Carry on Columbus (1992) Poster

User Reviews

Review this title
44 Reviews
Sort by:
Filter by Rating:
3/10
Shouldn't have been made.
Sleepin_Dragon20 November 2015
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
11 out of 13 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
2/10
Worst film I ever paid to see
CosmicPrune2 January 2018
For twenty five years I have carried this film around as a pre-prepared answer to any question which includes the words "worst film". Of course I have seen worse films on TV at strange hours of the afternoon or early morning, but I have neither watched them in their entirety nor handed over my own hard-earned cash to see them. I reserve scores of one out of ten for some of those movies, and this one merits a score of two purely because I did manage to endure it all.

This film is a tragic waste of the talent assembed to produce it. I'm not sure whether it's the script, the editing, the direction or all three which conspired to make it so bad but it's almost an achievement in itself that so many fine comedy actors were employed in pursuit of such a lost cause.

The Carry On franchise was never intended to be thought-provoking but it's irreverence and cheekiness evoked a more innocent time which, while it may not have really been as innocent as it made out, was well and truly over by the time Columbus hit our theatres. Even with those qualities intact it would have been fairly excruciating in 1992, but it wasn't even that good. It isn't so much of an anachronism as an embarrassment and I'll bet there were a few tense conversations between actors and agents in the period following its release.
5 out of 5 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
4/10
Jim Dale and Sara Crowe are the only ones worth watching Warning: Spoilers
I have seen all of the Carry on Films and I remember only not enjoying a couple of them. That would be Columbus & Emmanuelle. I know a lot of people hated England as well. I liked that one. After Sid James left, there was something missing.

This movie probably should have not been made. These films worked in the 50's, 60's & part of the 70's. The film looks like a cheap production. It's like something you would see on TV. Jim Dale plays Christopher Columbus and he goes out exploring and there are people out to stop him. Before the voyage starts we have a couple of stupid and wrong scenes. We see a bunch of Christians dressed as Klansman in black Klan outfits discussing how to get rid of Jewish people. That scene is stupid, wrong and unfunny. There is also a scene where Columbus recruits prisoners for his voyage and there is gate keeper that is gay. What a wimp. Gay characters are not funny. He is a total sissy. There is one good scene early on as Sara Crowe who plays Fatima. She does a nice dance in a harem outfit for her boss, the Sultan. She is assigned to sabotage the mission of Columbus. She gets on board dressed as a man. She and other try and try to stop his voyage. Fatima falls for Chris and she tells him of the plan to mutiny.

They are ready to hang him when they spot land. They decide to move forward. They go a shore and meet some people that show them the cave that has treasure. Before they enter Fatima strips down to her harem outfit. Very nice! They find a small treasure and trick the King and Queen from keeping it. Chris ends up getting it on with Fatima in the final scene.

There is not a lot of good things to say about this film. There are also a few bare butts that were not needed. I think giving this film a 4/10 is a gift.
7 out of 8 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
1/10
Laughter-free zone
Red-Barracuda17 September 2021
1992 was the 500th anniversary of Christopher Columbus landing on American soil and there were three prominent movies made to cash in on this - 1492, Conquest of Paradise and the film generally regarded as the most historically accurate of the three, Carry On Columbus. They were all crap I think, with the Carry On one being voted the worst British film ever made in 2004 by film professionals. Its not entirely unfair, as it really is a hopeless pile of garbage. It makes Cannon and Ball's Boys in Blue appear like Police Academy and the other Carry On films appear...better. The script is dreadful and the acting performances dire. It truly is alternative comedy, i.e. An alternative TO comedy. So, hop onboard the good ship Asinine on its voyage to the laughter-free zone.
8 out of 9 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
Oops
MartynGryphon22 April 2004
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 accepting 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, Barbara Windsor is Dead, Bernard Bresslaw is Dead.

