Dad's Army (2016) User Reviews

Comes armed with everything except the comedy.....

[s3276169 · 4/10 · 3 June 2016]

I grew up with the 1968 series Dads Army. It sat cheerily alongside other quality Brit comedies in a similar vein, such as It Ain't Half Hot Mum and complimented top US military comedy shows, such as Hogans Hero's.

That said, much as I desperately wanted to love the new film based on this wonderful series it simply lacks the clever comedic wit and wry humour of its predecessor. Indeed, it would be fair to say it comes armed with everything except humour. This film offers up great sets, a good choice of location, excellent costumes, a predictable but not unlikable story and a stellar cast.

Sadly, that's about it. The comedy is thin on the ground and a good portion of any humour there is amounts to very innocuous, mildly sexual jokes, mostly directed at Catherine Zeta Jones, spy character. "Did you slip her a sausage?" one woman asks Jones the butcher.

Simply put, this is such a terrible waste. A more polished script, infused with comedy of the period and maybe a few new twists, could have seen this film shine, paying homage to a wonderful series I can still happily watch 47 years later. Instead, what you get, is weak tea without the sugar. I'm sure Arthur Lowe's, Captain Mainwaring, would not have been impressed. Four out of ten from me.

A Big Mistake

[danew13 · 4/10 · 4 June 2016]

Trying to duplicate an evergreen TV series such as Dad's Army is about as plausible as trying to re boot Laurel and Hardy.

This was a unique show fronted by unique characters. The plots were simple and depended a bit on slapstick, but more than anything the presence of the late Arthur Lowe. Unfortunately, Toby Jones couldn't come near character of the stuffy but lovable Capt. Mainwaring. Without that it's not Dad's Army.

The production is filled with top actors such as Bill Patterson,Tom Courtenay and Catherine Zita Jones. But they had little to work with in a rather unfunny script for a far too serious plot. Bill Nighy does his best at stayed Sgt.Wilson. But he had little to work with against an equally unfunny Jones. I wasn't expecting too much from this film,so I wasn't disappointed a great deal.

They still don't like it up 'em

[bob-the-movie-man · 6/10 · 7 February 2016]

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.)

Why, oh why?

[phillewis-42679 · 3/10 · 3 June 2016]

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.

Stupid boy!! I quite enjoyed it. Nostalgia...

[Sleepin_Dragon · 7/10 · 7 February 2016]

I have waited with baited breath to see this, I hate to say I was one of the people that slated this and wrote it off beforehand, but I must admit it was a bit of a pleasant surprise. The TV show was magical, and watched in this household quite often, the catchphrases are iconic and still used to this day.

The old charms of the sitcom were lacking I guess, not really much in the way of slapstick humour, it was nicely funny, in a kind of quaint, slightly dated way, I enjoyed it more so for the nostalgia, it didn't have me belly laughing at any point, but I kept on thinking it's DAD's ARMY, just enjoy it.

Largely well acted, Toby Jones and Bill Nighy were both great, they bounced off each other well and were a funny, effective duo. Tom Courtenay was OK, just felt a little miscast, I'm sure if another film is made he could get further into the role. One of my favourite showings from the ever lovely Catherine Zeta Jones too, she's definitely still got it.

The plot was a little on the thin side some will argue, overall it was just a nice, easy to watch film. 7/10

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

[studioAT · 3/10 · 13 January 2017]

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.

As a long time fan I loved it and laughed a lot.

[adrianmerrall · 7/10 · 27 February 2016]

As someone who watched Dad's Army a long time ago and still puts the DVDs on from time to time I loved it and laughed the whole way through.

The casting was excellent. The characters were close enough to the original but still bought enough of their own version to make something new.

In discussion with other Dad's Army fans we were worried that this might be a disappointment but on the contrary, I thought it was very well done.

If you are new to Dad's Army, it might be a puzzle or may not stand well enough on its own but otherwise go and see it.

