Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utcsrgv.UUCP
Path: utzoo!utcsrgv!oscar
From: oscar@utcsrgv.UUCP (Oscar M. Nierstrasz)
Newsgroups: net.movies
Subject: Privates on Parade
Message-ID: <4274@utcsrgv.UUCP>
Date: Mon, 14-May-84 14:48:41 EDT
Article-I.D.: utcsrgv.4274
Posted: Mon May 14 14:48:41 1984
Date-Received: Mon, 14-May-84 15:13:29 EDT
Organization: CSRG, University of Toronto
Lines: 24

Privates on Parade  (Blakemore, Michael; GB; 1982; 95m)

This looked like it would be *really* bad, but I read some ok reviews
so I decided to check it out.  It wasn't *that* bad, but it wasn't
anything special either.  The biggest problem is that it couldn't
decide what sort of a movie it wanted to be -- an out-and-out farce or
a semi-serious piece of satire.  Unfortunately it wasn't funny enough
to succeed as farce, and it wasn't believable enough to work as
satire.  It was Catch-22 written by an acid-burnout with nothing to say.

Good points?  Well, John Cleese makes me laugh no matter *what* he
does.  He did a perfect impression of John Cleese, so that made me
happy.  The allegedly risque homo-humour (which has for some
unfathomable reason been compared to `La Cage Aux Folles') is
exceedingly tame and guaranteed to offend no one.  There are a few good
laughs, but precious few, however.  The fact that the level of
professionalism in the acting and in the film-making was tolerably high
didn't make up for the weaknesses in the script.

If you go, don't go with high expectations, and *don't* expect anything
even vaguely reminiscent of Monty Python.  And definitely don't go if
you have to spend more than 99 cents.

					Oscar Nierstrasz