These people 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 it is the rapport they had as a working team, that 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. I hope more intelligent heads prevail and we are spared such an indignity.
36 out of 52 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
1/10
The worst movie I've ever seen!
johnjanis28 December 2020
Absolutely terrible and embarrassing. Cheap looking and shameful. How did this atrocity ever see the light of day? What a disgrace to the Carry On name.
11 out of 14 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
2/10
Thank you Talking Pictures for giving the opportunity to watch this.
fostrhod21 February 2022
Occasionally you will watch a film in which you struggle to find any redeeming qualities. Carry On Columbus is such a film. It wasn't so much that the humour was dated, in 1992 I can still laugh at 95% of the Carry Ons, it was so badly executed and the casting was so misplaced. If your a Carry On fan it is nice to see some of the originals still in 1992 around to give it a go. Jim Dale, Jack Douglas. June Whitfield, Leslie Philips , Bernard Cribbins, Jon Pertwee andPeter Gilmore being the remnants of this British institution. The rest of the cast are the then cream of TVs alternative comedy, what a waste. 2/10.
4 out of 4 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
3/10
A Carry On For The Nineties
wilsonstuart-3234623 May 2018
The 'Carry Ons' had been wound up - to very little fanfare - nearly fifteen years before Carry On Columbus was released back in 1992. I was in high school then and I remember it vaguely; along with most contemporary audiences at the time, I certainly made no effort to actually watch a Carry On film in the cinema. Followng a dismal run Carry On Columbus soon faded at the box office , and it's only thanks to ITV 4 that I've gotten the chance to occasionally watch it over recent years.

The storyline - a take on Christopher Columbus and The New World, in case you missed the hint - is stale and lifeless. Too many of the performances are forced, and the timing and delivery - always essentially in a Carry On film - just isn't there; if the 'magic' that existed between James, Jacques, Butterworth, Connor, Williams, Windsor, et al (despite whatever else was going on behind the scenes) was spent by 'Emmannuelle' then it was unlikely it was going to be rekindled in the early Nineties - particularly with a group of actors and comedians from a very different background.

This was at the heart of Columbus's failure - the Alternative Comedian of the 1980s was extremely critical (often with good justification) of their 'traditional', 'music hall' or 'old fashioned' predecessors; and when they got their own chance on the silver screen their big shot was yet another Carry On film...it was no wonder they struggled to adapt to the 'seaside postcard' style they'd spent nearly a decade disparaging. By trying to reinvent a sanitised version, and underestimating or misunderstanding the job in hand, the Alternatives surgically removed the essence of what made the series such a success in the first place - even if realities were a bit more hit and miss than the myth suggests. Peter Rogers takes his share of blame as well - if the same formula was well passed its sell by date in 1978 (or 1976 if count 'Dick' as the last decent entry) did he really expect a different result in 1992?