Badly written, dull and simply not funny

[colinlomasox · 2/10 · 7 March 2016]

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.

Clonky script but still a giggle

[avatar_z · 7/10 · 6 February 2016]

I'm not old enough to remember the original but, like most, have seen them all on repeats; this doesn't compare to the original but is still worth a giggle. Yes most of the humour is of the silly post card style a-la roly-poly and sausage gags but still raises a giggle.

The script doesn't have the same flow as the original so in places is clunky and forced, with respect what would compare to the original easy flow of cast and gag in harmony.

The cast are near faultless, Catherine Zeta-Jones is superb as a 40's German spy / vamp, the heels, the clothes and the wiggle; Toby Jones is no Arthur Lowe but is almost there and fills the screen every time he's on it; Bill Nighy is a brilliant Wilson with all the put upon grace of the original and Michael Gambon as Godfrey was a joy to watch. The rest are all great but the one weak link was Jones, not a patch on Clive Dunn and rather a flat uninspiring character, shame. The two original cast cameo's were great but just that, cameo's and all too brief. Mrs Mainwaring finally making an appearance along with the rest of the wives was another great idea especially saving the day at the end.

Unfortunately the script is the one thing that this film falls down on, it hasn't the original charm and flow and was missing the Mainwaring Hodges bickering and battling, would have been a great pairing of him and the Germans after Mainwaring.

Will it stand up against the original, um no but it never really had a chance of that but it does stand up as a bit of Saturday afternoon silliness.

As I expected.....

[nick-64431 · 4/10 · 11 February 2016]

Having just seen this, and being old enough to remember the original series, it was, as expected, not terribly good. One of the things that makes the original series so good, the interplay between the cool and elegant Sergeant Wilson, and the pompous Captain Mainwaring. In the real world war two, the original Sergeant Wilson, John Le Mesurier, had been a tank regiment Captain, and the original Captain Mainwaring, Arthur Lowe, had been a ranker, a radar technician, and the role-reversal in the series worked so well..... the little class nuances between the two are completely lost in the film, . Michael Gambon carries off Godfrey to a tee, but the rest of the cast just don't seem to get it. Where was Frazer's gloom and doom? Jonesy a cook in the Sudan? have the producers not seen the 'dirty fakir' episode? Hodges barely gets a look in, no verger, and the vicar appears to have turned straight....there are so many little things in the original series that make it so funny, all those little things are missing here, along with the utterly spot on comic timing of the original time-served cast.

Some of the script writing is dire, with no attempt made to get it historically right, the Godfrey sisters to miss Winters, 'where will you be next, New York, Paris... difficult given that Paris was under German occupation at the time... and a U boat surfacing in broad daylight in the bay? Tank traps on the beach at the bottom of a cliff, but no wire or mines? , wire and mines would have put Corporal Jones right in his comedic element!

And as others have observed, Mrs Mainwaring is an original 'er indoors, never actually seen in the series,It was one of the elements of the original that Mainwaring would do absolutely anything to avoid his wife, why change this?

The biggest problem I had watching it though, was that I kept hearing the lines coming out of the on-screen actors, but in my head I was hearing them coming out of the mouths of the original cast,and it just can't live up to it, it's like a huge shadow cast over the whole film, somewhat akin to the relationship between the TV Sweeney, and the dreadful Nick Love film..timing is everything!

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

[pr65 · 8/10 · 6 February 2016]

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.

