The Carry On films

[Better Than Nothing]

The Carry On films - as British as fish and chips, as salty as the very briny itself, as cheeky as a loveable moppet sticking his tongue out at a startled vicar, part of the very fabric of our national identity. That seems to be the default argument cultural commentators who really should know better seem to adopt when discussing this string of modest comedies. As Will Self once said, tawdry beliefs may well be comfortable, but that's no reason to cherish them.

Strip away the after-the-fact enshrining of the Carry On franchise as 'an integral part of British culture engaged in projecting the English character and capturing the mood of the sixties and seventies for future generations' (Pseud's Corner ahoy!), discard your personal affection for certain cast members, scrap all those comfort blanket notions of damp Sunday afternoons spent enjoying gentle, undemanding chuckles over a heavily edited ITV3 screening of Khyber or Camping. What are you left with? A series of lowbrow, low-budget, technically inept and indifferently scripted films that weren't so much bawdy knockabout fun as horribly creepy, seedy and depressing.

Nothing wrong with comedy being creepy, seedy and depressing, of course - that accusation could be levelled against Bottom, several Monty Python sketches, the raincoat-and-mouldy-sandwiches world of Pete and Dud, Les Dawson's Cosmo Smallpeace character, Steptoe and Son, certain facets of Granville and Arkwright's characters in Open All Hours (Granville is obviously a slightly 'simple' man-child kept in a state of arrested development by a miserly old man with an extremely narrow view of the world who divides his time between counting his pennies and courting a woman who, for the most part, puts up with him as opposed to genuinely even liking him), the grim and ratty East Cheam inhabited by Tony Hancock - I could go on - but there was always something so glaringly and obviously unsavoury about the Carry Ons, exacerbated by the fact that they were trying so hard to be broad, family-friendly, slapstick (to say nothing of slap-and-tickle) entertainment.

Try watching an entire Carry On film from start to finish - it's an arduous task. Once the cosy glow of nostalgia has dissipated, you're left with very meagre pickings indeed. Every joke is mercilessly telegraphed and over-explained; every misunderstanding is hammered home with swanee whistle fanfares, kettledrum blows and reaction shots of Kenneth Williams looking like a startled donkey; even 'funny' names are repeated and referenced in case somebody didn't immediately pick up on the side-splitting hilarity of 'Stuart Farquar' ("Stupid what?") or 'Major Leap'. Technically, the films are level pegging with the dreary shot-on-16mm-on-a-grimy-September-afternoon filmed inserts from contemporary sitcoms, only the maestros at the BBC and ITV at least had the decency not to subject us to flubbed takes, the actors stumbling over the dialogue, all-too-obvious stunt doubles or sequences that appear to have been edited with a razor blade and a tube of UHU.

The nostalgia aspect, too, is questionable. Little Englanders may sigh contentedly at the well-kept housing estates, the spotless streets, the uncongested roads and the immaculate gardens on display, but it's also a world of sex-starved homunculi, hopelessly closeted and frustrated homosexuals whose lot in life is to be sneered at, pointed at and openly mocked; dolly birds - who appear to have slept in their make-up -  never dare to complain when they're improbably paired off with a hapless, bumbling Terry Scott (nursing yet another 'hilarious' bottom-centric injury) or a cackling, raisin-faced James; a world of congenitally snooty and stand-offish authority figures; a world where the young are forever doomed to have their fun spoiled by frustrated, middle-aged men (witness the termination of the outdoor rock concert in Camping) and there's no escape from the oppressive, crushing power of the Conservative autocracy (witness the still-shocking anti-union stance of At Your Convenience).

