Adventures of a Plumber's Mate

I mean I had to, right? Maybe this pun is intended - although I did not premaditate it. I just came up with it - no pun intended with this one for sure. Now if you are thinking what I am thinking ... what am I thinking? All kidding aside: another sex comedy and the last of the Adventures trilogy. The man responsible for the movies had enough after the third outing (this one right here).

And it may be good to stop something before it goes down the drain ... ah well another pun. Maybe he could've fixed it too. Anyway, a lot of nudity and titilating things to see. But always used for humor rather than arousal - just like the movies before this one. You know what is up (sorry) and if you want to get down with it (again, so sorry ... maybe)

What happened here? The first two movies in the ADVENTURES OF... series were quite funny. Yet somehow a trilogy was formed when the series was tied up with this painfully unfunny movie. It comes as no surprise that the series ended here and no fourth movie was made.

As another person has commented on this page, this movie has a dreary, depressing tone hanging over it. I would like to add that the first two movies were nothing like this. Indeed, from seeing the first two, you would never guess Britain had descended to harsh economic times. In this movie, it's all too clear with its constant reminders of debt, unlikeable aggressive characters, nasty unrepentant officials and painful lack of humour.

What happened to Christopher Neil? His character in ADVENTURES OF A PRIVATE EYE was a very funny and likable accident-prone. I thought his performance in that movie was even better than that of Barry Evans in ADVENTURES OF A TAXI DRIVER. In ADVENTURES OF A PLUMBER'S MATE, Christopher Neil seems to be sleepwalking his way through the movie, he didn't seem to enjoy being here and unlike the previous movie, his character was more annoying than likable and none of the ideas funny on paper were funny on the screen.

As if the lead actor weren't bad enough, some first-rate supporting talent is wasted as well.

Arthur Mullard plays a Mr. Big type character but he was too overly aggressive to be funny. Mr. Mullard deserved better than this. Jerold Wells was equally wasted as his sidekick who was given nothing to do other than stand around looking dumb. Mr. Wells had more fun on THE BENNY HILL SHOW and his great cameo in VAULT OF HORROR.

Willie Rushton is also wasted as a quick-buck artist who allocates a number of jobs to the main character to help him pay off debts. His performance here was completely uninspired (who could blame him?) and a long way departed from KEEP IT UP DOWNSTAIRS or ADVENTURES OF A PRIVATE EYE.

Suzy Mandell, a veteran of British sex comedies is wasted in a role as a tennis player whose only purpose is to get her kit off and go in the shower. Unlike movies such as COME PLAY WITH ME and INTIMATE GAMES, she is given nothing to do or say that is in the least bit funny. For those who want to see Miss Mandell full-frontal nude, the two mentioned movies will deliver whereas this one doesn't.

But perhaps the most criminal waste of talent here is Stephen Lewis. He plays the boss of the main character and is in full Blakey mode. Not even he could save this movie. Not even the funniest person from the ON THE BUSES franchise could make me laugh here. This is how bad this movie was.

On a positive note, Anna Quayle has a good time with her character, who is the owner of a club or something like that. She has a few funny lines and is backed up by Christopher Biggins, who also has a good time.

The only genuine standout on the cameo list is Claire Davenport who raises a laugh or two as a battleaxe-type masseuse who handles her clients very roughly. Her scene was funny but it couldn't save this movie.

All in all, this is a colossal disappointment for anyone who has seen the first two entries in this series. It brings a sad end to a franchise that was moderately funny in saucy British tradition. My recommendation is to stick to the first two movies and disregard this one as though it doesn't exist.

Compared with the tacky 'Confessions of' series, the first two 'Adventures of' films felt a little more classy with actual plots. This however is horrible. It's a humourless, very poorly made crime film with an exceptionally unpleasant lead character.

Christopher Neil, who was the taxi driver in the first movie plays an absolutely detestable character. He's a cruel, spiteful and ignorant sexist yob. Sexist! OK, you wouldn't expect a film like this to be particularly woke but in a so-called comedy you wouldn't expect such aggressive misogyny - or for that to be a basis of humour. There's also a plot which is the dullest crime story imaginable. That introduces a series of unlikeable, unfunny boring characters. These help to drag the tedium out for what seems hours.

Is it worth watching for the sexy ladies? No. The progression of characterless one-dimensional naked cardboard cutouts are as erotic as Chinese shadow play. The knickerless girl on the motorcycle at the beginning however is pleasant but the rest of the supposed erotica is just crude, dirty and cheap looking.

I'm obviously not a prude or I wouldn't be watching this but this is a vile, shabby excuse for entertainment which makes you feel dirty and annoyed that you wasted an hour and a half on.

As you might guess from the title, this movie is about the adventures of a plumber's assistant. In real life it's not exactly a profession where you'd expect a lot of hot sex action, but, of course, it is in movies like this. Aside from the vaguely sexy, plumbing-related hijinks though, there's a genuine plot where our hero "Sid South" (Christopher Neil)owes serious gambling debts to a pair of hulking loan sharks, and gets mixed up with a recently-paroled convict (after he fixes the, um, plumbing of the man's wife)in trying to retrieve a golden toilet seat (or rather a toilet seat with stolen gold concealed in it). There's nothing wrong, of course, with a sex comedy having a plot per se, but this unfortunately is not a very funny one.

These "Adventures of" films are naturally a cheap knock-off of the then-popular "Confessions of" series of sex comedies with Robin Askwith. The whole series is a couple steps down from the genuinely entertaining "Confessions of" series, but this film is also another step or two down from the first film in the series "Adventures of a Taxi Driver". It's a conceit in these films that blue-collar slobs somehow get more sex action than rock stars. The problem is that Neil often acts like a whiny, spoiled rock star and quickly loses the every-man sympathy of the audience. In the opening scene, for instance, he wakes up in his grungy, vermin-infested flat with a pretty nice-looking girl (evidently a one-night stand), who unaccountably considers him to be some kind of catch. But he kicks her to the curb like he's Rod Stewart (actually he leaves her bare-assed naked on the curb after his motorbike rips her dress off).

Neil has zero charisma in his role, but most of the female characters don't really have roles at all. They're all pretty cute, but they put in little more than undraped cameos. Suzy Mandel, for instance, was such an appealing actress that she sometimes appeared on the posters of movies she wasn't even in (like the French film "Pussy Talk"). Later, she went to the US and ended up in a big-budget XXX film,but they actually let her use a body double for the XXX scenes. Anyway, she's pretty much wasted as one of a quartet of "tennis girls" who catch the protagonist after he decides to use the ladies' shower for no real reason while on a job (in real-life he'd probably be reported as a sex pervert, but of course that's not what happens here. . .). The only characters I liked were the male character actors like the two loan sharks and "Sid's" boss. Their lower-class Brit accents were often virtually unintelligible, but they were at least funny.

Elaine Paige made her film debut in this British sex film.At the time the British film industry was in a very poor state.Often sex films were the only opportunity for actors to appear on screen.So that is the reason that Richard Caldicott appears.This film is a smaller budgeted version of the Confession series,which in turn took over when the Carry Ons had their day.This film is actually amusing in parts unlike the Confessions which were unfunny and crass.There is one very funny shot of a amateurs wobbling breasts.However Arthur Millard in his last film does rather exhibit his acting limitations.Rather redolent of the period.