User reviews

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.

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

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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

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.

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.

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.

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!

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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!

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.

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.

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).