| Carry on Jack (1964) | |
|---|---|
 |
Rating: 5.8/10 (2,548 votes) Director: Gerald Thomas Writer: Talbot Rothwell Stars: Kenneth Williams, Charles Hawtrey, Bernard Cribbins Runtime: 91 min Rated: Not Rated Genre: Adventure, Comedy, Romance Released: 17 Apr 1964 |
| Plot: This is the tale of Albert Poop-Decker, a newly commissioned Midshipman (although he took 8 1/2 years to qualify). He joins the frigate Venus, and adventures through Spanish waters, mutinee and Pirates taking his Captain, his swee... | |
Bernard Cribbins joins the crew on the latest adventure which takes to the high seas in a parody set around the time of the Battle of Trafalgar. Once again, this was a film originally not planned for the Carry On series, and came from the pen of Rothwell, but was renamed and given release under the Carry On moniker. This goes some way to, once again, explain the absence of certain series regulars, with only Williams, Hawtrey and Dale (who only entered the series in the previous film) on board.
Albert Poop-Decker (Cribbins) is relaxing and celebrating his long-awaited promotion to midshipman aboard the Venus, when he ends up knocked out by a maid, Sally (Juliet Mills), who plans to disguise herself to leave for sea and seek her long lost boyfriend. Poop-Decker, in the confusion that follows end up press-ganged onto the very ship he was assigned to, but without any identification (and with Sally in disguise in his place) he ends up as a deck-hand. Whilst at sea, some of the crew plan to stage a mutiny against the weak-willed Captain Fearless (Williams), and things only go from bad to worse at that point.
It’s all a pretty humdrum and average affair, and whilst Cribbins is engaging in the lead role, as is Williams (as ever), the whole thing feels very routine in nature. The absence of the core group of actors from the earlier films is noticeable, which is not to say that the cast of names such as Juliet Mills, Donald Houston, Cecil Parker, and Anton Rodgers are weak in their roles, it is just that the chemistry present when the usual gang are together is absent.
It all looks very sumptuous, however, with the film making effective use of locations and sets, along with costume design, to emulate the era in which it is set effectively. The use of colour in the film only lends favourably to the visual splendour. But in the end, it is a well-acted and great looking film that doesn’t fully tap into the comedy potential, and so ends up just being a muddled story of contrivances and coincidences with barely a titter to carry it through.