With one or two exemptions (notably Jim Dale and Sara Crowe) most of the cast look all at sea here - and not in the way Colombus would have liked. It says much about low expectations that people can say this is better than the last two or three entries is a plus point - I'd say it was a necessity! Not the worst but it's near the bottom of the league, and one for the completionists only.
4 out of 4 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
1/10
Carry On Columbus
jboothmillard3 July 2012
Warning: Spoilers
It was perhaps coincidence that the last Carry On film ever made (thirteen years after the final compilation film, That's Carry On) was also the last one I had to watch, having watched all thirty in a non-chronological order over the years, and sadly it is not a good one. Basically Christopher Columbus (Jim Dale) is sure that he can sail the seven seas to find a different route to the far East and discovers new countries. To do this he needs finance, so he convinces King Ferdinand (Leslie Phillips) and Queen Isabella (June Whitfield) of Spain to give him the money he needs to hire a boat and get a crew together. Also coming along on the trip however is spy Fatima (Sara Crowe) who has been sent by The Sultan of Turkey (Rik Mayall) to sabotage the journey so that he will not lose the money he gets through taxing people. Eventually after many incidents along the way Columbus and the crew do come across a new country, later to become America, and they get to know The Chief (The Nutty Professor's Larry Miller) and all the other residents, until they return home with a fortune of (unreal) gold. I will be honest and say that I didn't really follow or care what was going on. Also starring Peter Richardson as Bart Columbus, Alexei Sayle as Achmed, Julian Clary as Don Juan Diego, Bernard Cribbins as Mordecai Mendoza, Richard Wilson as Don Juan Felipe, Keith Allen as Pepi the Poisoner, Nigel Planer as The Wazir, Andrew Bailey as Genghis, Burt Kwouk as Wang, Tony Slattery as Baba the Messenger, Maureen Lipman as Countess Esmeralda, Holly Aird as Maria, Jon Pertwee as Duke of Costa Brava, Martin Clunes as Martin, Who Framed Roger Rabbit's Charles Fleischer as Pontiac, Jack Douglas as Marco the Cereal Killer, Chris Langham as Hubba and Peter Gilmore as Governor of the Canaries. Kenneth Williams, Sid James, Frankie Howerd, Charles Hawtrey, Hattie Jacques and Peter Butterworth had all passed away, and Barbara Windsor (who rightly said the script was "crap"), Joan Sims, Bernard Bresslew and Terry Scott refused to take part, only Dale, Gilmore, Phillips, Pertwee and Whitfield came back for another, the rest of the cast consists mostly of rising and alternative comedians. The cast is good, but having them is pointless because the film is so bad, the Carry On films are a British institution and something to be remembered when they were good, and this was only made to coincide with the 500th anniversary of Christopher Columbus' discovery of the America. The good Carry On films (Cleo, Screaming, Don't Lose Your Head, Up the Khyber, Camping, Again Doctor) all came out in the 1960's, it is in the 1970's that the innuendos and double entendre turned into pure filth and rubbish, especially in England and Carry on Emmannuelle - which along with this are the worst, this is a never funny and crap comedy. Poor!
6 out of 7 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
1/10
Would the word woeful suffice?
TheLittleSongbird13 June 2010
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
11 out of 15 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
10/10
A brave continuation of a great series
FUX6 November 1998
After 14 years since the last Carry On (Emmannuelle), Rogers/Peters decided it was about time they made another. Most of the main stars had died (Kenneth Williams,Charles Hawtrey, Sid James, Hattie Jaques, Petter Butterworth) thus many new stars were required.. Those originals that were still with us were all approached, but often only offered small parts, and thus turned them down (even the role of Columbus was offered to a new star first (Robbie Coltrain) however we do get Jim Dale). Many of the jokes are taken from previous films, but the new actors manage to succesfully deliver them making Columbus much better than the last film (Emmannuelle). Jim Dale shines through out, however my favourite has to be Julian Clary (in a role that would originally have to go to good old Charlie Hawtrey). The only part of this film I do not like is the end. Our "heroes" are left looking rather stupid, having been pawned off with fools gold by the Americans - NOT the way to finish a Carry On film in my opinion. Although lacking the good old "Ooh Matron", Sids guffaws, and Babs' giggles we do get a hint at the good old days in Clary's opening sentence with the classic Hawtrey opening "Oh Hello!" - A good tribute.
5 out of 18 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
6/10
Could have been much, much worse!
chuffnobbler5 August 2003
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.
19 out of 25 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
1/10
It should have been so much better!
adamjohns-4257523 March 2022
Carry On Columbus (1992) -

I'm pretty sure that as a kid I actually went to see this at the cinema.

My whole family have always been fans of the 'Carry On' series of films and having recently watched the majority of them I can say that, for the most part, they are still enjoyable, although there are a few that are a bit cringey ('Carry On Girls' (1973) and 'Carry On Loving'(1970)).

But those are nowhere near as bad as this film.

It's just stupid. Initially I thought that it was just daft, but it got so much worse. The comedy timing is off and the jokes and script weren't that good to start with.

I can't think why they let it be released when it was obviously so poorly conceived and even those writing and starring in it found it hard to be proud of it.

The concept was fine, but the delivery was appalling. The producers really had an opportunity to bring back what was something of a British institution and could have lead to a whole new collection of 'Carry On's', but failed so badly with this pantomimic, after school, childish nonsense. It's not even filmic in the way that it's made. At points I thought that I was watching a 'Chucklevision' (1987-2009) and 'The Young Ones' (1982-4) crossover.

