some ways it feels like a film from earlier era. It would have sat more comfortably in the 1950s. Although there are elements of the early 1960s kitchen sink dramas. The character Hancock plays in the film, Wally Pinner, is hard to quantify. It's obviously not the same Hancock of the TV series and the film The Rebel but his performance isn't strikingly different. Hancock had carved out a career playing a deluded pompous and tragic figure. He understandably wanted to get away from that and show that there was more to him. With the character Wally I get the feeling he was trying to create a gadfly. Unfortunately the over all feeling of the film was depressing and Wally's attempts at being a local chirpy character don't really work for me. Another odd aspect of this film is the ending. Suddenly the film flips from a downbeat slightly tragic comedy to complete slapstick.

This film just didn't know what it wanted to be. It veers between being a 1950's British comedy, a 1960's kitchen sink drama, a social commentary, a downbeat gentle comedy and a slapstick without doing any of them particularly well. Part of the problem for Hancock was that the world and particularly Britain had changed enormously in a very short space of time and I doubt Hancock understood those changes. Ironically the people he had shed from his career along the way including Kenneth Williams, Sid James and his writers Galton and Simpson all went on to huge success in the 1960's.

I still like this film though and consider it an interesting part of British film history. However I'm not sure I would recommend it to a non Hancock fan.

A true picture of how human social intercourse is conducted

[ianlouisiana · 10/10 · 29 March 2006]

There is an almost bi-polar aspect to Wally Pinner that corresponds to Mr Tony Hancock's real life persona.In no other public arena did he show so much of himself - in my opinion.Audiences expecting to see his East Cheam incarnation were rudely awoken.There were of course several Hancocks,Hancock the buffoon,Hancock the Pompous,Hancock the dry wit,Hancock the ironist...often they appeared within the same 30 minute radio or TV programme,but never Hancock the disaffected husband(or any other kind of husband),Hancock the vulnerable human being. This is not a "Tony Hancock Film" and should not be watched as such;it is a film with Tony Hancock in the lead role.It does not have the safety net of a Galton and Simpson script,it succeeds or fails according to whether you think Mr Hancock can stand on his own two feet both as a performer and a writer.I can think of no other comedian who could have given a performance even remotely like it apart perhaps from the great Jimmy Jewell.He is matched by the very beautiful Miss Sylvia Sims as his socially aspiring wife.Whether or not Miss Sims was one of the many women who felt attracted to his strange mixture of vulnerability and arrogance I don't know,but their scenes together definitely resonate. Old time Hancock favourites like Hugh Lloyd and John le Mesurier help to place him in a familiar context,so that when he plays against type it is rather disturbing. Is it all a metaphor for the death of Variety,the end of the British Empire or simply the story of a seaside entertainer?I neither know nor care."The Punch and Judy man" is a considerable achievement in its own right.It deserves to be considered when the brief renaissance of British Cinema in the early 1960s is discussed,because it belongs up there with "A kind of loving" and "Billy Liar" as films that say something true about real people and how human social intercourse is conducted.

Den Of Sin. 60 Years Of Doom

[ygwerin1 · 9/10 · 4 April 2020]

Punch & Judy Man is a film of an era long gone like my childhood, in 1963 I was 15 years of age.

I spent my holidays with my family in British seaside holiday resorts, staying in places like Littlehampton and Margate. Or with an Aunt May a Woolworth Manageress, in Conwy North Wales.

In the 1950's and early 1960's Punch and Judy Shows were still a permanent feature of the British holiday, as integral as rain.

For me this film depicted the atypical annual holidays perfectly aptly, the resorts and climate.

Many holiday towns seemed to have something of an identity crisis, of who they actually imagined would be staying at their resort.

That may seem strange but there were resorts like Littlehampton, who appeared to consider themselves more middle class. And targeted their facilities towards attracting, that kind of holidaymaker. While a mere few miles along the coast in the neighbouring resort of Margate the opposite seemed to be the case. A similar case in point is of two resorts in the North of England, of Lytham St. Anne and Blackpool.

Here the resort of Piltdown is run by career politicians in local government, with little to no interest in the people who put them there. Or indeed what they might actually want from their holidays, and expect from the resort.

Wally and Delia Pinner want different things out of their lives, not an uncommon phenomena in many marriages.

Wally hates Piltdown's Yacks while Delia, vainly hopes that she may someday be accepted into Piltdown society.

The Problem however for Delia Pinner is that this self opinionated society, does not want or desire her to be involved with it.

