I like the storyline of this show,it attract me so much

Just what I expected

It’s fine. It's literally the definition of a fine movie. You’ve seen it before, you know every beat and outcome before the characters even do. Only question is how much escapism you’re looking for.

All of these films share one commonality, that being a kind of emotional center that humanizes a cast of monsters.

I just watched this again, 20+ years after seeing it on cable. I had the vaguest recollections of the movie, came here to see the cast, and thought it would be fun to watch.It isn't.The list of talent in this movie is amazing - but the results are boring. There was enough talent here to make this into Blazing Saddles of the Sea with the right script. But the script wasn't right. Sure, it has a plot. But just about everything in it is lackluster. There's so much talent wasted on lame jokes and premises that fizzle that it becomes sad to watch it all slip away.Most of the jokes are obvious, and the rest are either pointless or so base as to be insulting to the people they have performing them.As an example, there's a scene early in the film where Eric Idle heads to Lord Lambourn's estate. As he gets out of his carriage, the camera cuts to a pile of horse manure. Then we cut to him stepping in the horse manure the last shot showed us. Then he stands there and waits for his assistant to clean his shoes while he's still standing in the manure. That's it. End Joke.Just seconds later, after he meets lord and lady lambourn, the camera cuts to a man about 15 feet away peeing on a hedge. Lady lambourn tells him to stop it. He runs away. She chases him. That's it. End Joke.If either of those sound lame when they're written out, they're just as bad when you're watching them. The movie is filled with bits that could have been in any movie about any subject, but they just happened to be in this movie because someone thought they'd get a laugh. They do nothing to advance plot, characters, or even the next 5 seconds of screen time.And if you're thinking of watching for the performances--they don't really manage to salvage anything. It feels like after a certain point everyone started going through the motions just to get the film in the can.

I have a certain affinity for this movie of the breed where I can't really recommend it, because it really is not a well-planned, well-directed, or comedically sound film. But it appeals to my inner Python because of its history. It's a virtual "Who's who" of late 1970s comedy. I could not resist the purchase when it came out on DVD, having myself already read the book and the screenplay. Anyone with a taste for early 80s comedy will appreciate the stellar cast: Chapman, Eric Idle, and John Cleese from the Python cast, Cheech and Chong, and half the cast of Mel Brooks' Young Frankenstein. Some may know, also, that Marty Feldman had previously worked with Chapman and Cleese in At Last the 1948 Show, the British sketch comedy show that predated Monty Python.But, as I said earlier, I can't recommend it because I don't know if I would have enjoyed it so much had I not had such an appreciation for the historical value. The gags are good and there is a lot of clever wordplay, but I mostly just enjoy watching such famous personalities acting alongside each other. It's a good one for the collection, but look elsewhere if production value is what you want.

With this cast and budget, should have been much more of a sustained laugh fest. Nevertheless, many of the lines and visuals are classics, and everyone aboard is such a pro that you can forgive the deader stretches. Marty Feldman does a lot with not much material, while Peter Cook's beyond-deadpan mutterings are frequently hilarious. Disappointing were Peter Boyle and Tommy Chong, the latter to the point of inducing nausea. Cheech Marin fares better, but only because his character is written with marginally more dimension. Loved David Bowie's cameo and Madeline Kahn's pluckiness. James Mason, however, looks vaguely uncomfortable (not to mention feeble) in his few scenes, which, sadly, do not contain any glittering gags.All in all, you will definitely laugh, cringe, and yawn, but won't regret tuning in.

I somehow missed this movie in its first release, but having seen it recently on cable I realized I didn't miss much. Looking at the cast and crew, you'd expect one of the greatest comedy films ever made. Three Pythons, Peter Cook, Cheech & Chong, and several Mel Brooks alumni (Mars, Boyle, Kahn, Feldman, and composer Morris). But it never gets off the ground. It's as though Chapman couldn't figure out if he wanted to make a cute adventure movie or a zany comedy, so it ends up not functioning well as either. I kept waiting for a genuinely funny sequence, but in vain. Peter Cook is wasted in a fairly straight role (as is Eric Idle), and most of the other cast members wander aimlessly through the thin plot. Chapman could probably have written a very funny 5-minute pirate sketch, but was out of his depth in a 90-minute feature. John Morris did produce a good soundtrack, however, and David Bowie makes a nice walk-on appearance.