AndyRM
XOXO
- Location
- North Shields
The 'Carry On' films are utter garbage. They aren't even funny as a parody.
Thing is, this, the first in the series, wasn't recognisably a Carry On. It had none of the the supposedly bawdy postcard humour for which they later became known, and there was no Sid James going yuk yuk yuk. It was just a dispiritingly poor and lame British film that could never have been of any interest to anyone but the British, and really should have been none to them.The 'Carry On' films are utter garbage. They aren't even funny as a parody.
The banquet scene is a nailed-on classic, and it's pretty good fun overall.I actually quite enjoy one or two of the later ones. Watched carry on up the Khyber recently. Made oi laff.
I watched The Irishman. Obviously it has a great cast and some good writing. And some good performances. My problem with the movie was having guys close to 80 years old playing people who are supposed to be 30 or 40 years younger. I just wasn't buying it. DeNiro was way too old to have such young kids. There was one scene where DeNiro is fighting and kicking the guy and he was holding his arm as if he had palsy and his kicks looked fake. He just looked like an old man. Same with Pesci and Pacino. These guys were miscast in these roles and it ruined the movie for me.
I think this deserves a thread of its own: 2nd best comedy question.Cohen is a genius. I still remember watching live the interview in which he asked the second best question-to-a-celeb ever: "So, Brooklyn, when he grows up, is he going to be a footballer, like his dad, or a singer, like...Mariah Carey?"