For a truer picture of the tragedy behind the Carry Ons - a tragedy that could never quite be kept safely off the screen (witness the spray-painted trees in Camping, or the paltry five-bar gate in wild Wales that doubles unconvincingly for the Khyber Pass in Up the Khyber) - look no further than Roger Lewis's brilliant biography of Charles Hawtrey, or the diaries of Kenneth Williams, whose disdain for the series has been well-documented elsewhere. The films only turned a profit because producer Peter Rogers was a notorious penny-pincher whose top rate of pay for the series regulars remained at a steady £5,000 between 1958's Sergeant and 1978's Emmannuelle. Joan Sims complained to the last about the notoriously low fees - in Rogers' hermetically sealed, padlock-pocketed autocracy, women were always paid significantly less than men.

Terry Pratchett likened his revulsion toward Lewis Carroll's Alice books to the fear and nausea he felt as a child when he was obliged to kiss elderly relatives, and that's the same feeling I get from the Carry On films. I'll leave the last words to the late, much-missed Ken Russell, when asked his opinion on the series - "Can't we do better than this?"

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tfbPF-yRKY0

"s*****c porn, we're talking about, in a lot of these films".

[Phoenix Lazarus]

Remember that scene in one of the hospital-based Carry Ons, in which Terry Scott attempts to sexually assault a much smaller and weaker person he believes to be a female nurse, but is actually a man in drag.  Scott's mistake doesn't make that scene much less unpleasant, in my view.

[Better Than Nothing]

Remember that scene in one of the hospital-based Carry Ons, in which Terry Scott attempts to sexually assault a much smaller and weaker person he believes to be a female nurse, but is actually a man in drag.  Scott's mistake doesn't make that scene much less unpleasant, in my view.

God, yes. This is exactly the kind of thing I'm talking about. EXACTLY. Give this man a medal or a can of lukewarm Barr Cola. Whichever is easier to locate.

[Phoenix Lazarus]

I remember one of them had Kenneth Williams getting his trousers torn off in some public place.  That was quite funny.  I recall Holiday on the Buses had a similar scene with Blakey that was also very amusing, in a bottom-of-the-barrel way.

[Better Than Nothing]

Please, no mentions of On the Buses or any of the accompanying films. I'm asking you as nicely as I know how.

That's another Carry On constant - trousers being ripped off, usually to reveal horrible, Stilton-coloured, spindly legs, gaudily-patterned underwear and the inevitable sock suspenders.

[Gulftastic]

Some of the series manage to be any good. ...Up The Khyber,...Cleo,....Screaming,...Don't Lose Your Head are all good films. The 'dinner party scene in 'Khyber' is one of the best scenes in any British comedy film.

And one of my favourite jokes is:

'What are you favourite 'Carry On...' films?

'Screaming, Girls, Loving, Dick, Up The Khyber'

[Phoenix Lazarus]

That's another Carry On constant - trousers being ripped off, usually to reveal horrible, Stilton-coloured, spindly legs, gaudily-patterned underwear and the inevitable sock suspenders.

Not sure that's right.  I recall Kenneth Williams losing his trousers once, in one Carry On, but not anyone else in any of the others.  Now if you mean that that was a recurring motif within 70s broad comedy, well yes, I'll concur with that.

[CaledonianGonzo]

I may be misremembering, but don't Kenneth Connors' trousers come off in Carry On Girls?

[Brundle-Fly]

Carry On Camping is the most depraved of the lot. I would extend on this but my computer playing havoc.

[thenoise]

Some of the series manage to be any good. ...Up The Khyber,...Cleo,....Screaming,...Don't Lose Your Head are all good films. The 'dinner party scene in 'Khyber' is one of the best scenes in any British comedy film.

Agreed, I love Khyber the other historical/parody ones, and several of the early films were harmlessly amusing, before it descended into bawdiness and endless smutty innuendo and Barbara Windsor's tits.

[Ignatius_S]

Something that often happens when the Carry On series is discussed, sweeping generalisations are made with no regard to clear differences as the films went on. Disregarding Columbus, the notion that the series didn't evolve in any way over 20 years is inaccurate and overly simplistic. As the idea that the series is some kind of sacred cow.

