Skip to main content

I am trying to uncover a communist plot, and not a pornographic love-in.

Not Now, Comrade
(1976)

(SPOILERS) Yays! I saw Not Now, Comrade one BBC afternoon twenty-plus years ago, and it stayed with me, not because it was especially good – although, I had in mind that the cheesy farce carried a certain Carry On period charm – but because of Lewis “Fisk” Fiander’s outrageous performance as a defecting Russian ballet dancer. Revisiting the picture, that is indeed about the size of it.


The quality of Not Now, Comrade lies squarely on the shoulders of Ray Cooney, who not only wrote it and co-directed, but also co-starred (offering by far the weakest performance, as tipsy MI6 man Mr Laver). Cooney is most (in-?) famous for having penned the long-running bigamy farce Run for Your Wife. He turned it into a film as recently as 2012, starring, appropriately enough, everyone’s favourite Olivier, Danny Dyer. Cooney has a big French following, but then so does Jerry Lewis. Not content with one “life” play on words, the farceur extraordinaire also wrote Wife Begins at Forty a couple of years later.


Comrade was a sequel in mode and title, if not characters, to Not Now Darling, a 1967 farce filmed in 1973 (also, modestly enough, co-directed by and starring Cooney; the other co-director was David Croft, of Croft and Perry – their It Ain’t Half Hot Mum stars Davies and Estelle appear here – while Harold Snoad, Comrade co-director, helmed five early episodes of Dad’s Army as well as a number of Are You Being Serveds). Its origins lie before Darling, however, in his 1964 farce Chase Me, Comrade.


The TV-level production quality suggested by Cooney’s collaborators is Not Now, Comrade all over. As a film director, he doesn’t seem to appreciate that you can’t just point the camera at the action and expect a farce to translate to screen with the same energy it does on stage; it doesn’t matter if the cast are giving one hundred percent.


The action revolves around the country house of Leslie Phillips’ Commander Rimmington (his role is a peripheral one, mainly required to act confused and cop an eyeful of Carol Hawkins; sadly, this is post-smoothy, “Oh, I say” Phillips, the odd “Incredible!” aside), where Rudi has ended up as a consequence of a mix up over which car boot he secreted himself in in order to facilitate his defection. Ensuing are various expected cases of mistaken identity (“Am I still the gardener?” asks Kinnear’s Hoskins at one point) and attempts to avoid the authorities (police, Russians, MI6), as the Commander’s daughter Nancy (Michele Dotrice) and her hapless civil servant boyfriend Gerry Buss (Ian Lavender) attempt to assist Rudi and his girlfriend/burlesque artiste Barbara (Hawkins) in the former’s defection.


Commander Rimmington: Is that the damn silly sort of thing you get up to in the Polish government?
Rudi: Yays.

The failure of Comrade is unsurprising. 1976 was a bit late for this sort of mildly saucy fare; the writing was on the wall once the Confessions movies stole the Carry Ons’ thunder from 1974 onwards, combining sitcom antics with sexploitation and cheeky Robin Askwith. Indeed, by ’76, Carry On was in its terminal stages, attempting to offer more nudity and sexual content and looking entirely out of touch and all at sea (Hawkins, who appeared in several Carry Ons and Confessions of a Pop Performer, turned down a specially-written Carry On England role due to its nudity).


Accordingly, the most revealing Comrade gets is during the opening sequence, where Barbara distracts attention from a throng of press surrounding Rudi by giving them a display of her nipple tassels’ propulsive abilities. After that, there are numerous tit jokes (“Yes, my wife’s got the best au pair in the business”), obviously angled at Hawkins, copious instances of a randy Russian assuming any request or statement is an invitation to rumpo (“Yays!”), and much bottom pinching (gender indiscriminate, to be fair, mostly coming from its writer-director-supporting player – “Mr Laver, please don’t be au fait with the au pair”)


Hawkins is spirited and amusing throughout, more so than bigger star (thanks to Some Mothers Do ‘Ave ‘Em) Dotrice. Her career includes numerous sitcom appearances, but she’s probably best known in fan circles as Vila’s love interest Kerril in Blake’s 7 third season episode City at the Edge of the World. Lavender’s very game, playing a character whose surname, credit where it’s due, is evidently entirely based on one middling gag (“He’s Mr Buss”: “Well, he should have come by taxi too”). Roy Kinnear is suitably exhausted, exasperated and sarcastic throughout. June Whitfield eventually arrives as Millington’s wife and in short order experiences Lavender, dressed as a Russian, lying on top of her on the sofa when the Commander walks in. Naturally.


Barbara: The constable here is on the lookout for an effeminate young man.
Gerry: Everyone to his own taste.