Bad sets, scripts, photography, direction, acting and well actually I can't think of anything good.

Jim Dale was the only one giving proper 'Carry On' style and Larry Miller as The Chief was the only one that was even vaguely entertaining to watch.

I have never been sure that I've seen any of the films in the series all the way through, which is why I recently decided to watch them all and tick them off. I Thank God that I can now say that I have seen this one and I never have to watch it again. Give me 'Carry On Screaming' (1966) 'Cleo' (1964), 'Camping' (1969) and 'Don't Lose Your Head' (1967), but please never make me endure this one again.

139.83/1000.
3 out of 3 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
1/10
A Total Wast Of Time...!
Mulle-37 June 1999
This is one of the most boring comedies, I have ever seen. The plot is bad; the acting is bad. And it is NOT a funny movie. Please use your time at something else. You will be sorry if you wast 1½ hour of your life on this crap. I'm am!
10 out of 15 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
Why the UK should give up film production.
sebastian_carr15 October 2002
The original Carry On series has a certain kitsch charm. They were smutty, low budget attempts to appeal to the masses, which broadly succeeded in putting a smile on the nation's face. Great casts of talented comic actors such as Sid James, Kenneth Williams, Charles Hawtrey and Barbara Windsor gave their all to leave a superb record of the humour of the time. Fourteen years after the original series drew to a close, largely because it was no longer relevant to the country, someone got the bright idea to revive the tradition. I can almost hear the smug conversations as the likes of Julian Clary and Rik Mayall decided to undertake what they thought would be a simple project. How miserably they failed. It is an execrable, ill conceived and poorly executed film, the only purpose of which is to illustrate the quality of the originals.

We often bemoan the demise of the British film industry, yet we seem to be almost incapable of turning out any decent films with the resources we have.
18 out of 32 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
1/10
A sad end
m_pratt20 November 2006
This film is poor. The carry on magic is non existent. The remaining carry on regulars have little to do apart from Jim Dale. Cribbins is not bad but better in Jack and Spying. Jack Douglas is poor in this film and looks bored and wishing he was somewhere else. Whitfield and Philips are poor as the king and queen of Spain. Julian Clary is rubbish he cannot act he is unfunny and he is better off acting in the Tweenies!!!. By this time the art of making carry ons was gone. There is no regulars in this film at all. Kenneth Connor was still alive, Joan Sims was still alive Bernard Bresslaw was still alive Frankie Howerd was alive. Patsy Rowlands was still alive. Sid had been dead for 16 years. Hattie Kenny and Charlie has passed on Sadley. Barbara Windsor could have been in this to liven it up a bit. Maureen Lipman is not carry on material. There was no point in casting comedians in place of the original actors they have passed on and they will Sadley missed they where born to act. I heard they where thinking about a new Carry on Carry on London i hope they don't make it it will be sad unfunny and never the same.
8 out of 12 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
1/10
Carry On Clunkers!
ShadeGrenade10 August 2006
Having managed to destroy traditional British comedy by the early '90's, the alternative comedy brigade then made complete fools of themselves by signing up for 'Carry On Columbus'. Why, exactly? Alexei Sayle was a vociferous critic of 'old school' comics such as Les Dawson, so what's he doing here? Actually, neither he, Rik Mayall, Julian Clary, Keith Allen and co. can be blamed for the film turning out a stinker. Sid James, Kenneth Williams and the original gang would have had a tough time making this dreadful script funny. It plays like a bad 'Carry On' spoof done by 'The Comic Strip Presents' team. Clary manages a few guffaws as a Hawtrey-substitute, but the only person to emerge with any credit is Jim Dale. Old-timers Jack Douglas, Leslie Phillips, June Whitfield and Jon Pertwee feature in so few scenes as to be barely noticeable. I pity anyone who paid to see it on its original release; on television you can always change channels, or better still put on a 'Carry On Screaming' D.V.D.
9 out of 14 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
4/10
Might Not Have Been So Bad if it wasn't a Carry On
vox-sane17 August 2010
Warning: Spoilers
Two good reasons to watch "Carry on Columbus" are Jim Dale and Bernard Cribbins. Dale, who occasionally seems to be channeling Sid Caesar, starred in several "Carry On" movies of the late sixties and seventies. Long-time comedy star Cribbins made enough "Carry On" flicks to qualify as an early regular. These two veterans show up all the young comics shoe-horned into "Columbus" and their scenes together are the best in the movie.