Regardless of the movies themselves, Rogers and Thomas could be extremely shrewd film makers. For example, Carry On Cleo not only successfully cashed in on the Taylor and Burton epic, it used many of the same sets and Rogers hired legendary film poster artist Tom Chantrell (in an exceptionally long career, he produced posters ranging from the first Star Wars film to Bus Stop to countless Hammer films to Brighton Rock to video nasties). Chantrell produced a poster that sent up the one for Cleopatra - the producers of the latter were not amused and legal action was taken. It was ruled that posters for Carry On Cleo had to be destroyed, which just created even more publicity for the film.

Not sure that's right....

That's because it's not - but then again, factual accuracy hasn't been a hallmark of this thread (e.g. Williams was fond of the series and this is reflected in his diaries; that's not to say he was always complimentary about it).

[biggytitbo]

I guess I'm one of the few people alive to find the Carry on films unironically funny. I love the craft that goes into them, and the sense of absurdism. They're incredibly conservative, but always  in a knowing, very absurd way, silly to a point of sophistication in fact.

[Absorb the anus burn]

They are childish, conservative, reactionary, grubby, repetitive, creepy, lazy, seedy cynical... Yet some of The Carry On films can be extremely funny and neatly capture British obsessions, peculiar values and priorities better than many other films.

I've seen all of them far too many times, yet can still giggle at familiar gags, but also cringe at everything from the ham acting, to the perpetual union bashing, to the poof stereotypes and creepy attitude to women.

Funniest sequences?

1. Joan Sims getting drunk at the wine tasting in Carry On Regardless, and beating up Nicholas Parsons and David Lodge.

2. Terry Scott going to meet his dowdy date at Joan Hickson's house in Carry On Loving.

3. Kenneth Williams and Charles Hawtrey dragging up to catch shoplifters in Carry On Constable.

4. The sped up coach trip to the seaside in Carry On At Your Convenience.

5. The fisting gag in Carry On Camping (as mistakenly watched through the tent silhouette)

[Johnny Textface]

That doc looks really good cheers. Is that the best doc covering the carry-on films?

[ColonelVolestrangler]

That doc looks really good cheers. Is that the best doc covering the carry-on films?

'Carry On Darkly'? It's not really about the Carry On films themselves, more a bit of muck-raking about a handful of the stars, as I recall it, basically telling us the startling news that Sid James was a gambling womaniser, Kenneth Williams was a self-loathing homosexual, etc.
Mind you, I can't remember a particularly good or in-depth documentary about the films.

[Ignatius_S]

'Carry On Darkly'? It's not really about the Carry On films themselves, more a bit of muck-raking about a handful of the stars, as I recall it, basically telling us the startling news that Sid James was a gambling womaniser, Kenneth Williams was a self-loathing homosexual, etc.
Mind you, I can't remember a particularly good or in-depth documentary about the films.

Aye, it was pretty poor stuff and 'Darkly' implied something more, well, dark than was actually on offer. In the run-up to transmission, it did get a fair bit in the press (the Mail anyway) and the whole thing felt such a cynical rehash with an agenda. For me, it's like the Reputations two-parter on Williams that wanted to concentrate how unhappy his life was, to the detriment of what else one could say – also, Bob Monkhouse was chipping in, giving an impression that he knew Williams well, which wasn't strictly accurate. Actually, thinking about it, the recent biography by Chris Stevens did a decent job in refuting some of the claims that are often trotted out.

Channel 4 did A Perfect Carry On, which wasn't great but did have some good contributions. Philip French was very po-faced about how awful the films were and complaining that one of the respondents in a Sound and Sound poll for the greatest British comedy films had the nerve to include a Carry On film - and then Philip Dodd, who was that person, was interviewed.

Dodd had selected two as a joint choice (one was Up The Kyber but can't remember the other) and had said he was being a little mischevious (i.e. he knew this would get people spluttering in outrage) but there was also a serious point. The Carry Ons were a hugely successful film franchise and did contribute to British popular culture and if the history of British comedy cinema is being considered, it then it's only right that it is inluded. I might be paraphrasing this wrong, but I seem to remember that Dodd was basically arguing that people shouldn't just pick the things that they think should be included and disregard the ones they don't care for. IIRC, the two he picked, Dodd was actually fond of.