Inaccuracies

[austinmonk · 6/10 · 8 February 2016]

As a die hard fan of Dads Army, I was miffed with the inaccuracies in this film, firstly they said Pike had flat feet which is why he wasn't in the regular army when we know the reason was because he had a rare blood group, also when Jones told Mainwaring he hadn't shot anyone because he was a cook In the Army was also incorrect as it was Frazer who was a cook in the Navy, if you are going to make a film of a well loved TV series at least get it right, also Toby Jones wasn't pompous enough as Mainwaring, you hardly were aware of Jones and Frazer, I loved Godfreys character played by Michael Gambon, you got him spot on, also Wilson was good. Why was the film about Catherine Zeta Jones, its called Dads Army and it should have been about Dads Army, sadly she wasn't needed and she bored me to death cos I wanted to see more of the main characters with their well known phrases, I class myself as a firm fan as I watch the TV series several times a week and never get bored of it. If there is a next time at least get a fan of Dads Army to write the script so as not to disappoint fans

A failed attempt to do justice to the series with inferior clones

[rbrb · 3/10 · 2 August 2016]

This is a film version of a famous and funny TV series of the same name. In the last war the home guard consisted of mainly older men protecting Britain's shores: the series and now this movie portrays their comical adventures.

Unfortunately most of the characters in the movie version are inferior clones of the series. The making of this movie seems to have been rushed. A script that is mostly poor and unfunny and I could not wait for the picture to end.

In the TV series what made it so amusing was the strong interplay between the main male players. The lead actors wife was talked about but never seen nor were female recruits visible if at all. The film makers have ruined the picture by failing to give us a picture that does justice to the original series.

2 and a half, rounded up =

3/10

Cast in search of a comedy script

[iandbaldwin · 1/10 · 21 February 2016]

Dad's Army was always about comedy, the war came second. Sadly this has been forgotten by the scriptwriters of this turgid film. While special mention should be made for Michael Gambon playing a very good Godfrey (formerly Arnold Ridley), Daniel Mays as Private Walker (formerly James Beck) and Sarah Lancashire as Mrs Pike (formerly Janet Davies) the rest of the cast left a lot to be desired. Tom Courteney as Jones (formerly Clive Dunn) had none of the spark and fight that this old soldier had when played by the late great Dunn, even when hanging off a cliff edge he could rustle up none of the "Don't Panic !" bravado of Dunn and throughout played the role as limp as a lettuce. There was an ideal opportunity for slapstick when the CGI inflatable tanks took off and this would have been an ideal chance for one of the cast to have flown across Southern England holding onto a dirigible as had happened in the TV series to Captain Mainwaring (The Day the Balloon Went Up). Disappointing, would have rather watched a cleaned print of the original cast's film.

Far better than I expected

[vincentqlauzon · 7/10 · 26 February 2016]

The idea of making a Dad's Army movie in 2016 was a.bizarre one and when first announced I couldn't see how the TV series of many decades ago could be updated.

The film itself is a pleasant surprise, with several laugh out loud moments and many little touches that provide a chuckle or amused smirk.

The cast is mostly first rate. Some off the wall casting really works with the standout performances being those of Toby Jones as Captain Mannerism and the sublime Bill Nighy as Sergeant Wilson.

The only main cast member who doesn't work is Tom Courtney as Jones. As with other Courtney performances he simply lacks the warmth of the television version of the character.

Worth a watch.

Oliver Parker should hang his head in shame

[frosteliza · 1/10 · 11 June 2016]

I was a great fan of the original Dad's Army series on the TV. I loved the characters, and the interaction between them. Even though you always knew exactly what was going to happen next, it was funny.

Although I seem to be in a minority, I also thought that the original feature film from 1971 was pretty funny, even if in a more slapstick way.

In summary, I think you can appreciate that the comedy bar does not need to be set too high for me to enjoy and laugh at a film.

So - what I just don't understand is how a well-funded, professional film-maker like Oliver Parker with access to excellent actors and actresses, and hundreds of hours of brilliant original material there for the studying, could produce such absolute garbage as this film.

OK, his track record is not spectacular. The St Trinians duology and Johnny English were only so-so, and most of his other stuff is a bit plodding and serious.

