Tacticalin An absolute waste of money

Dynamixor The performances transcend the film's tropes, grounding it in characters that feel more complete than this subgenre often produces.

ActuallyGlimmer The best films of this genre always show a path and provide a takeaway for being a better person.

Ezmae Chang This is a small, humorous movie in some ways, but it has a huge heart. What a nice experience.

jc-osms Like its near contemporaries "The Great Race" and "Those Magnificent Men In Their Flying Machines", I always associate this film with my childhood especially at New Year. On New Year's Day we'd visit my granny and after lunch, while the adults talked, the kids would watch TV where invariably one of these three crazy race films would be on.For that reason alone, I really wanted to mark "Monte Carlo Or Bust" well but I fear I can't, the child not being father to the man on this occasion. By which I mean I can see all too clearly its faults and while I was tempted to smile occasionally, in truth I really wanted all the competitors to get to the end of the race long before they actually do.Of course it's dated by its stereotyping of nationalities and woman as the weaker sex and I also didn't much care for one or two stray, admittedly mild vulgarities which occasionally surfaced. More than that though, the cast, despite hamming it up outrageously just don't sell the film enough. Tony Curtis, in a trial run for his "Yank Abroad" turn in the TV series "The Persuaders", seems too old to be playing the young gallant, Terry Thomas just isn't dastardly enough, Eric Sykes is unbelievable as a dirty-minded Lothario while Gert Frobe as an overdone Teuton, is just weird doing camp comedy when you remember he was Bond's best villain Goldfinger. If anything the Englishers come off best - Susan Hampshire is at least engaging as a "bright young thing", suitably gamine as a posh flapper and although chained to the leash of the script Pete and Dud offer the most amusement as stiff upper lip army types, although even then the "Carry On" team did this so much better in "Carry On Up The Khyber Pass".Director Annakin tries everything to evoke the "Golden Silents", with lashings of slapstick, mistaken identity capers, speeded up camera shots, would-be dramatic stunts and some light romance, but there's no real tension for such a famous race and anyway the race-off at the end seems like another swizz.Actually I'd have given it another mark if they'd stuck to the alternative title "Those Magnificent Men in Their Jaunty Jalopies" but in truth the animated series "Wacky Races" did this so much better.

SeriousMovieCritic This movie has to be taken with a grain of salt - one can not compare this 60's movie with todays hot and speedy Action/Adventure films. Some viewers are doing just that with this film. Instead, this movie is full of excellent character actors such as Gert Froebe, Terry-Thomas, Bourvil and Dudley Moore, an interesting storyline and a very catchy soundtrack with a song from Jimmy Durante (which was only briefly available in 1968 on Paramount LP). This movie should be viewed in widescreen only to preserve the vista. I can seriously recommend this film to anyone who wishes to be entertained for a couple of hours by a great cast with an interesting story and a good soundtrack.