When Windsor Davies shows up as a policeman (he’s investigating constabulary-provoking reports of “a young fella prancing about in an effeminate manner”), there’s an additional level of amusement to be had simply from patented Windsor Davies reaction shots, such as every time Hawkins calls him “Darling”. At this point in the proceedings – keep up – she’s posing as the local liberal candidate: “I wouldn’t mind knowing what the young lady stands for” he asks. “Practically anything” comes the reply. It goes without saying that “I have a very large manifesto”. None of Cooney’s lines are the stuff of high art (“Well, I’m all in favour of policemen having them... balls”), but Davies and Estelle (as a typically camp and oblivious neighbour), reprising their TV rapport, can’t help but raise a smile.


Commander Millington: Who locked this door?
Gerry: He did.
Commander Millington: You did?
Rudi: Yays.

The real reason to check this out, though, is Fiander, who responds to every given question (“Who are you?”; “How do you do?”) with an unvaryingly comical “Yays” (or “Yay-es”, for emphasis). I’ve seen the actor in a few things over the years, but most defining is his performance as Fisk in Doctor Who story Nightmare of Eden, where he adopts an accent so absurdly over the top, he does the nigh impossible and not only steals scenes from Tom Baker, he also makes him corpse. Rudi is supposed to be utterly unrestrained, however, and so Fiander delivers admirably.


Not Now, Comrade isn’t especially good, in the same way that the majority of the Carry Ons aren’t especially good. Which is to say, it’s charmingly vulgar and relatively innocuous by today’s standards. It’s artless but likeable, and that it was already past its sell by date on release rather adds to its appeal. Of course, one might suggest it was curiously prescient of the coming era, whereby Barbara, rejected by Rudi (he’s homesick for the motherland, so decides not to defect after all), switches from a political conscience to a capitalist outlook (“I think I’ll just stick to nice, sexy businessmen in future”). She doubtless did very well in the ‘80s.



Agree? Disagree? Mildly or vehemently? Let me know in the comments below.

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

I just hope my death makes more cents than my life.

Joker (2019)
(SPOILERS) So the murder sprees didn’t happen, and a thousand puff pieces desperate to fan the flames of such events and then told-ya-so have fallen flat on their faces. The biggest takeaway from Joker is not that the movie is an event, when once that seemed plausible but not a given, but that any mainstream press perspective on the picture appears unable to divorce its quality from its alleged or actual politics. Joker may be zeitgeisty, but isn’t another Taxi Driver in terms of cultural import, in the sense that Taxi Driver didn’t have a Taxi Driver in mind when Paul Schrader wrote it. It is, if you like, faux-incendiary, and can only ever play out on that level. It might be more accurately described as a grubbier, grimier (but still polished and glossy) The Talented Ripley, the tale of developing psychopathy, only tailored for a cinemagoing audience with few options left outside of comic book fare.

Poor Easy Breezy.

Once Upon a Time… in Hollywood (2019)
(SPOILERS) My initial reaction to Once Upon a Time… in Hollywood was mild disbelief that Tarantino managed to hoodwink studios into coming begging to make it, so wilfully perverse is it in disregarding any standard expectations of narrative or plotting. Then I remembered that studios, or studios that aren’t Disney, are desperate for product, and more especially, product that might guarantee them a hit. Quentin’s latest appears to be that, but whether it’s a sufficient one to justify the expense of his absurd vanity project remains to be seen.

Haven’t you ever heard of the healing power of laughter?

Batman (1989)
(SPOILERS) There’s Jaws, there’s Star Wars, and then there’s Batman in terms of defining the modern blockbuster. Jaws’ success was so profound, it changed the way movies were made and marketed. Batman’s marketing was so profound, it changed the way tentpoles would be perceived: as cash cows. Disney tried to reproduce the effect the following year with Dick Tracy, to markedly less enthusiastic response. None of this places Batman in the company of Jaws as a classic movie sold well, far from it. It just so happened to hit the spot. As Tim Burton put it, it was “more of a cultural phenomenon than a great movie”. It’s difficult to disagree with his verdict that the finished product (for that is what it is) is “mainly boring”.

Now, of course, the Burton bat has been usurped by the Nolan incarnation (and soon the Snyder). They have some things in common. Both take the character seriously and favour a sombre tone, which was much more of shock to the system when Burton did it (even…

I'm reliable, I'm a very good listener, and I'm extremely funny.

Terminator: Dark Fate (2019)
(SPOILERS) When I wrote my 23 to see in 2019, I speculated that James Cameron might be purposefully giving his hand-me-downs to lesser talents because he hubristically didn’t want anyone making a movie that was within a spit of the proficiency we’ve come to expect from him. Certainly, Robert Rodriguez and Tim Miller are leagues beneath Kathryn Bigelow, Jimbo’s former spouse and director of his Strange Days screenplay. Miller’s no slouch when it comes to action – which is what these movies are all about, let’s face it – but neither is he a craftsman, so all those reviews attesting that Terminator: Dark Fate is the best in the franchise since Terminator 2: Judgment Day may be right, but there’s a considerable gulf between the first sequel (which I’m not that big a fan of) and this retcon sequel to that sequel.

