criterionforum.org

How to Get Ahead in Advertising



Richard E. Grant is the endlessly suave Dennis Bagley, a high-strung advertising executive whose shoulder sprouts an evil, talking boil. The boil speaks only to Bagley, is silent to the rest of the world, and seems to be growing. This caustic satire reunites the talented team behind the cult classic Withnail and I to create a tour de force of verbal jousting and physical comedy.

Special Features

• Exclusive widescreen version, supervised by director of photography Peter Hannan
• Original theatrical trailer
• English subtitles for the deaf and hearing impaired

Criterionforum.org user rating averages

Feature currently disabled

Having just finished my second viewing of this film, I can say that I officially love it. Hot to Get Ahead is one of the best satires I've ever seen, and one of the smartest too.

I hope we'll see this one re-issued sometime in the future. It deserves the best that Criterion has to offer.

You might as well get the MGM disc, it's the same thing and the CC ain't getting reissued

oldsheperd wrote: the CC ain't getting reissued

A man can dream, can't he? I'd settle for any edition with at least a commentary by Bruce Robinson. The lack of special features on both releases is unfair to this great film.

oldsheperd wrote:You might as well get the MGM disc, it's the same thing and the CC ain't getting reissued

And the MGM is enhanced for 16:9, while if I'm not mistaken the original Criterion wasn't.

so i've found a used, mint, allegedly non-bootleg version for about 50 bucks. i've not seen this yet but i have always wanted to(i loved withnail). the seller is 99% positive. should i go through with it?

Got a link?

downrightindie wrote:so i've found a used, mint, allegedly non-bootleg version for about 50 bucks. i've not seen this yet but i have always wanted to(i loved withnail). the seller is 99% positive. should i go through with it?

I'd seriously recommend renting the MGM disc first - I adore Withnail too, but Advertising is just terrible; shrill, obnoxious, virtually incoherent and generally half-baked. Although if you do want to buy it, at least the Criterion should keep its resale value.

If you only care about the movie, I'd just check out the MGM release, the image is good and it's anamorphic. I think it's better than the Criterion, since neither have extras.

As for the film, I really enjoyed it, and it's really great until the end, it kinda loses itself, or I got lost.

Cinephrenic wrote:Got a link?

yeah

Today I saw a copy at a pawn shop, but didn't get it since the word violation on the back bottom right of the cover was spelled viloation. I checked out my copy at home, which I had purchased some time back from a forum member sealed w/ Borders price tag on the wrapping and it was spelled the same way. Either it is spelled wrong on the legit copy, or someone faked a borders tag. Can anyone with a legit copy confirm?

I got mine from Amazon when it first came out and it's also spelled incorrectly: "viloation"

Great. Hopefully it is there tomorrow then. I'll pick it up for trade fodder.

tholly wrote:Great. Hopefully it is there tomorrow then. I'll pick it up for trade fodder.

Well, it was still there today and is in great shape. I'll be posting it in the trade forum with some pictures later. Hoping to use it to get another OOP that I'm missing.


Thanks for confirming it for me.

I got hold of a used copy of this through the Amazon sellers. One thing struck me as odd, it had an orange translucent case.
Is this as it should? The packaging shots on this site has a black case like most other Criterions. Artwork, disc and insert seems to be 100% legit. (including the misspelling)

No, that's definitely not the original case.

Richard E. Grant posted on his Instagram that he just recorded a new commentary on this for an upcoming Criterion upgrade.

BD upgrade in May



DIRECTOR-APPROVED BLU-RAY SPECIAL EDITION FEATURES
2K digital restoration, supervised by director of photography Peter Hannan, with 2.0 surround DTS-HD Master Audio soundtrack
New documentary featuring interviews with writer-director Bruce Robinson and actor Richard E. Grant
Trailer
English subtitles for the deaf and hard of hearing
PLUS: An essay by critic David Cairns

New illustration by Jaxon Northon

Just to clarify as there was some back and forth about the Robinson films re-releases: I had emailed Mulvaney asking Criterion to confirm if Richard E. Grant had been correct or not when he stated on his IG-clip that he had recorded a commentary. The email response I received is that Criterion hates to disagree with Mr. Grant, but that he may have misspoke in his excitement as there is no commentary track forthcoming. The recorded interview is also confirmed as a video though, not audio-only.

Shame there isn’t a commentary. Grant and Robinson are very close, not to mention great raconteurs, and I would’ve loved to hear a commentary

Although Robinson is ultra-critical of the film these days (he says, with considerable justification, that it's just one long bludgeoning rant aimed at people who already feel the same way about advertising), so Criterion may not have been keen. I don't know where they stand on contributors actually slagging off their films in extras, but more than one major studio actively forbids it.

MichaelB wrote: Fri Feb 28, 2025 6:05 pm Although Robinson is ultra-critical of the film these days (he says, with considerable justification, that it's just one long bludgeoning rant aimed at people who already feel the same way about advertising), so Criterion may not have been keen. I don't know where they stand on contributors actually slagging off their films in extras, but more than one major studio actively forbids it.

I know Robinson has always had issues with the budget/resources that HandMade gave him on it, and he particularly dislikes the office set that Grant’s character has

It’s WB with the commentary policy, no?

MichaelB wrote: Fri Feb 28, 2025 6:05 pm Although Robinson is ultra-critical of the film these days (he says, with considerable justification, that it's just one long bludgeoning rant aimed at people who already feel the same way about advertising), so Criterion may not have been keen. I don't know where they stand on contributors actually slagging off their films in extras, but more than one major studio actively forbids it.

Soderbergh was pretty negative about The Underneath, but that film was technically just as an extra on King of the Hill.

I don't understand why they are still doing 2K restorations of films...

Has there been a more recent one than Arrow's circa 2014, which is what I assume Criterion licensed?

MichaelB wrote: Wed Jun 03, 2026 1:18 pm Has there been a more recent one than Arrow's circa 2014, which is what I assume Criterion licensed?

Yes, it's the one Arrow did.