theowinthrop It tries hard, and it has some energy from a few of the stars in it, but MONTY CARLO OR BUST lacks the verve of it's predecessors, THOSE MAGNIFICENT MEN IN THEIR FLYING MACHINES and THE GREAT RACE, and some of the goofiness of it's less remembered successor, ROCKET TO THE MOON. It may be the script, which lags at times, or it may be the fact that the super-nationalism of Pre-World War I Europe is not translatable in the 1920s (oddly enough). The cast includes people from the two preceding films including Tony Curtis (THE GREAT RACE), Terry-Thomas, Eric Sykes, and Gert Frobe (THOSE MAGNIFICENT MEN), and some welcomed new faces (Susan Hampshire, Peter Cook and Dudley Moore). But there is less time for the character development found in the earlier films. For example, the three French female drivers and the two Italian male drivers never really have individual personalities, although one of the Italians has "topic A" constantly on his mind when he thinks of the amorous awards awaiting him if he wins.The idea is that 1924 marks the first Grand Prix to Monte Carlo across Europe. The various characters are interested in winning the race - well most of them are. Poor Gert Frobe (in a far more sympathetic role than his pompous German Colonel in THOSE MAGNIFICENT MEN) is Willy, a well-known superior "getaway - car" driver in Germany who has been sprung from prison by the Count (Jack Hawkins, in one of his last - really silent film parts). He resembles a wealthy playboy who has been entered in the rally, but has been "removed" so that Willy can replace him. A fortune in stolen jewels is in Willy's car, and it is going to be transported secretly across Europe so it can be brought to the men who can sell it. Willy doesn't mind, at first, but he resents the constant threat over his head by the Count's men (who are everywhere), and he knows he could win the rally - he's a better driver than anyone else. But the Count doesn't care.SMALL SPOILER: At the conclusion, Willy is freed from the threat from the Count, and cuts loose. Although he does not get official recognition because of his fraudulently replacing the actual driver who entered, Willy actually does win the race for a few minutes.There is also the British Army Colonel, Major Digby-Dawlish (Peter Cook) and his batman/assistant Lt. Kit Barrington (Dudley Moore). There addition to the cast actually is a recognition of two previously successful comedies this team appeared in: the original BEDAZZLED and THE WRONG BOX. Digby-Dawlish is an inventor of motorcar devices he has tested in India, and he hopes to win the rally so he can market these to the world. The devices (like attaching skis to the car in the snowy regions) seem to be sensible, but always come acropper - but Dawlish and Barrington never say die, and always seem to have another device to undue the chaos and damage of the first device!Then there is the antics of Terry-Thomas and Tony Curtis. Terry-Thomas is Sir Cuthbert Ware-Armitage, the son of the Sir Percy Ware-Armitage who tried to cheat his way to the trophy of the 1910 London to Paris flight in THOSE MAGNIFICENT MEN. Daddy has been killed at the start of the new film in the crash of another airplane, and Cuthbert is as happy as possible - he is now owner of the family industrial empire. But then he learns that daddy sold half the business to Chester Schofield (Curtis), an American with ideas of his own. Ware-Armitage is not going to let a Yank control half that empire. He bets Schofield that he will beat Schofield to Monte Carlo - the winner gets to keep the entire industrial empire. Schofield agrees, not realizing that Cuthbert is as crooked and ruthless as his father was. Using (or misusing and blackmailing) his family retainer Perkins (Sykes) to do his dirty work, he also blackmails a young cousin (Hampshire) to vamp Schofield and make him lose interest in the race.The reduction of plot themes should have strengthened the script - but there are gaps. Chester is drugged at one point, but Hampshire gives him some medication she has and he snaps out of his sleepy behavior automatically. Perkins puts up with a lot of crap from his boss - far more than most people reasonably accept. In the end he gets a fine revenge, but it should have been earlier in the film. The film is amusing enough - but try to catch the other films in the series which were better.

KEVMC In the 1920's several international characters gather to compete in the gruelling Monte Carlo Rally. Some will employ fair means or foul to ensure victory.This film was a follow up of sorts to 1965's 'Those Magnificent Men In Their Flying Machines', although it also bares similarities to 'The Great Race'(in which Tony Curtis once again starred). Sadly it is not in the same class as either. It lacks the coherence, wit and spectacle of 'Flying Machines', despite Ken Annakin being at the helm once more. In fairness to him the main problem is the screenplay - its simply not that funny. This causes an over reliance on the visual gags, and here again the film falls short. The effects aren't terribly special even for 1969. Some of the characters are also downright irritating - I'm thinking particularly of the Italians - bulging eyed, flailing armed, noisy oafs.There are some compensations however. Dear old Terry-Thomas and Eric Sykes repeat their double act from the previous film to some effect, and Susan Hampshire is every inch the English Rose. But its Peter Cook and Dudley Moore who steal the show as a British Army Officer/Inventor and his Batman respectively. They have all the best lines and manage to deliver them in a typically deadpan and upper class manner. Example:- As their car hurtles down a snowy hillside out of control, and having tried every concievable method of stopping it to no avail, Cook calmly announces "This simply won't do at all!" Priceless.Not a total disaster then, but considering the talent involved, with better writing and more careful work all round it could have been, and indeed should have been, so much better.