But he has a ready-made audience! Most people wanting to see this film would be wanting more of the original Dad's Army sitcom humour - more of the now-deceased characters; more of the same witty interactions, more slapstick humour, more 'don't panic' and 'we're doomed'! That would not be difficult, surely. But oh no. Instead, we get a 100 minutes of non-comedy as a bunch of highly talented actors are badly directed through a wooden script.

The plot is not funny. It's a hoary old femme fatale chestnut which revolves around Catherine Zeta Jones. Whilst she's a very good femme fatale - she's not funny.

The script is not funny. No-one says anything amusing. Interactions between the characters are laboured, dead and lack anything like comic timing. The slapstick sequences are so bad that you feel sorry for the talented actors forced to go through the motions.

The cast characters are not funny. Tom Courtenay as Jones looks and sounds like a dazed old man with Alzheimer's - quiet, sad and lost. There is no spark of the fire and craziness from Clive Dunn's representation. Bill Nighy as Wilson is no longer funny because he's a really nice chap who would never hurt a fly - he's now a public school snob who risks his relationship with Mavis over an old flame. John Le Mesurier's character would never have contemplated such perfidy! Michael Gambon as Godfrey portrays a senile old man who urinates up a tree in a field - the original Godfrey was an old-fashioned gentleman who would never have done such a thing. Bill Paterson's Frazer has such limited screen time he might as well not be in it. Toby Jones as Mainwaring bears some similarity to the original Arthur Lowe, but once again instead of appearing as just a bumbling, pompous but ultimately golden-hearted gentleman he just looks a bit sad and lost. Blake Harrison as Pike is about as close as anyone gets to the original Ian Lavender version, but even he is given strangely conflicting characteristics - the original mummy's boy Pike would never have dumped his girlfriend on the doorstep, or pursued a man-eater like Catherine Zeta Jones!

Even the two members of the original cast who appear have such brief roles you probably won't even notice they were there unless you read the cast list. Ian Lavender appears as a senior officer but is almost unrecognisable (and there is no tongue-in-cheek nod to his original role, which surely would not have been difficult to write in). And the vicar plays - the vicar. Very briefly.

The only even-slightly redeeming feature of this film is that it gives some screen-time to characters of the women who supported the Home Guard and the war effort. They are no funnier than the men, but at least they are there.

I think the out-takes during the end credits actually show that the cast of the film could have made a great movie if only the Director had let them.

Just for a few seconds, the cast members actually imitate the attitudes and interactions of the original Dad's Army cast, and just for a few seconds it's actually funny! I can only believe that the cast were told: "yes, you're playing the parts of Jones and Mainwaring and Wilson and so on, but you MUST NOT under any circumstances attempt to emulate the way in which the original actors Clive Dunn and Arthur Lowe and John Le Mesurier and so on played their roles. Any attempt at actual humour, real acting or changing the script and you're fired!"

At the final screening before this film went to print, a lot of people must have looked sideways at each other, and I only hope the director hung his head in shame.

If like me, you have a fond memory of Dad's Army, but haven't seen the endless re-runs for at least the last 20 years, you may just love this.

[Yealander · 7/10 · 14 October 2021]

I liked this film. So who is it aimed at? Well, if you're a die-hard Dad's Army fan, I suspect there will be far too many reasons not to like this film. Lots of inconsistencies with the original characterisation, writing, format and style. Let's face it, the original casting and writing was iconic... You won't repeat or beat that. If you are a Dad's Army virgin, I find it hard to imagine you will get this film, unless you are totally fascinated by British culture in WW2. However, If like me, you have a fond memory of Dad's Army, but haven't seen the endless re-runs for at least the last 20 years, you may just love this. I did. It might help if u also like "Eye Of The Needle" (which overlaps the same real-life plot elements) and the film "Enigma" (etc), which I do. So, it's plot is derivative, and the visual style is totally cliché cinematic Teal and Orange (and out the other side) with narrow depth of field, but this is supposed to have a vintage comedy feel, so I let that go. What you get is a totally stellar cast, who really are channelling the original cast. Which is impressive as many of these guys are much more famous than some of the original cast. But the new cast know the originals where maybe not all famous but were all totally right for the part. The originals were all perfectly cast, defined the roles, even if they never to exceeded them in their careers. This is a marvellous and respectful comedy with some real comic moments, that will never exceed the original, buit I thinks it does work for those of us with warm childhood memories of the original series. And then there is the spot the original cast cameo moments... So lovely I can't understand the low rating and can only presume its because people revere the original version.

