Carry on Columbus (1992) Reviews

• Could have been much, much worse!

  chuffnobbler2003-08-05

  Carry On England. Carry On Emmannuelle. Two titles to strike fear into the hearts of many a film fan. The Carry Ons were never highbrow, but were always good fun, until the later years, when they became an embarrassment. 14 years later, Carry On Columbus took the UK by surprise. It's not nearly as good as the Carry On Classics (Cleo, Camping, Cabby, Khyber, Convenience, etc), but is far better than its two predecessors. Jim Dale gives a valiant performance as Columbus, with a host of Carry On regulars in cameo roles (Jon Pertwee, June Whitfield, Leslie Phillips, etc) and even a couple in larger, supporting roles (Bernard Cribbins and, in his least-annoying Carry On performance, Jack Douglas). The main problem with the film, I feel, is that there are far too many characters. Dozens of speaking parts, blurring the film's focus and ensuring that the major characters get less screentime than they ought to. Some characters are completely wasted, others get lost in the crowd. Much is made of the "alternative" comedians appearing in the film: the likes of Rik Mayall, Julian Clary, Peter Richardson, Alexei Sayle, Keith Allen, etc. I always feel Mayall is way over-the-top, in a film where most performances are more sedate and down to earth. The star is Julian Clary, who is a natural at delivering the smutty lines, and gets a Hawtreyesque "oh hello!" on his first appearance. Sara Crowe is a perfect Carry On dollybird: blonde and bosomy, but far more intelligent than the Carry On girls of yesteryear. A few of the best jokes of any Carry On (the "sharks" scene with Jack Douglas and Rebecca Lacey is a beauty), and some nice ideas all round. It just needs a bit of rewriting and re-editing, and its' cast list halved! Carry On Columbus is a perfectly good film. For a first draft.

  More

• Oops

  MartynGryphon2004-04-22

  This film is the biggest pile of doosh, it's been my misfortune to endure, I love the carry on films, and because I do, I have problems even excepting this pityful movies exsistence. Barbara Windsor and Joan Sims did the wise thing and refused to have anything to do with this debarcle. To include so called modern comics such as Rik Mayell, Alexi Sayle etc is an insult to the Carry on name. A movie HAS to be bad if the normally grotesque Julian Clarey, gives me the only chuckle of the film. The only 'true' Carry on regular in this movie was Jim Dale (and Peter Gilmore at a push). June Whitfield, Leslie Phillips, Jack Douglas & Bernard Cribbins, all made only a handful of appearances in the series, and do themselves no favours appearing in this arsefest. Lets put this into perspective. Sid James is Dead, Kenneth Williams is Dead, Kenneth Connor is Dead, Charles Hawtrey is Dead, Hattie Jacques is Dead, Peter Butterworth is Dead, Joan Sims is Dead. Bernard Bresslaw is Dead. These people along with Babs and Jim, WERE the Carry on movies, it was their magic and their comedic timing and delivery that made these films charming. Not because they were 'Carry on Films' but because THEY were in them, and the rapport they had as a working team, (even though Sid and Williams disliked each other), made that Carry on Magic. This film was nothing more than ghostriding. And if This movie wasn't damaging enough to the Carry on name, then I'm sure you'll all be sickened to hear that they're planning to make another. STRUTH!!!!

  More

• Shouldn't have been made.

  Sleepin_Dragon2015-11-20

  I've had a real terror fest, I've watched some true horrors, Carry on England, Carry on Emmanuelle and ended with Carry on Columbus. I've said it before, they should have stopped at the brilliant Carry on behind. It's better then the previous two, but that's not saying much, Carry on for me conjures up Sid James, Kenneth Williams, Hattie Jacques, Bernard Bresslaw and Joan Sims. Four couldn't do it and one had the sense not to. So the film is just lacking what it is to be a Carry of film, I'll give plaudits to Jim Dale for battling hard against the awful script he was given. I've tried to pick out a good bit, I've tried very hard, but I can't find one in there, it's too forced. I applaud them for trying to continue the line, and for forming a 'new' batch of British comics, sadly it just didn't quite work. 3/10

  More

• Carry On Columbus

  Smalling-21999-09-29

  Christopher Columbus, with the help of the Spanish queen, gets on board to discover India. He does America instead, that is full of tricky aborigines. A foolhardy and predictably doomed attempt to get recovered a formula that worn out its date twenty years ago. The once-individual humour of double entendres, sex-overdose and sheer crudity, which has always depended very much on taste, no longer raises even chuckles. Tired antics of a loosely assembled new cast helps no more than the insignificant minority of once-regulars (Jim Dale, June Whitfield, Bernard Cribbins, Jon Pertwee, Leslie Phillips, Jack Douglas, Peter Gilmore).

  More

• Would the word woeful suffice?

  TheLittleSongbird2010-06-13

  Don't get me wrong, I really like the Carry On franchise, but along with England and Emmanuelle, this movie is down there with the worst of them. Sorry I didn't like it, in fact I thought it was woeful. There was such a lot wrong with it, and not much good with it. The story is incoherent, the dialogue ranges to bad to horrendous, the gags are poor, the pacing is all over the place, the direction is non-existent the sets and costumes are somewhat cheap and the acting was poor. Leslie Phillips and June Whitfield are wasted, Bernard Cribbins is unusually bland and Julian Clary(???) only adds to the problem in an excruciatingly embarrassing turn as Don Juan Diego. In fact, the only redeeming quality is Jim Dale, who actually tries to do something with his role. Overall, dreadful and one of the worst. 1/10 Bethany Cox

  More