Wally and Delia are however, not a zillion miles apart from each other. Seemingly paradoxically it takes the bun fight, to prove how much they need and mean to each other.

All of the actors played their roles perfectly especially Sylvia Syms, John Le Mesurier, Hugh Lloyd and Mario Fabrizi. Though its a great shame, that Hattie Jacques has only an extremely small cameo part.

Tony Hancock was in his element as Wally Pinner finally, getting the chance to act out of the TV pigeonhole.

I am a huge fan of Tony Hancock on radio, TV and film. Any problems he had were not principally of his own making, rather more of the public consideration of him. The British public have been somewhat conservative, in their viewing habits. Proving themselves to say least unhappy, with any changes in their programmes.

Any other comic simply wanting to change their public persona, would have no problems. But for Hancock well apparently people still cannot find it, in themselves to forgive let alone forget.

I feel compelled to ask will Tony Hancock's memory, be forever blighted by people's own perceptions?

Hancock's Masterpiece

[ShadeGrenade · 10/10 · 13 June 2007]

Following the success of 'The Rebel' ( 1961 ), Tony Hancock and writers Ray Galton and Alan Simpson kicked around ideas for a follow-up ( such as having Hancock go on a round-the-world cruise, or him playing a double role ), and scripts were written, but none pleased the star. Eventually, he fired them, teaming up with poet and novelist Philip Oakes. Directed by Jeremy Summers, 'The Punch & Judy Man' is no average British comedy film, in fact it is an astonishingly bitter piece, with plenty to say on the subjects of small-town snobbery ( which still goes on alas ) and class divisions. It cast Hancock not as his familiar East Cheam character but 'Wally Pinner', a dour, middle-aged Punch and Judy man in the English seaside town of Piltdown, a place he despises. His marriage to the lovely but aloof Delia ( Sylvia Syms ) is on the brink of collapse, and he is looked down on by the pompous dignitaries who run the town, such as the Mayor ( Ronald Fraser ). Pinner's only friend is the Sandman ( John Le Mesurier in one of his best film roles ), a local eccentric who makes historical sculptures out of sand, and gives lectures to tourists.

Pinner is persuaded by Delia to give a show at a forthcoming dinner to commemorate 60 years of Piltdown, at which a member of the aristocracy - Lady Jane Caterham ( Barbara Murray ) will be present. It gets out of hand, degenerating into a bun-throwing fight.

The humour flows naturally, and even when not particularly amusing it still manages to engage, such as Wally's conversation over tea with the Sandman. Only the bun fight at the end looks as though it were written in at the last minute, but it is a minor criticism. Hancock gives a superb performance as the cynical 'Pinner'. Several of the cast, including Hugh Lloyd, Mario Fabrizi, had appeared previously in 'The Rebel'. Hattie Jacques is seen fleetingly as a fortune teller.

Public apathy ensured that Hancock and Oakes did not collaborate again. A great shame.

Be warned, however, the D.V.D. is missing a scene where Pinner works off his rage in his wife's gift shop by inserting a bunch of flowers into a ceramic pig's rectum. Presumably it was deleted to enable the D.V.D. to get a 'U' certificate.

Funniest moment - Pinner's ice cream eating contest with the little boy played by Nicholas Webb ( Syms' nephew ), while the ice cream man ( Eddie Byrnes ) looks on in disgust. As good as anything Chaplin ever did.

A flawed beauty

[crazyhorsefc · 8/10 · 1 October 2020]

Having conquered radio and television, cinema proved a tougher challenge for Tony Hancock and The Punch and Judy Man was his last star turn. It's failure at the box office had less to do with the film itself and more to do with the British public's inability to accept Hancock outside of his 'half hour' personality. It's box office failure, couple with poor reviews from an equally unforgiving press, meant this film has been overlooked and underappreciated since its release.

In truth, it is a gentle observation of a traditional seaside town in England in the early 1960s with some wonderful performances, particularly from the supporting cast that the star has assembled around him. Hancock turns in a fine performance as the titular character whose wife wishes to climb the social ladder while he is happy with his station in life, happy to go against the grain of what is considered the norm.

There are some great little moments in the film, with some tender touches, and definitely worth a viewing.

I really enjoyed it

[marktayloruk · 8/10 · 5 March 2021]

Laughed out loud. Hancock as a.kind of successor to his East Cheam self deflating the pompous rather than trying to join them. Hancock in local government could have worked - and the council being run by a clique is all too realistic. Were there really any seaside towns only sixty years old in 1963?