Evengyny Thanks for the memories!

Listonixio Fresh and Exciting

Ghoulumbe Better than most people think

SpunkySelfTwitter It’s an especially fun movie from a director and cast who are clearly having a good time allowing themselves to let loose.

rrahill The only Carry On Film I have seen where I didn't even raise a smile, let alone a laugh. I hated the script. I don't think the absence of the regulars is to blame for this. Writers David Pursall (screenplay) and Jack Seddon simply messed up. It's just extremely boring, irratating and not funny once. I made myself watch the director's cut from beginning to end and was so pleased when it ended.Carry On England really makes Carry On Emmannuelle look like a multi-Emmy Award film!On the plus side, this a great film for any masochists out there. Next time you are getting whipped, I dare you to watch this at the same time.

deziiqn Carry on England. The worst of the lot. When you look back at some earlier Carry on films (such as Cleo or Up the Khyber) it makes you wonder how it came to this. The majority of the cast had never been in a Carry on film, while the regulars obviously weren't too enthusiastic. I've tried several times to watch this film but have failed to make it to the very end. The plot is as follows - wait, is there an actual plot? It is centred around Captain S Melly *sigh* played by Kenneth Connor. He is put in charge of a mixed-battery. During a very long scene, nearly the whole cast is introduced. Every joke and pun during this scene just falls flat - it's not funny at all. The soldiers do nothing but kiss each other. Windsor Davies plays Sergeant Major Bloomer, second in command to Smelly (I'll just refer to Kenneth Connor as that from now on). The next two biggest roles were Sergeant Able played by Patrick Mower, and Sergeant Willing played by Judy Geeson. To be honest, just too many of the characters names had a double entendre. I won't list anymore characters because there's just too many (because barely any are developed; NONE of them are interesting). The jokes are unfunny, the characters are uninteresting and the overall production leaves a LOT to be desired. This film is truly awful and that's all I can say really.

crossbow0106 Set in 1940 in England, this is a story about a particular military outfit made up of men and woman who were particularly inept, lazy and probably a bit oversexed. Sid James, who wasn't supposed to be here anyway, passed away before the film was done. He could have brought some life into this, he was a great comedian. This movie is very shrill, lots of yelling, lots of noise. Does the new general of this company whip these people into shape? Do you care? The jokes are very obvious here, and I was only semi-amused a few times. The movie seems labored, and that is not good for a Carry On film. I would only recommend this film for Carry On completists. Otherwise, there are other films in the series which are infinitely better (examples are Carry On Doctor, Carry On Abroad, Carry On-Don't Lose Your Head etc).

ian1000 Yes it's a dreadful film, and certainly the worst Carry On BUT there's one good scene, sure to be enjoyed by most men. Four female service personnel parade outside topless one morning, stood in a row, backs straight, chests out...There are no other kind words for it. Jack Douglas, whose comedy act seemed to consist of being bitten on his backside by his own backside, adds nothing to the tale. Kenneth Conner makes the best of a bad script.It was never a fan of It Ain't Half Hot Mum or Windsor Davies but I suppose any casting director in the mid 1970s could have not found a better RSM.