I take your point - it is a fair one. Maybe the source material just wasn't suitable for turning into a full scale movie - there are many instances of this in Brit series turned into movies - they are inevitably disasters. I too - detest it when they change genders and even nationalities for the sake of "wokeness" - what a ridiculous term - but no more than I expect from those who are) If you don't gush over them you are accused of being racist sexist and any other term they can think of to put you down. Is it racist to disapprove of David Copperfield being played by Dev Patel - when the original character was obviously white British. I am not disapproving of Dev Patel himself - but I find it so PC to cast him as this character. I think the worst possible instances of PC come with the Agatha Christie adaptations - homosexuality is rife - where none appeared in the original novels - murderers change to different people - in one adaptation (Sarah Phelps writer) Poirot was never in the police force and was in fact a priest!! In "Mary Queen of Scots" the female director (theatrical of course) was determined she wasn't going to make this film without diversity - completely contemptuous of the fact that she was changing historical fact for PC fiction - thus there was a black courtier and a Chinese handmaiden - not to mention the fact that Rizzio was a cross dresser who wanted to be one of the girls and who was told by one of the cast "you can be what you want to be darling" Jeez!! I dread to think how Rizzio's descendants took that one. Truth is being chipped away at every day because of political correctness - soon our history will be the stuff of fiction and truth will be lost forever.

@strangebedfellows said:

I take your point - it is a fair one. Maybe the source material just wasn't suitable for turning into a full scale movie - there are many instances of this in Brit series turned into movies - they are inevitably disasters. I too - detest it when they change genders and even nationalities for the sake of "wokeness" - what a ridiculous term - but no more than I expect from those who are) If you don't gush over them you are accused of being racist sexist and any other term they can think of to put you down. Is it racist to disapprove of David Copperfield being played by Dev Patel - when the original character was obviously white British. I am not disapproving of Dev Patel himself - but I find it so PC to cast him as this character.

Netflix has another television series "Cursed (2020)", and King Arthur is played by Devon Terrell.

I will maintain my position - I think that traditionally white roles should remain that colour - you can't alter history for the sake of political correctness. If authors wanted their characters to be black or different in any way they would have written them that way. It's not fair to tear apart the work of somebody who is dead and can't object. I wonder what the response would be if "The colour purple" had an all white cast - or if Nelson Mandela was portrayed by a white actor - or Chairman Mao was portrayed by a black actor. The uproar would be deafening. All races should be proud of their heritage and not try to hijack that of other cultures.

To go back to the OP, why isn't anyone discussing this movie? Perhaps because a mildly amusing comedy from 2005 when the idea of making films based on old television series was a good idea. For that matter why aren't we discussing the entire career Will Ferrell? As for Michael Caine his entire career is based on paycheck rolls, tell it to his bank account.

Let's keep telling ourselves it's only a movie it's only a movie...to call a film based on a female-led 1960s sitcom as female-driven claptrap is such a burn. Ouch!

As for Michael Caine his entire career is based on paycheck rolls,

I can't agree with that statement - not the word entire anyway. He has been in some good roles "Get Carter" (original is my favourite) - "Educating Rita" "Sleuth" "Fourth Protocol" and a good few others - mainly in his earlier years.

@strangebedfellows said:

As for Michael Caine his entire career is based on paycheck rolls,

I can't agree with that statement - not the word entire anyway. He has been in some good roles "Get Carter" (original is my favourite) - "Educating Rita" "Sleuth" "Fourth Protocol" and a good few others - mainly in his earlier years.

Okay I will give you that. I wrote too rashly. Just looked him up and over 130 film roles credited and uncredited since 1950 and add to that television work. Seems like a film or two sometimes even 3 or 4 every year since. By the 60s he was a known actor and eventually have his pick of roles. Also having his real working class cockney accent used. As well being maybe the last survivor of a generation of notable actors. Caine had his stretches of good roles and bad ones but hasn't stopped. Heck he will probably die on set.

Yes !! I have a special affection for Michael Caine - he defined the sixties really - from "Alfie" onward - he is a very down to earth actor - no airs and graces. I tend to forgive his misses - much like I do those of Robert de Niro's - another of my favourites.

Yes - a truly unforgettable film - for all the wrong reasons!! I bet his bathroom looked lovely though!!