Está Faltando um de Nossos Dinossauros

And it's in my top ten best films. Hilarious from the very start, with Lord Southmere hitching a lift from the yeti ("Thanks for the lift old boy - I don't think you're abominable at all!") and then escaping from the villains in the Natural History Museum disguised as a baby. It may be racist in the same way as Carry on Up the Khyber (most of the Chinese are occidentals in terrible eye makeup) but it's certainly feminist, celebrating the power of women in grey stockings fuelled only by nice cups of tea. (What if this great beast should fall on us, Hetty? Then we would be the first people in two million years to be killed by a dinosaur!) xxxxxx

I'm not sure why this movie receives as bad reviews as it does. Admittedly, Ustinov's performance is the worst I've seen from him, and nowdays the portrayal of Orientals comes across as out and out racist. But, if you forgive the movie these problems (this was 1976 when sensibilities were different) it's not that bad. Not wonderful, but with a few laughs. And I had little trouble following the plot.

What enormous fun! Nannies, toffs with monocles, drunken Scots, loud Yanks, inscrutable Chinese ... every cliché under the sun chases around London in pursuit of a dinosaur skeleton on the back of a lorry.

Such energy, fun, and real "oomph" make this film utterly lovable. it's not subtle, but it's not meant to be. It's a kids' film. I love it as I love the Carry Ons: rip-roaring laughter, unsubtlety, old gags, and corking performances from a range of brilliant character actors.

Look at the cast list! How can anyone not love this film, just from the cast list alone?! Peter Ustinov and Helen Hayes lead the proceedings. Derek Nimmo has a key role. Carry On-ers Joan Sims, Bernard Bresslaw, Amanda Barrie and the supreme Joan Hickson give 100% to their roles.

People seem to be a bit sniffy about this film, but it's so good-natured, warm and funny that it's really rather rude to pick it to pieces for its stereotyping or its clichés. This film is glorious as it is.

Clearly any film nearly 30 years old is going to have flaws by today's standards and I know many people knock this film because of the now very politically incorrect portrayals of the Chinese.

However (and I am part Chinese myself) I regard the performances as pure pantomime or affectionate parody and not offensive. Besides - the bumbling British upper classes hardly fare any better.

I watched this on DVD last night and I still find it funny. Nostalgia of course plays a big part - I was 8 when it came out, still into palaeontology and visiting the Natural History Museum regularly.

But it still has some cracking dialogue, great slapstick and visual humour and of course the incomparable Helen Hayes and Peter Ustinov.

So if you want a chuckle and to escape back to a gentler (albeit fictitious) time - you could do a lot worse than spend 90 minutes watching this.

This was one of the most memorable films of my childhood, and I hadn't seen it since it came out in the cinema in England when I was seven years old, until I was given a DVD of it again today, thirty-one years later. Although today it didn't have me rolling in the aisles or have me doing Peter Ustinov impressions for hours afterward like it did back then, it still was a charmer, and it was simply just fun to watch. It deliberately encapsulates a bit of the paradoxically innocent yet bigoted flavor of England back in those times, and there are many little delicate touches for those with an appreciation for the idiosyncrasies of the English. Peter Ustinov is perfectly cast to be given license to run amok with his non-politically-correct character, considering he was one of the most well-read, culturally-sensitive intellectuals of his generation. (Check out HIS Bio!) It's certainly all about him. Overacting? I'd say "playing it broad" instead, and yet with real skill. Ustinov was a master raconteur on many subjects: political, cultural, and musical, and his comedic timing was also very acute. I think it shows. Is this film racist? Well, it certainly couldn't have been produced by Walt Disney in today's social climate, but I'd say rather that it is really a grand romp in satire, made at a time when we could more easily laugh at ourselves and each other, and forgive a little easier too. Sure it's completely "wrong" that the Chinese guys are actually played by Europeans in make-up. But the very joke lies in just how much a parody this "Chinese" make-up actually is, and how no-one is remotely intended to be fooled. Paraphrasing lines of Ustinov's (Chinese) character explains this perfectly: "How can you tell Europeans apart? They all look the same...those eyes." The film left me with the wistful feeling and hope that here was the England and these were the kinds of adventures that we had when we were children. (How dearly I would still love to run around with a squad of Great British Nannies or Chinese Agents looking for a microfilm on the Diplodocus in the Natural History Museum.) It's a wonderful time to look back to, even if it probably only ever existed in imagination. Sadly, the once-free-to-wander-in- during-our-summer-holidays Natural History Museum now charges a hefty admission fee. And that's a fact.