What's a Carry On? was done for the 40th anniversary and for a celebratory document, seem to remember it being not bad – certainly there were some good contributions that I thought were decent like the ones by Lance Percival and one long-time employee of Peter Rogers (I think his personal assistant).

[kidsick5000]

The Black and White Carry Ons will always signal Sunday afternoon to me.
They give the impression of being quite simple and fun to make.
It may not be the case, but all the cast seem happier in the earlier ones. Certainly compared to later where everything appears to have been made under duress by a cast that is less a crew of actors and more a seething assortment of psychoses and animosity

[Famous Mortimer]

The last five or so are pretty awful (Camping is probably the last good one) but the early ones are fucking magic. Many happy memories of watching them with my Mum. Then I'd shoplift the videos for her when I was a teenager (she didn't ask me to do it, I pretended I'd bought them).

[Roy*Mallard]

I love the Carry Ons. I genuinely find most of them very amusing. Of course, there are the odd few which don't do much for me, but the acting, the characters and the silly humour are what make them great.

My favourites are Camping, Convenience, Cabby and Behind (yes, i'm serious, it's a beauty - go watch it). The ones i don't really like are Nurse, Teacher, and Emmanuelle (i have only seen Columbus once or twice and that was a long time ago). I can sit through Carry On England no problem, and chuckle with alarming regularity.

Carry On films are, like dinnerladies and Ever Decreasing Circles amongst others, my comfort blankets - they cheer me up when the horrors of the world are gnawing at my shoulders.

They were made 50+ to 30+ years ago on low budgets, so of course they don't reach the height of panoramic visual genius. Whether or not you find them amusing depends on what turns you on. Simple as that. I love them... you don't... Fuck off!

[Roy*Mallard]

There was a great Radio 2 documentary a few years back called 'Carry On Forever!', which was narrated by Leslie Phillips. It was 2 hours long and was generally a very positive celebration of the whole series (get ye to a torrent!). Much better than Carry On Darkly and crap like that which try to piss all over the names of dead people who can't fight back....because they're dead! I really hate those. Like those semi-true dramas on Hattie Jacques, Tommy Cooper, Frankie Howerd etc, which show an exagerrated version of events for dramatic effect - nice, if you can't sell a show on fact, make it up and add a virtually non-existant stipulation. Unpleasant.
Do i sound like TC?

[elnombre]

There was a great Radio 2 documentary a few years back called 'Carry On Forever!', which was narrated by Leslie Phillips. It was 2 hours long and was generally a very positive celebration of the whole series (get ye to a torrent!). Much better than Carry On Darkly and crap like that which try to piss all over the names of dead people who can't fight back....because they're dead! I really hate those. Like those semi-true dramas on Hattie Jacques, Tommy Cooper, Frankie Howerd etc, which show an exagerrated version of events for dramatic effect - nice, if you can't sell a show on fact, make it up and add a virtually non-existant stipulation. Unpleasant.
Do i sound like TC?

No but I completely agree with your hatred of the current 'this is what this beloved entertainer was REALLY like' bullshit dramas.

These people, flawed as they were, were stars. These shows aim to retroactively turn them into 'celebs'.

[Glebe]

I've always felt nostalgic about Carry On, although right enough the films were often cheap, tawdry and a bit depressing. Not to mention usually not exactly hilarious (except in the affectionately ironic sense).

[imitationleather]

I think they're all great and will happily watch any of them except for England (Columbus doesn't count as one). I do agree with the Behind-loving (ooo-err) up-thread. It's one of the best ones and probably the most under-rated.

[Johnny Textface]

Even Emanuelle?

[Beagle 2]

Obviously they're mostly terribly written and corny as hell. But they happened to contain some of the greatest character actors this country ever produced, who can elevate almost any scene to something entertaining.

