This is an entertaining thread. For a modern day equivalent of On the Buses, look no further than When the Whistle Blows, which I adore.
On The Buses Page 4
Great in its day but very dated now, in my opinion anyway.
A thumbs down from me on this one. Typical ITV sub-Carry On drivel that went on far too long.
Quote: Maurice Minor @ April 29 2009, 8:26 PM BSTA thumbs down from me on this one. Typical ITV sub-Carry On drivel that went on far too long.
500 years ago we would have burnt you at the stake for that remark!!
Well maybe a tad harsh... But have seen some of the re-runs recently and they are pretty bad. And the films are depressing.
I think the Carry Ons were to blame for a large part of it; the 'execs' that ran things at that time saw the Carry Ons being successful and thought "So you want more like that? right then..." The Carry Ons begat the Confessions.. films, which begat Adventures of.. films, which caused Whats Up SuperDoc? and Whats Up Nurse?, then Rosie Dixon etc etc. A pale imitation of a pale imitation of a pale imitation....
And in the middle of all that trash, ITV was trying to keep up with its own brand of broadcastable 'bawdiness'. Maybe the 1970s viewers genuinely thought it was hilarious, but at the same time as OTB was going out, the Beeb was doing Dad's Army and Steptoe.
ITV took the 'Sid and Babs' type letchery from the Carry Ons and plonked it into OTB (and other shows) with no real wit or warmth or anything. It just looks sleazy and grubby. I don't think it's just the 21st Century viewpoint either; the Carry Ons at their prime don't come across as desperate or make uncomfortable viewing, they are just funny.
Well you are entitled to your opinion and there are many many people across the globe ready to disagree with you there. You forget as well that On The Buses came in an era not familiar with sexual equality and also to add that it never resorted to any swearing or nudity to gain its laughs.
Quote: Maurice Minor @ April 30 2009, 1:03 PM BSTITV took the 'Sid and Babs' type letchery from the Carry Ons and plonked it into OTB (and other shows) with no real wit or warmth or anything. It just looks sleazy and grubby. I don't think it's just the 21st Century viewpoint either; the Carry Ons at their prime don't come across as desperate or make uncomfortable viewing, they are just funny.
Watching the Carry Ons now, one thing that always makes me laugh and not for the right reasons is the casting.
Take Carry On Camping - Sid James and Bernard Bresslaw who both must have been at least mid-40s were cast as the young romantic leads who desperately wanted to take their girlfriends away for a bit of hows-yer-father, and they're both terrified of the girls' mothers!
I know it's a bit off-topic but I just wanted to join in
Also, you seem have forgetten that On The Buses came in an era not familiar with The Spice Girls (or iPods for that matter) and did not feature any Ewoks. Furthermore, it never resorted to any use of the Yackety Sax music or cameo appearances by the cast of Seinfeld to gain its laughs.
Quote: Peter Gash @ April 30 2009, 3:48 PM BSTTake Carry On Camping - Sid James and Bernard Bresslaw who both must have been at least mid-40s were cast as the young romantic leads who desperately wanted to take their girlfriends away for a bit of hows-yer-father, and they're both terrified of the girls' mothers!
Carry On Camping is one of the least funny Carry Ons, IMO. Sid James was 56 when it was made and Bernie Bresslaw was 35.
Quote: Craig @ April 30 2009, 3:35 PM BSTit never resorted to any swearing or nudity to gain its laughs.
It was tea time/prime time telly so it couldn't have. It still couldn't. But it was *dying* to and went as far as it could...
Quote: Kenneth @ April 30 2009, 3:54 PM BSTCarry on Camping is one of the least funny Carry Ons, IMO. Sid James was 56 when it was made and Bernie Bresslaw was 35.
And Barbara Windsor was 32!
Quote: Peter Gash @ April 30 2009, 3:48 PM BSTTake Carry On Camping - Sid James and Bernard Bresslaw who both must have been at least mid-40s were cast as the young romantic leads who desperately wanted to take their girlfriends away for a bit of hows-yer-father, and they're both terrified of the girls' mothers!
You've missed the point of Carry On Camping entirely. They're not supposed to be "young romantics". And they're not scared of the girls' mothers, but they didn't like the prudish influence they had over their daughters. But if you've taken that view of the film(s), then they're obviously not to your sense of humour.
Yes I'd say to enjoy/be a fan of On The Buses you have to be a fan of double entendres, innuendo and seaside postcard humour, and frankly like Carry On films. It was all good-hearted humour and hilarious (in my opinion).
As for the point about them not being able to be rude; well they could have done in the films but still never resorted to it (apart from the final spin-off film where there were two brief glimpses of nudity - but that came at a time when this was all the rage).
The remarks regarding Sid and Bernie (Carry Ons) has also been aimed at On The Buses with Stan and Jack but I don't see the problem as any middle-aged unattached bloke would chase after a younger woman if possible, so where is the problem? In Stan's case his hopes of romance were always thwarted anyway.
Quote: Craig @ April 30 2009, 3:35 PM BSTWell you are entitled to your opinion and there are many many people across the globe ready to disagree with you there. You forget as well that On The Buses came in an era not familiar with sexual equality and also to add that it never resorted to any swearing or nudity to gain its laughs.
Mutiny On The Buses was made in 1972.
The Sting was made in 1973.
The same era.
I know which one is wittier and more intelligent in every aspect of its construction without using swearing and/or nudity.
(It's not Mutiny On The Buses.)
I can't claim to have heard of The Sting, but it doesn't sound like it has even a remotely similar target audience - thus hardly a fair comparison.
Quote: Aaron @ May 1 2009, 2:11 PM BSTI can't claim to have heard of The Sting, but it doesn't sound like it has even a remotely similar target audience - thus hardly a fair comparison.
The Sting is one of the most famous movies ever made.
Mutiny On The Buses was made specifically and deliberately as a movie for a cinema release.
Both are therefore movies. Both are comedies. Both were released in the early 70s seeking cinema-going audiences.
I think they both wanted exactly the same target audience.
Well that's a wider malaise within the British industry - why did they continue to aim for OTB type output? Again, I'd say the Carry Ons were to blame. They showed you could make a film for £250k and get the No.1 spot at the box office for a week or two. Therefore why bother spending time, effort and money making truly classic films with the likes of Paul Newman in them?
American audiences were (and are) extraordinarily resistant to 'foreign' films, hence Hollywood's domination. British film makers are always on a hiding to nothing at the US box office, yet could extract the same revenue from the British market as American film makers could - but the British offering produced a higher margin.
Doesn't explain why the script had to be a load of tosh though.