A cruel parody of the original

[nickjgunning · 2/10 · 27 August 2018]

Woefully miscast, silly 'big movie' background score and no real sense of the period. The script was lame and predictable. Of course, different actors want to own the part and not merely mimic their predecessors; but the original cast and scriptwriters 'made' the series; pompous Arthur Lowe, sly but superior John Lemesurier, hysterical and overstated Clive Dunne. The new cast are very respectable actors, but they don't have that music - hall farce background which gave Lowe and his cast a believability. This cast doesn't engage at any level. Meanwhile the script writers have explored every possibility for humour... and binned it!

Good old gentle British fun

[GB65 · 7/10 · 8 February 2022]

There's an awful lot of pretentious reviews on here. This was just a lovely wander through some memories of the original with some lovely new twists to the characters. I thought every one of characterisations of the main players was mostly excellent. There were a couple of times when Toby Jones was speaking and I could picture Arthur Lowe. Just fun, nothing more, nothing less.

If there was a half-star.....

[xpat-55192 · 1/10 · 15 November 2018]

As an avid fan of the brilliant original TV series, I thought the script was abysmal and every cast member except Bill Nighy, Catherine Zeta-Jones, and Michael Gambon let themselves down with a crash. The unattractive and annoying cockney spiv playing the late James Beck's black marketeer-cum-womaniser role was particularly galling. A film for which producers should have created a different title for this diabolical shame and, by doing so, not cast aspersions on the original cast, script and series. Avoid like the plague.

It's proved me wrong....

[GrahamY · 8/10 · 8 February 2016]

Have to say I'm one of those that on hearing they were making a new Dad's Army film, threw my arms in the air in disgust and vowed I would never go to see it out of respect to the original and much beloved TV series - but as the release date has drawn closer and I've read and watched interviews with various cast members, I've found my interest being piqued more and more to the point that we went to see it yesterday (two days after release). Having done so, I have to say that I've taken back everything I ever said about disrespect and not being able to come anywhere close to the original's genius - the film has proved my initial fears to be totally unfounded.

Sure it's not the original and doesn't even feel like the original BUT it doesn't try to be. I put it elsewhere that it's like a good cover version of a song - it shows the original respect whilst presenting it differently enough not to just be a straight copy, or even try to be.

There are numerous points of reference back to the original throughout, these vary from catchphrases to the classic map with the Union Jack arrows fending off the advancing swastikas that appeared in the original's opening titles (and do so very cleverly too).

Yes the plot is a little flimsy and Godfrey's sisters methods of arriving at the denouement of the spy is a little implausible - but to be honest how many of the original series plot lines were that plausible? One or two of the characters lose something in this "re-imagining", Jones and Hodges being two of them - but then all of the actors involved have gone to great lengths to say they didn't want to imitate the original characters, more put their own interpretations on it, and with only 90 minutes or so to develop and show those characters limitations have to be expected - although personally I'd like to have seen the Jones character be given more visibility.

The cinema we saw it in was packed and there were plenty of real laugh out loud moments where everyone was laughing - and all in all I think a laudable job has been done which as I started off by saying shows no disrespect to the original.

Oh and make sure you stay to the end of the titles, there are some funny outtakes in there and a rather touching homage back to the original conducted by all the main cast of the platoon.

