Dad's Army (2016) Reviews

• Why, oh why?

  phillewis-426792016-06-03

  I'm sorry, but with the best will in the world I wanted to like this movie. I've probably watched all the original series when they were first televised and thought that they were so, so funny. I watched the DVD's of the series several years ago and still found them highly amusing, not as funny as when I originally saw them but that, to a certain extent, is understandable. However, this remake!! It is so not funny! The dialogue and interaction between the characters is woefully weak. If I were to see that sort of interaction in a school play rehearsal I would seriously consider canceling the show! Why do producers think it is good value to remake classics without the original actors? Could you imagine a remake of Steptoe and Son without Wilfred Brambell and Harry H Corbett? Perish the thought! Sorry, but this movie is a no-no for me and I would advise anyone who has a 'soft spot' for the original 'Army' to stick to your good memories of that show and not to spoil those memories with this poor attempt at an alternative version.

  More

• Better than I thought it was going to be. A pleasant surprise.

  pr652016-02-06

  As a Dad's Army fan (and with a keen interest in the history of the REAL Home Guard of 1940 - 44) I realised this was never going to 'measure up' to the original TV series. In fact I thought it was going to be terrible (!) but went along to see it if only to tick the box. It was better than I expected and it was a pleasant surprise. Sadly I think that Tom Courtenay 'killed' LCpl Jones's character with a very wooden performance. However, there was good effort from the other actors. I thought that Toby Jones (Mainwaring) dominated the screen when he appeared and captured Mainwaring's flaws (and attributes) very well. I enjoyed Michael Gambon's Godfrey very much, and Bill Nighy's Sgt Wilson was an interesting re- interpretation that was nicely done. There were other good performances too (e.g Mrs Pike etc). As well as a some chuckles, there were touching moments, and I think it captured the ethos of the time well (patriotism, paranoia reference the enemy, 'all pulling together' etc). In all I would call it a pleasant film to watch, and a homage of some sort to the original series and the historical Home Guard. It was a nice touch to set the film in 1944 when the Home Guard was becoming ever more irrelevant. The original series (many have surmised) only covered the historical period of 1940 - 42. I've always regretted that and would have like to have seen the series set over the full 1940-44 period with perhaps a single episode covering their return to civilian life in December 1944 to round it off. The last year would have been quite comedic as Mainwaring might have struggled to enthuse the men as they became less relevant to to the war, and quite touching too. I wouldn't listen to too many negative reviews, the film is worth seeing. I'd rather it had been made than not, even if it only points people towards the original series and reminds them that the Home Guard was real and that they lost 1,200 people to enemy action in WW2 (mainly air raids while on duty etc), and also that although they never faced an invasion (a real concern in 1940-41) they didn't know that at the time, but they volunteered anyway.

  More

• Badly written, dull and simply not funny

  colinlomasox2016-03-07

  When news first emerged of a Dad's Army film early last year, the main cry from the fans and general public alike was 'but why?'. Unfortunately, and perhaps unsurprisingly, the end product does absolutely nothing to alter this. Beautiful German spy Rose Winters (Zeta-Jones) comes into a small town to gather information for the Nazis, blinds everyone with her looks, manipulates them to her bidding while everyone runs around suspecting everyone else but her of undercover nefariousness. Yes, it really is that derivative. It's a plot that could have been lifted lock, stock from a hundred TV movies produced from 1960 until 1980, but tellingly probably none since. It's obvious that a lot of thought has been put in to casting as every character is perfectly shaped to match his respective character from the original series, and every one really tries to do as good a job as possible. Admittedly Bill Nighy is incapable of playing anyone other than Bill Nighy but it works as bumbling Oxford boy Sergeant Wilson, Toby Jones is almost indistinguishable from Arthur Lowe as Captain Mainwaring, Tom Courtenay does a fair Clive Dunn impression and Gambon was born to play Godfrey. But casting alone does not a film make. At its core, the original Dad's Army series was little more than a bunch of men in a church hall bickering with each other, the different character's unique and exaggerated qualities carefully weaving a different angle into the argument and comedy as a whole. That can, and very successfully did, work for thirty minutes, but clearly it's another thing entirely to treble the running time and expect it to still function at the desired level. So the writers, as is customary, took the whole thing out of its comfort zone with a more (supposedly) extensive plot. The problem is that the plot, script and dialogue are all utterly dreadful. It is simply not funny, nor is it interesting. At no point do you care one jot what happens to the characters or the storyline. Stir in a complete lack of humour and you're left with a hollow shell of a movie that drags along and leaves you feeling utterly cheated. It manages to lack fun, pace, spirit and perhaps most surprisingly of all, nostalgia. It's good that the home front's respective wives get some screen- time, particularly Mrs Mainwaring who was never more than a sullen passing reference in the series, but it still doesn't help. The film is littered with tired innuendos that are seemingly delivered at times with embarrassment, and the occasional poorly timed moments of slapstick are cringe worthy. It's telling that the outtakes at the end of the movie are far funnier than anything in the film itself, although most of the audience will have rapidly headed for the exit by then like home fans fleeing a drubbing from a local rival. Is Dad's Army a missed opportunity or an inevitable disappointment? It's difficult to care. Either way it's badly written, dull and simply not funny.