[Ignatius_S]

Even Emanuelle?

There's surely a good to be made about that being the worse one, but I don't think Emmanuelle is in people's consciousness anything like the others because it's comparatively unknown – e.g. it's been shown on TV a lot less (and even then, I think very late at night) and I have a feeling it was only put onto home media much later compared to the other films. Consequently, it's one that's often overlooked.

For me, I think the only element that I liked when most of the main actors are sitting around the kitchen table sharing their sexual tales. It's nothing to do with the script, but there just felt to me like there was genuine warmth there – one reason that people liked to work on the Carry On films (and this applies to the crew, as well as cast) because there was meant to be a feeling of camaraderie and family, which I think comes across there. Maybe they thought this was going to be the last time?

With England, Rogers and Thomas were trying to compete with the Confessions series, which had a disastrous impact. In some ways, I think it could be argued to be the worse as it's only notionally a Carry on film. For example, very few of the usual cast are featured and even then, it's the newcomers who were given centre-stage; Carry On scripts were never the hallmark of sophistication but there could be some decent lines (IIRC, Norden and Muir used to let Talbot Rothwell go through their old scripts) and England's script was incredibly crude. Personally, I would say it works better when considered as a smutty sex comedy, rather than a Carry On.

Obviously they're mostly terribly written and corny as hell. But they happened to contain some of the greatest character actors this country ever produced, who can elevate almost any scene to something entertaining.

I would disagree with them being mostly terribly written – as I feel that's overly sweeping. Screaming and Cowboy are excellent parodies, for instance, which followed well-known genre tropes and featured some decent jokes; actually, in the case of Cowboy, I can't recall any lines that I think are particularly outstanding or memorable but as a parody, I think it's a great send-up (mind you, the basic idea of someone mistakenly being thought of a great gunfighter is a rich one and had be used brilliantly in The Paleface and My Little Chickadee).

Also, I think a decent proportion had good basic storylines that were utilised well. However, over time, I feel this changed – Carry On Camping is usually what I regard as the peak, not because I'm inordinately fond of it, but after it I really feel the law of diminishing returns kicked in. Stories were increasingly weaker and/or far-fetched – at the same time, the films relied increasingly on the cast and the fanbase and for me, it feels like Rogers and Thomas were trading too much on the brand.

Going back to the writing itself, with Carry on Sargeant, William Hartnell's character, I would say, comes across as a very believable one and the final scene where his final squad present him with a retirement gift is very touching without being mawkishly sentimental – it's well done. I don't think the films get enough credit sometimes.

[Famous Mortimer]

I agree with lots of that, even though I really struggle to find anything decent in the later films.

Actually, looking through the released list, I really enjoyed "Carry On Girls" (1973), even though it was a bit ridiculous, and don't remember "Carry On Dick" at all. Everything after that was pretty much garbage though, in this fan's eyes (and as much as I loved "At Your Convenience" from 1971, the theme of stupidity of people in trade unions was a bit irritating.

[daf]

Lots of good stuff in Behind  [nb]'Me ball's burning',  Elke Sommer 'bleeding terrible' & Old Matey from Coronation Street in Hotpants!![/nb] - the Joan Sims/Peter Butterworth bit in the Caravan is particularly lovely.

[mycroft]

I'm a big fan of Matron - Sid, Bresslaw, Maynard and Cope attempting a heist to nick contraceptive pills, Hattie and Ken's brilliant chemistry brought to the forefront, Terry Scott excellent as a pervy doctor, Connor doing all his physical stuff... What else could you ask for?

[Better Than Nothing]

I'm a big fan of Matron - Sid, Bresslaw, Maynard and Cope attempting a heist to nick contraceptive pills, Hattie and Ken's brilliant chemistry brought to the forefront, Terry Scott excellent as a pervy doctor, Connor doing all his physical stuff... What else could you ask for?

Yes, the sight of a chubby rapist being too thick to see through Kenneth Cope's unconvincing drag never ceases to amuse, does it.