I look on this film as both a film buff and a retired lawyer.I started my training about 4 years after this film was made and i think it may well have reflected society's then view of women lawyers,namely that their judgment was ruled by their emotions and not clear logical thought.I was actually articled to a woman solicitor and i have to say that she was a clear headed professional woman.Mind you women lawyers were extremely rare.In my class at Law School there was only one one woman in a class of 44.So many of the attitudes of the era are shown here.For example the stigma of children born out of marriage.Anyway having said that i would add that this is an amusing film with a fairly distinguished cast which kept me fully entertained.
7 Reviews
For older cinema goers only
Maverick19629 September 2021
Gentle British comedy of the times, the best things being spotting the lesser known actors and actresses of the time like Ron Moody, Joan Sims, Amanda Barrie, Terry Scott, Graham Stark, John Standing and the wonderful Liz Fraser who sparkles here. Michael Craig and Mary Peach star as solicitors new to the bar, warring over a brief to prove or disprove the marriage between Brenda de Banzie and Ron Moody. James Robertson Justice and Roland Culver lend support. I enjoyed it thoroughly but that's my age.
Pleasant Early '60s Comedy
djfjflsflscv20 December 2021
A career in law for restless junior barrister Tony Stevens (Michael Craig) has so far revolved around cases concerning sewage pollution and he's longing for something even slightly more salacious. His mood isn't improved upon learning that he is to share his chambers with a new female colleague, particularly as the idealistic Frances Pilbright (Mary Peach) comes from a prestigious legal family and is immediately offered interesting briefs.
Her first case centres on a middle-aged, working class - and, it seems, easily confused - woman named Gladys Pudney (Brenda da Banzie) who claims to have been married during the war before a bomb explosion gave her instant amnesia and she forgot all about her clownish, crooked husband Sidney (Ron Moody). Now recovered, Gladys has tracked him down, but he claims not to know her, perhaps due to the presence of a glamorous if somewhat sozzled girlfriend (Liz Fraser).
With so few offers of his own, Tony cons his caddish solicitor friend Hubert (John Standing) to give him the job of Sidney's defense counsel, and thereby places himself in direct opposition to Frances' efforts to prosecute. Their ensuing battle of wits before Mr Justice Haddon (James Robertson Justice) is further fraught by the growing attraction between them, and eventually upended altogether when it is emerges that Gladys isn't all that she appears...
This Rank comedy from Ralph Thomas and Betty Box was based on a play and adapted by actor Nicholas Phipps, who also appears (and would go on to write 1963's Doctor in Distress).
Set largely in a courtroom, A Pair of Briefs clearly betrays its stage-bound origins and though there is the occasional effort to expand, such scenes are unnecessary as enough energy is sustained through the performances.
Most particular of these is the ever-excellent James Robertson Justice, once again playing the abrasive intellectual who wearily tolerates and upbraids all who dare to test his patience and manages to anchor a story which might otherwise seem a little on the dull side.
Michael Craig is another plus, one of the most reliable of Britain's leading men of the period, though quite neglected today, while Mary Peach shines (despite being seemingly dubbed), especially in a late scene when her character becomes tearfully defiant in the face of what she considers to be the dry callousness of courtroom detachment. The following year, Peach would make it to Hollywood and appear alongside Rock Hudson and Rod Taylor in the flop aviation drama A Gathering of Eagles before turning her focus to British television. A pre-Oliver! Ron Moody deserves special mention too as Sidney Pudney, a disreputable and somewhat tedious man who he makes somehow likable, while Brenda De Banzie eschews the mature glamour of her other roles in favour of a northern, down-at-heel housewife.
Despite its saucy title, there is no sexual frolicking of the Carry On kind, or even slapstick, but neither is it as snotty as the Boulting Brothers' Brothers In Law. Instead, A Pair of Briefs is one of those forgotten old comedies that only seem to pop up in Britain on a weekday mid-afternoon on Channel 4: slight and maybe unmemorable, but amiably amusing with a familiar and capable cast, and certainly worth a watch for fans of inoffensive British films of the era.