  More

• They still don't like it up 'em

  bob-the-movie-man2016-02-07

  As someone in his frisky fifties, I am old enough to remember the arrival on our British TV screens of the original Dad's Army back in 1968. I can still remember my dearly departed Dad with tears flowing down his cheeks at the antics of this motley crew of (mostly) old folks as they confronted the (mostly imagined) Nazi hoards. Now nearly 40 years after the last episode premiered comes another big screen version (a spin off film with the original cast came out in 1971). For those reading this from other parts of the world that may need a little more explanation, Dad's Army refers to the British Home Guard - a group of old timers from the First World War and/or those otherwise unable to serve in the active fighting forces in World War 2. The Home Guard were to be the last line of defense in an invasion of the UK. The plot of the new film is paper thin. It's 1944 and the Nazi's are desperate to understand the invasion plans of the Allied forces. They dispatch a spy - Agent Cobra - to the sleepy seaside town of Walmington- on-Sea to try to dig out the truth. At the same time, an attractive journalist in the shapely form of Catherine Zeta-Jones arrives in the town to do an article on the Home Guard unit, stirring up passions and relationship-disruptions as she goes. And that about sums it up! (Now, you'd have to be pretty clinically stupid after watching the trailer not to work out who the spy was going to be, and fortunately for the film this is not a secret that is left to outstay its welcome.) As a standalone film it's a pleasant enough watch, but in the end a bit of a damp squib. It really only works as a strong dose of nostalgia for the characters from the original series. So the key demographic for this would be those over 50 or children under 12 who may also enjoy some of the farcical and knockabout humor. Many of the cast are perfectly suited to their roles, as caricatures of the original cast. Toby Jones plays the pompous Mainwaring; Bill Nighy is the spit of Le Mesurier as Sergeant Wilson; Michael Gambon makes a fantastic Private Godfrey; and Blake Harrison (from "The Inbetweeners") is good as 'Stupid Boy' Pike. Toby Jones in particular excels in getting across the character of the puffed up and self-important Mainwaring. The quality of his acting is nicely brought home by a blooper shown over the end credits involving a mobile phone: Jones stays perfectly in character as he lambasts Private Godfrey. It was also truly fantastic to see 84-year old Frank Williams reprise his role as the vicar. With Ian Lavender's cameo, one of only two of the original cast members to do so. The one cast member that really didn't work for me was Tom Courtenay as Corporal Jones: an excellent actor, but not a good fit for this part. Jones (in the guise of Clive Dunn) was at the farcical comedy centre of the original series, but here all of his lines fall as flat as a deflated blimp. The script manages to fabricate opportunities for most of the cast to utter their classic catchphrases, with some more successful than others. There is also a lack of chemistry between some of the cast, with the Mainwaring/Wilson class war not really working well: a classic line about Wilson speaking Latin falls to the floor like a dead weight as a result. Directed by Oliver Parker, this is one mainly for the older fans of the TV Series. It's probably a 4* film at best, but the extra 2 *'s I give this one is for the heady dose of nostalgia and good memories from my youth. (Please visit bob-the-movie-man.com for the graphical version of this review. Thanks.)

  More

• A decent attempt. Shame it's not a funny one.

  studioAT2017-01-13

  Lets face it, everyone involved in this was on a hiding to nothing from the start. If this film had too many nods to the original (and beloved) TV series, it would be criticised. If it tried to be its own beast, it would be criticised. In the end it fails as a film because a) it tries to be a bit of both, and b) it just simply isn't funny. There are some talented people involved, all doing very respectful takes on the original characters, but they are working with a weak (and often historically inaccurate) script that means they are lumbered doing imitations, rather than putting their own spin on the roles. It's a shame this isn't good, but I can't say I'm surprised.

  More