Now I'm off to eat my hat (and my original words about the project along with it)

Old friends with slightly different faces

[neil-476 · 7/10 · 19 February 2016]

A Nazi spy has come to Walmington-on-Sea, and it is up to the well-meaning but rather inept batch of Home Guard spare-time "soldiers", led by the self-important Captain Mainwaring (pronounced Mannering, for those encountering this odd British pronunciation for the first time) to foil the plot.

The British TV sitcom on which this film is based ran from 1968 to 1977, but is so much-loved that its 80 episodes are on more or less constant rotation on repeat channels. So one approaches an adaptation 40 years on, with (of necessity) different actors, with curiosity and trepidation. The plot of this film is primarily functional – it provides a coherent storyline of sufficient length to let us see our characters, normally only seen in 30-minute bursts, do their stuff over 90 minutes. And that's the heart of it, really. Because these characters were so well designed in the first place that they are like suits of clothing, and what this film does is enable a different batch of actors to wear them. There may be differences in the facial resemblances (although the casting is excellent, and I was delighted to see Tom Courtenay underplaying Corporal Jones, in contrast to Clive Dunn's hammy over-acting, so out of place in the original), but these characters are recognisably the same as those from the TV series.

And the thing I particularly liked about this film – which is enjoyable and amusing, by the way – is that it is made quite clear that, despite their ineptitude, every one of these men is a hero: each one has a hero moment when you are left in no doubt as to their valour.

Indescribably bad.........

[elhoggo · 1/10 · 17 February 2016]

Well....I'm speechless...words fail me, Dads Army.....I will never get those two hours of my life back....fatuous unfunny indescribably puerile drivel.....Its an insult to the intelligence and to the men who were in the home guard. The TV series was funny largely because it was satirical and had characters who were totally out of their depth but doing their best.

I remember watching the TV series with my parents, who lived trough those times and loved the show. I know of people who were in the home guard who loved it because they said it was a wonderful exaggeration and parody of the reality and futility of the struggle and the people involved. This film makes them out to be imbeciles.

It is not worth spending time on detailed analysis, but suffice to say the writers understood nothing of what made the original so clever and successful. It really is one the worst films i have ever paid to see.

Amiable attitude, but simply not that funny

[Wizard-8 · 3/10 · 11 November 2018]

Being that I wasn't born and raised in the United Kingdom, I never got to see the original "Dad's Army" television show that this modern day movie is based on. So this opinion is from someone who can't compare this movie to the original TV series. Despite not seeing the series, it was obvious that the makers of this movie were seemingly assuming that all of its audience would be familiar with the old television series. The movie dives straight in the middle without properly introducing and developing its central characters. Also, the movie seems to think that its audience would be familiar with what the United Kingdom was like during the war, and what the Home Guard was like (something I had a little knowledge about, which did help.) But the real problem with the movie is that it's not very funny. To its credit, the movie isn't shrill and in-your-face like many Hollywood comedies, and instead goes for a more low key approach. But this approach is so low key, there's hardly any energy, and it's hard to laugh as a result. Also, many of the gags seems aimed at very young children, being very simplistic and obvious instead of more clever and biting. The actors are likeable, the period detail is pretty good despite not having a megabudget, and it's warm-hearted. But it simply wasn't funny to this outsider. Judging by many of the other comments here, it apparently isn't that funny to people in the UK also.

Not brilliant but not bad either

[mjsreg · 6/10 · 14 June 2016]

If you are expecting a faithful reproduction of the brilliant TV series you will be disappointed.

Several characters from the TV series were neglected, in particular those of the verger (who didn't appear at all) and the arrogant Hodges (who had a very minor role with very little development or exhibition of the animosity between he and Mainwaring).

The actors in the TV series developed the characters and made them their own, so the actors in the film were bound to have a tough job developing the characters for the screen. Even so, it was interesting to see different interpretations of the personalities of each.

Not a bad film and not a brilliant classic of all time, but still worth a watch provided you don't set expectations too high.

I do think the writers could have developed the story more in depth, and some parts of the film felt very superficial and laboured.