Also showing up to good effect are Leslie Phillips and June Whitfield – another pair of comedy veterans – as the King and Queen of Spain. A bit of the sheen is taken off their glow by rumors that Frankie Howerd and Joan Sims were originally envisioned for these roles. It's too bad Howerd, who died the year "Columbus" was released, was unable to give one last well-honed dithering character as the king, or as – well, see below.

Apart from Dale and Cribbins, "Columbus" is a better bad movie. It is not "bad" in the sense of being shoddy. (Like all "Carry On" movies, it was made as cheaply as possible, but the cheapness underscores the "Carry On" charm and gave "Carry On" movies a feel all their own.) "Columbus" is bad because it is a comedy without enough laughs.

The first few minutes of "Columbus" are rotten, with alternative comedian Rik Myall apparently trying to stand in for the irreplaceable Kenneth Williams. The first scenes prepare one for worse things to come, though they never get truly awful until the end. The movie ends horrifically, after Columbus arrives in America and meets excruciatingly unfunny, Bronx-accented, stogie-smoking natives.

Bookended between these frightfully bad scenes are some fairly funny moments. "There's no mustard on it" should be a "Carry On" classic line. "Will it eat me whole?" even more so. There are several guffaws, just not enough to make the comedy work as a whole, despite some game performances by newcomers as well as the few old hands who signed aboard.

If this same movie had been billed merely as a spoof of the serious Columbus movies released in and around 1992, "Carry On Columbus" might have fared better. It is marginally superior to Graham Chapman's gruesome 1983 sea-going disaster, "Yellowbeard." "Columbus" should have learned from Chapman's shipwreck, which it resembles in too many ways.

"Yellowbeard" boasted three Pythons in the cast (Chapman, John Cleese and Eric Idle). Several Mel Brooks alumni were on hand (Marty Feldman, Madeline Kahn, Kenneth Mars). Notable British actors who had been successes in comedy (Michael Hordern and James Mason) rubbed shoulders with British comedy legend Spike Milligan and America's Cheech and Chong. Not buoyed by a good script, many laughs or a good ending, all hands sailing in "Yellowbeard" sank without a trace.

"Yellowbeard" petered out with unfunny natives in a new land. So did "Columbus." With a better ending (finding several former "Carry On" members being held in a cave, say, or maybe an unbilled appearance by a Frankie Howerd as a native high king), "Columbus" might have been acceptable.

"Columbus" might have turned out as a silly but diverting little comedy along the lines of later Leslie Nielsen flicks (which it resembles more than its "Carry On" predecessors). Unfortunately, "Columbus" had the weighty "Carry On" imprimatur slapped on it.

The "Carry On" label means something. Originally sly social comedies, by the 1970s "Carry On" became wall-to-wall nudge-nudge, wink-wink double-entendres. Ephemeral beauties like Shirley Eaton ("Goldfinger") and Jill Adams ("The Green Man") made way over time to more earthy sirens Liz Fraser ("I'm All Right, Jack") and Barbara Windsor.

"Carry On" starred a host of Britain's finest talents from radio and the movies, including but not limited to Kenneth Williams, Sid James, Leslie Phillips, Hattie Jacques, Joan Sims, Kenneth Connor and Eric Barker. None of these actors appeared in all the "Carry On" movies. Some dropped out for a while and came back. Others dropped out forever because of low pay or health problems (including death). Not even Kenneth Williams was in every single "Carry On." But as "Carry On" carried on, the "Carry On" brand acquired a certain undefinable definition.