Her first case centres on a middle-aged, working class - and, it seems, easily confused - woman named Gladys Pudney (Brenda da Banzie) who claims to have been married during the war before a bomb explosion gave her instant amnesia and she forgot all about her clownish, crooked husband Sidney (Ron Moody). Now recovered, Gladys has tracked him down, but he claims not to know her, perhaps due to the presence of a glamorous if somewhat sozzled girlfriend (Liz Fraser).
With so few offers of his own, Tony cons his caddish solicitor friend Hubert (John Standing) to give him the job of Sidney's defense counsel, and thereby places himself in direct opposition to Frances' efforts to prosecute. Their ensuing battle of wits before Mr Justice Haddon (James Robertson Justice) is further fraught by the growing attraction between them, and eventually upended altogether when it is emerges that Gladys isn't all that she appears...
This Rank comedy from Ralph Thomas and Betty Box was based on a play and adapted by actor Nicholas Phipps, who also appears (and would go on to write 1963's Doctor in Distress).
Set largely in a courtroom, A Pair of Briefs clearly betrays its stage-bound origins and though there is the occasional effort to expand, such scenes are unnecessary as enough energy is sustained through the performances.
Most particular of these is the ever-excellent James Robertson Justice, once again playing the abrasive intellectual who wearily tolerates and upbraids all who dare to test his patience and manages to anchor a story which might otherwise seem a little on the dull side.
Michael Craig is another plus, one of the most reliable of Britain's leading men of the period, though quite neglected today, while Mary Peach shines (despite being seemingly dubbed), especially in a late scene when her character becomes tearfully defiant in the face of what she considers to be the dry callousness of courtroom detachment. The following year, Peach would make it to Hollywood and appear alongside Rock Hudson and Rod Taylor in the flop aviation drama A Gathering of Eagles before turning her focus to British television. A pre-Oliver! Ron Moody deserves special mention too as Sidney Pudney, a disreputable and somewhat tedious man who he makes somehow likable, while Brenda De Banzie eschews the mature glamour of her other roles in favour of a northern, down-at-heel housewife.
Despite its saucy title, there is no sexual frolicking of the Carry On kind, or even slapstick, but neither is it as snotty as the Boulting Brothers' Brothers In Law. Instead, A Pair of Briefs is one of those forgotten old comedies that only seem to pop up in Britain on a weekday mid-afternoon on Channel 4: slight and maybe unmemorable, but amiably amusing with a familiar and capable cast, and certainly worth a watch for fans of inoffensive British films of the era.
An enlightening window into patriarchal imperial misogyny
richardwworkman2 May 2021
This film is actually hilarious, brilliantly scripted, superbly acted and wonderfully directed. It's easy to miscontextualise this as as example of sexism endemic within government, judicial and social systems but I thought this did a great job of humiliating those that expose those prejudices.
A bomb is dropped on a wedding and the groom sees an opportunity to escape a lawful marriage simply to satisfy his vile egotistical sexual satisfaction. The ensuing court case see a female barrister pitted against the system.
It's a brilliantly entertaining film filled with wonderful moments of compassion and comedy.
A bomb is dropped on a wedding and the groom sees an opportunity to escape a lawful marriage simply to satisfy his vile egotistical sexual satisfaction. The ensuing court case see a female barrister pitted against the system.
It's a brilliantly entertaining film filled with wonderful moments of compassion and comedy.
A Tame Farce
JohnHowardReid16 July 2009
Despite its deliberately salacious title and advertising, "A Pair of Briefs" turns out to be a rather tame, verbose, clumsy, heavy-handed and overly repetitious farce. It's one of those stage pieces in which the characters take forever to make a jocular point that even the most cretinous audience fully grasped in the first few seconds. And in actual fact, aside from the credit titles themselves and a totally irrelevant (if "brief") scene in a strip club, there is little in the movie that would be judged unsuitable for an audience of novices or monks.
