Carry on Loving

Carry On gang run a marriage bureau. The proprietors, Sid and Sophie Bliss (Sid James and Hattie Jaques) seem set on matching the most unlikely couples. And mayhem ensues - which is expected in this low-key, yet fun Carry on entry. The crude bawdiness came 3/4 years later, and though it's more obvious in its naughty one liners, it's still in the classic mould of Carry-on. It's not the best one, but it's a good watch.

Great to see Sid James and Hattie Jacques play off on another. The rest of the veteran cast - such as Joan Sims, Kenneth Williams, Charles Hawtrey and Bernard Bresslaw - do their parts well. The younger group are fine; Jackie Piper and Imogen Hassel bring the temperature up!! Also seeing London in 1970's and the fashion makes a great time capsule.

"Sid" (Sidney James) and "Sophie" (Hattie Jacques) run the "Wedded Bliss" dating agency that supposedly uses complex computer algorithms to match couples. Their cleverly entitled "to wit to woo" brochure is supposed to help make true love blossom but it's a "Carry On" so of course you're going to get the mismatches of the century playing out for the next ninety minutes. This is one of the more memorable of the franchise for me. The comedy bond between James and Jacques was always a strong one and here there is just enough humour - as opposed to tacky innuendo - to keep the thing entertaining enough with Joan Sims and a rather unlikely Lothario in Terry Scott, adding well too. It's not one of the better roles for Kenneth Williams ("Snooper"), Charles Hawtrey's "Bedsop" was actually quite annoying and it definitely recycles a few earlier ideas just once too often, but as these films go this is a slightly better effort that maybe raises a titter rather than a laugh and passes the time in a predictably smutty fashion.

Sex is all the rage in the small city of "Much Snogging-on-the-Green" with everyone talking about it, doing it or talking about doing it. In the midst of all this the Wedded Bliss computer dating agency uses "computer technology" to try and bring together those unlucky enough not to be getting any. Meanwhile the unmarried Percival Snooper dispenses marital guidance for those unlucky enough to be already hitched.

A review by TC Raymond on this very site suggests that this "isn't a prime candidate for the best in the series" but goes on to say how good it is. Of course I agree strongly with that specific statement if not his overall opinion. Of course Loving is not up there as the best of the series and the reason for this is because it is actually at the other end of the scale with the Carry On films made in the 1970's that generally saw the series lose touch with the spoofs and wit of the better films (such as Khyber for example). The plot is a series of double-entendres, sexual misunderstandings and people talking at cross purposes. You see, the big joke is that they sound like they're talking about sex but really they're not – oh my splitting sides. Now I'm not against a bit of that (I'm bl00dy doing it now) but it doesn't make a film on its own and sadly this is the majority of the comedy and there is little else here. I barely laughed once I think but I suppose those that think the "Confessions" films are the height of comedy will like this and find value in it.

The cast are mostly poor. O'Callaghan made me realise just how good Jim Dale was because the former is pretty awful in the character often played by the latter. James is always good at the sort of lecherous character he is given here and he is amusing. Williams is his usual self but his material is weak and he deserves better (as indeed many of them do). Sims and Jacques play the clichéd women's roles while Piper is the totty. At least Hassall is different from the usual female character within this series. Small turns from Scott, Bresslaw and a few others don't add that much.

Overall then a pretty poor film which is sadly where the Carry On series found itself as it lurched towards its death in the 1970's. Viewers who love saucy postcards and smutty jokes may find some value in it but for the majority I suspect it is too basic and obvious to be worth watching. Befitting the quality of the script the whole thing ends in one big messy pile, which is a pretty good summary of the quality of the whole affair if you ask me (and yes I know you didn't).

I personally liked this Carry On. True the story is thin, Terry Scott is nothing special(in my opinion)-in fact I found him bland- really and the film spends too much time on Scott and the regulars feel underused in comparisons. However, it does look good, with the cinematography, locations and scenery first rate, and the music was energetic. I liked the pacing, and the innuendos and double entendres. And the cast in general are likable, Sidney James and Kenneth Williams are always good value as is Joan Sims, Charles Hawtrey and Hattie Jaques, while Joan Hickson and Imogen Hassal make delightful appearances. Overall, Carry on Loving is not brilliant, but it is definitely watchable for fans of the series. 7/10 Bethany Cox

I see so many reviews of people commenting about Loving being one of the Carry on movies during its declining years, I have to disagree with those, with Convenience, Girls and Behind still to come the crew were still on top form. Loving highlights a sexual revolution that had pretty much already happened years before. It's not loaded with particularly original material, but it has its moments, Sid and Hattie are great fun as warring married couple The Bliss's, Kenneth Williams is hilarious as Percival, the excellent Patsy Rowlands is finally given a large role, making full use of it. Joan Hickson is a delight as Jenny's mum, as are the whole eccentric family, but the all time highlight must be the laugh out loud finale which is side splitting, you can almost see the look of joy on everyones faces. I must admit to a feeling of sadness when I watch Imogen Hassall, such a tragic waste, a good actress, incredibly beautiful, such a shame she never went on to bigger things. Bernard Bresslaw is once again made an idiot out of, not able to show that he could act. It may not be one of the classics, but it's still a very, very funny film.