A naval movie called "Watch Your Stern" (1960) was funnier than that year's "Carry On Constable." Featuring Leslie Phillips, Kenneth Connor, Joan Sims, Hattie Jacques, Sid James and Eric Barker, "Stern" also contains cameos by Spike Milligan and Eric Sykes. It was probably even more delightful in that it did not have to drag the already heavy weight of the "Carry On" series name. Even though "Constable" was only the fourth "Carry On" and the series had not become altogether scatological, the series was already attaining legendary status. "Columbus" should have been a one-off "from the people who brought you 'Carry On'" rather than trying to resuscitate a dead series.

Though the entertainment quality of the "Carry On" series was probably more nostalgic than real, the actors were at the core of each movie. They did their best with the material they were given, whether it was more serious and heartwarming (early on) or totally risqué (later).

At a first look, "Carry On, Columbus" was wildly different because of its mostly new cast. Star Jim Dale was a welcome face familiar to devotees of the series, but too many "Carry On" regulars had died (James, Williams, Jacques, Peter Butterworth, etc.) or, for whatever reason, chose not to appear (Sims, Kenneth Connor, Bernard Bresslaw, Liz Fraser, etc.) No more or less funny than later Leslie Nielsen movies, "Carry On Columbus" was stuck with a brand name. Think of a James Bond movie where they replaced Sean Connery with Charles Hawtrey.

"Carry On Columbus" is probably no worse than "Wrongfully Accused" or "Dracula Dead and Loving It." But as a "Carry On" it did not and probably could not meet the expectations of its audience.
4 out of 5 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
2/10
Peter Rogers proved wrong
malcolmgsw16 May 2022
Rogers always excused paying his star performers, Williams,James,Hawtry,peanuts because the Carry On title was the real star. So this lamentable effort showed this was so much eyewash. He lived a life of luxury,despite being made bankrupt,whilst such as Hawtry died in poverty. No residuals for them.

Voted worst British film ever made I am hard pressed to think of another film worthy of this award.
4 out of 5 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
1/10
what were they thinking?
petersj-23 August 2010
Some movies can be so bad that they are funny. The trouble with this movie is that it tries desperately to be funny but isn't. Many looked forward to seeing a new Carry on movie but despite a very good and talented cast this movie is very hard to sit through. Its hard to say why it doesn't work but its probably because the genre has out lived its used by date. The old carry on movies had a loyal and faithful audience but they belonged to another time. These days we can watch them and they bring back sweet memories of sitting in an old theatre (like the Grosovenor in Melbourne)and licking on your Dixi ice cream. It is rather nice that the gay characters don't do the silly hinting and that Julian Clary can be quite open. He seems to be the only performer who seems to get a laugh. Thankfully most people support gay rights and same sex relationships are simply a life style choice. "Carry on Columbus" really is a terrible mess and there are no laughs.
5 out of 7 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
2/10
Carry On No. 30
michaelarmer8 May 2020
Well peter Rogers managed to make the 30 Carry On's that he wished to, just, however it was poor and the last few were poor, this was not the worst, that fell to 'Carry on Emmannuelle' but this was not much better.

The picture quality was poor, the film was just flat, not funny, not exciting, not dramatic, it was just nothingness.

The lead actor was Jim Dale, he had not done any for many years, it was 1969 when he did his last, and it looked like it, he tried, but the quality of everything else failed him. Jim actually started in one of the side issue films, 'Raising The Wind', he did two more before he got into 'Carry on Cabby' but in a small role, it was not until in 'Carry on Cleo' did he become a main actor and one of the regulars, but he was one of the main roles in most of the best, he did 11 Carry On's and 4 of the spin-offs, so 15 films altogether, but he has done other stuff and spent many years on the stage, he is still going, mostly narrating these days but he is 84 now.

Bernard Cribbins also did his last (it was the obviously the last fr all that were in it), he had only done 2 before, 'Carry on Jack' and 'Carry on Spying' both in 1964, so not a regular, but still a memorable performer, he has done loads of other films and TV, his last was in 2018 at the age of 88, I hope he has retired now, he is 91!