With the exception of Michael Craig, a rather wet and ponderously uninspiring hero, the players do what can to improve their tired and rather fulsome material. Liz Fraser comes off best. It's not that her lines are any sharper, it's just that she manages the rather difficult feat (considering the poverty of her material) of not outstaying her welcome. Mary Peach is okay as the concerned heroine, while James Robertson Justice (as an irascible judge) contributes his customary characterization. Ron Moody, who is "introduced" in this movie, strains mightily to make something of the caricature the script hands him. Likewise, Brenda De Banzie overdoes both sides of her dual portrait. The only other player worth mentioning is Charles Heslop, who does contribute a few amusing moments as a reminiscing registrar.
With the exception of Michael Craig, a rather wet and ponderously uninspiring hero, the players do what can to improve their tired and rather fulsome material. Liz Fraser comes off best. It's not that her lines are any sharper, it's just that she manages the rather difficult feat (considering the poverty of her material) of not outstaying her welcome. Mary Peach is okay as the concerned heroine, while James Robertson Justice (as an irascible judge) contributes his customary characterization. Ron Moody, who is "introduced" in this movie, strains mightily to make something of the caricature the script hands him. Likewise, Brenda De Banzie overdoes both sides of her dual portrait. The only other player worth mentioning is Charles Heslop, who does contribute a few amusing moments as a reminiscing registrar.
Only for a rainy afternoon ...
spottedowl12 April 2011
This below par comedy rarely surfaces above average.
Poor casting of the lead players along with diffident direction produces a movie that is best described as a letdown.
Without the talents of the irrepressible James Robertson Justice propping up the whole shebang it would be something to miss - however his presence does stand out and makes it worthwhile to have a look on a rainy afternoon.
Most of the support cast, notably Joan Sims, manage well enough with the tripe being fed to them. Personally, I expect more from an English comedy than has been presented here.
Poor casting of the lead players along with diffident direction produces a movie that is best described as a letdown.
Without the talents of the irrepressible James Robertson Justice propping up the whole shebang it would be something to miss - however his presence does stand out and makes it worthwhile to have a look on a rainy afternoon.
Most of the support cast, notably Joan Sims, manage well enough with the tripe being fed to them. Personally, I expect more from an English comedy than has been presented here.
Barrister in the Chambers
boblipton23 November 2017
Michael Craig is miffed because he has to give up his desk for a new junior barrister, who turns out to be the niece of the senior barrister -- Mary Peach. While he's toiling at his customary briefs concerning bad drains (3 guineas for his appearance), her godfather gives her one paying 25 as her first case, so he wheedles the opposing side out of the solicitor.
It's a peculiar one. She's appearing for Brenda de Banzies. She's suing Ron Moody (in his first movie) for restoration of marital rights. Her story is they were married during the war, he took the marriage certificate, and both she and the hall were hit in the Blitz. The records were destroyed and she was evacuated and her memory wiped out for 17 years.
It's a sparkling comedy that reminds me very much of director Ralph Thomas' earlier DOCTOR IN THE HOUSE, particularly when James Robertson Justice shows up as the judge before whom the case is tried. Although it took a few minutes to find its legs, it turned out to be a fine comedy.
It's a peculiar one. She's appearing for Brenda de Banzies. She's suing Ron Moody (in his first movie) for restoration of marital rights. Her story is they were married during the war, he took the marriage certificate, and both she and the hall were hit in the Blitz. The records were destroyed and she was evacuated and her memory wiped out for 17 years.
It's a sparkling comedy that reminds me very much of director Ralph Thomas' earlier DOCTOR IN THE HOUSE, particularly when James Robertson Justice shows up as the judge before whom the case is tried. Although it took a few minutes to find its legs, it turned out to be a fine comedy.
See also
Awards | FAQ | User Ratings | External Reviews | Metacritic Reviews