So you want me to be half-monk, half-hitman.

Casino Royale (2006)
(SPOILERS) Despite the doubts and trepidation from devotees (too blonde, uncouth etc.) that greeted Daniel Craig’s casting as Bond, and the highly cynical and low-inspiration route taken by Eon in looking to Jason Bourne's example to reboot a series that had reached a nadir with Die Another Day, Casino Royale ends up getting an enormous amount right. If anything, its failure is that it doesn’t push far enough, so successful is it in disarming itself of the overblown set pieces and perfunctory plotting that characterise the series (even at its best), elements that would resurge with unabated gusto in subsequent Craig excursions.

For the majority of its first two hours, Casino Royale is top-flight entertainment, with returning director Martin Campbell managing to exceed his excellent work reformatting Bond for the ‘90s. That the weakest sequence (still good, mind) prior to the finale is a traditional “big” (but not too big) action set piece involving an attempt to…

You guys sure like watermelon.

The Irishman aka I Heard You Paint Houses (2019)
(SPOILERS) Perhaps, if Martin Scorsese hadn’t been so opposed to the idea of Marvel movies constituting cinema, The Irishman would have been a better film. It’s a decent film, assuredly. A respectable film, definitely. But it’s very far from being classic. And a significant part of that is down to the usually assured director fumbling the execution. Or rather, the realisation. I don’t know what kind of crazy pills the ranks of revered critics have been taking so as to recite as one the mantra that you quickly get used to the de-aging effects so intrinsic to its telling – as Empire magazine put it, “you soon… fuggadaboutit” – but you don’t. There was no point during The Irishman that I was other than entirely, regrettably conscious that a 75-year-old man was playing the title character. Except when he was playing a 75-year-old man.

The more you drive, the less intelligent you are.

Repo Man (1984)
In fairness, I should probably check out more Alex Cox’s later works. Before I consign him to the status of one who never made good on the potential of his early success. But the bits and pieces I’ve seen don’t hold much sway. I pretty much gave up on him after Walker. It seemed as if the accessibility of Repo Man was a happy accident, and he was subsequently content to drift further and further down his own post-modern punk rabbit hole, as if affronted by the “THE MOST ASTONISHING FEATURE FILM DEBUT SINCE STEVEN SPIELBERG’S DUEL” accolade splashed over the movie’s posters (I know, I have a copy; see below).

This popularity of yours. Is there a trick to it?

The Two Popes (2019)
(SPOILERS) Ricky Gervais’ Golden Globes joke, in which he dropped The Two Popes onto a list of the year’s films about paedophiles, rather preceded the picture’s Oscar prospects (three nominations), but also rather encapsulated the conversation currently synonymous with the forever tainted Roman Catholic church; it’s the first thing anyone thinks of. And let’s face it, Jonathan Pryce’s unamused response to the gag could have been similarly reserved for the fate of his respected but neglected film. More people will have heard Ricky’s joke than will surely ever see the movie. Which, aside from a couple of solid lead performances, probably isn’t such an omission.

He tasks me. He tasks me, and I shall have him.

Star Trek II: The Wrath of Khan
(1982)
(SPOILERS) I don’t love Star Trek, but I do love Star Trek II: The Wrath of Khan. That probably isn’t just me, but a common refrain of many a non-devotee of the series. Although, it used to apply to The Voyage Home (the funny one, with the whales, the Star Trek even the target audience for Three Men and a Baby could enjoy). Unfortunately, its high regard has also become the desperate, self-destructive, song-and-verse, be-all-and-end-all of the overlords of the franchise itself, in whichever iteration, it seems. This is understandable to an extent, as Khan is that rare movie sequel made to transcendent effect on almost every level, and one that stands the test of time every bit as well (better, even) as when it was first unveiled.

Look, the last time I was told the Germans had gone, it didn't end well.

1917 (2019)
(SPOILERS) When I first heard the premise of Sam Mendes’ Oscar-bait World War I movie – co-produced by Amblin Partners, as Spielberg just loves his sentimental war carnage – my first response was that it sounded highly contrived, and that I’d like to know how, precisely, the story Mendes’ granddad told him would bear any relation to the events he’d be depicting. And just why he felt it would be appropriate to honour his relative’s memory via a one-shot gimmick. None of that has gone away on seeing the film. It’s a technical marvel, and Roger Deakins’ cinematography is, as you’d expect, superlative, but that mastery rather underlines that 1917 is all technique, that when it’s over and you get a chance to draw your breath, the experience feels a little hollow, a little cynical and highly calculated, and leaves you wondering what, if anything, Mendes was really trying to achieve, beyond an edge-of-the-seat (near enough) first-person actioner.