Leslie Phillips was another semi-regular, he was in 'Carry on Nurse' the 2nd one, he did 3 more including ....Columbus' plus 4 of the spin-offs, the last in 1961 so it had been over 30 years since until he did this, again he is another with an extensive career, he retired in 2012, and sadly passed away in 2022.

June Whitfield was in it as well, she started in 'Carry on Nurse' as well, and did 3 more including this and 1 spin-off, she also had a long career, including the 'Absolutely Fabulous' TV and film, sadly she passed away in 2018, aged 93.

Jack Douglas had a short role in this, he had done a few with short roles, the only one he had a main one in was 'Carry on Behind', he had actually done 8 and 2 Xmas TV specials and the TV series, he only had a middling career though, and passed away in 2008 aged 81.

Peter Gilmore also appeared, he had been in 11 Carry On's, mostly in small roles , his best was in 'Don't Lose Your Head' as Citizen Robespierre, he had a good career, retiring in 1996, he passed away in 2013 aged 81.

Jon Pertwee only did 4 including this in cameo roles, famous for his Dr Who roles, Jon was another with an extensive career and retired in 1995, unfortunately he passed away the next year aged 76.

John Antrobus you might not have heard of, he was a writer who did a bit of acting, he wrote some of the Carry On's, he had a bit role in this, he was also in 'Carry on Constable' and 'Raising The Wind' many years ago, he is still with us aged 86.

Of the rest, most were modern actors, although there were a couple of older actors that had never been in Carry On before such as Bert Kwouk, but none that did any good, with the exception of Maureen Lipman.

So Peter Rogers managed to do his 30 Carry On's but in doing so ruined the franchise and spoilt the memory of the great ones, but not too much, it also looked like it could have been a comeback with new blood, but this rubbish put paid to that, you just have to ignore the last few and concentrate on the best ones such as Screaming and Up The Khyber, so get the DVD player out and shove those on, not this.
2 out of 2 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
10/10
Very good!
noledge22 July 2003
I know its not up to the standard of alot of the older films, but its miles ahead of Emmanuelle and England im my opinion. It also has some VERY funny lines, the best ever in any Carry On film in fact:

"Now Columbus. Father Torquemada has read your document"

"But its in Hebrew"

"Yes, well he had a Jewish grandmother didn't he?"

"At the seminary I attended it was compulsory"

"What you mean they all had Jewish grandmothers?"

Absolutely the best line in any Carry On film! Along with other good ones like:

"In gods name... Make it go!"

"Fine foods. Exotic women. Gay companions"

Yeah its not as good as the others and doesn't feel part of the series with so little of the original stars involved, but its good enough in parts and I hear tell that they are now making another film 'Carry On London' - bring it on!
4 out of 17 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
6/10
Not the Embarrassment it Could Have Been
richardchatten21 February 2022
A far more worthy farewell to the 'Carry On' series than the truly ghastly 'Carry On Emmanuelle' in 1978.

Veterans of the original series like Bernard Cribbins and Leslie Phillips were still vigorous enough to take part (the latter replacing Frankie Howerd who died just before filming commenced, interacting surprisingly successfully with new boys like Alexei Sayle and Rik Mayall; and even Alan Hume returned for old times sake as cameraman. While Sarah Crowe is a more than satisfactory substitute for Barbara Windsor.
2 out of 9 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
1/10
An embarrassment to British Cinema
BIGMUSH4 June 2001
I think the best way of describing this film would be to start by saying that I am an avid cinema attendee and like to visit at least once a week and have done so for getting on for over ten years, and without doubt this is STILL the worst film that I have ever had the misfortune to endure. It's one of those films were you want to leave but don't because you're sure that it must get better.... and then it ends!

The story is so thin and uninspiring that you wonder why the film company decided to bring this great long running series out of retirement after all these years merely to kill it stone dead. In summary awful doesn't do it justice.
7 out of 12 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
Carry On Columbus
Smalling-229 September 1999
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).
10 out of 16 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
An error has occured. Please try again.

See also

Awards | FAQ | User Ratings | External Reviews | Metacritic Reviews


Recently Viewed