JohnHowardReid Six points out of ten would be a generous rating for this disappointing movie from Tony Hancock and Peter Sellers. However, it will doubtless prove of interest to their admirers, so I include it here. The movie-making background will also strengthen the movie's appeal, while the bevy of Martian-costumed starlets is definitely another point in the film's favor. Actually, both Hancock and Sellers are wasted in minor roles that allow them few opportunities to unveil their comic talents. Another disappointment lies in the script. True, it has some plot ideas that certainly sound promising, but it fails to back them up with witty lines. Most of all, however, the movie does not have a director with the necessary skill and finesse. Time and again, promising ideas are stymied by both poor timing and an inept choice of camera angles. Sloppy film editing is also of no help. Actually, the movie could have been at least partially salvaged by sharp editing. Brian Reece's role, for instance, is of little consequence and could be severely trimmed to advantage, and so, regrettably, could Mr. Sellers' role, plus almost all of that tiresome by-play about rat traps. Fortunately, almost all of Hancock's part is still worth retaining, and we like the music score. Photography is rather flat, and despite a fairish budget, the film seems destined for the lower half of double bills.

trimmerb1234 This a fairly unremarkable film from the era except for the presence of the two (later) major stars - but well worth seeing for the jewel of a performance from Sellers. Both went on to make their names in comedy but this meeting on film was to be the one and only. Did each or either sense that the other was a potential rival? Their parts here are completely without interaction. Thereafter their paths diverged, Sellers became a bigger and bigger name in cinema and Hancock instead found success on television. Very interesting to compare and contrast the two performers and performances. Both had had success on radio playing a wide range of characters (voices). Sellers though excelled as comic character actor of chameleon like abilities as can be seen here but was never a comedian with his own comic personna. Hancock however was more comedian than character actor other than briefly burlesqueing a range of (much) earlier British film star performers. With the aid of comedy writers Alan Simpson and Ray Galton Hancock did go on to establish a comic personna - not apparently too far away from his real self - but in time became uncomfortable surrounded by a regular cast and finally - but most memorably and successfully - became the sole star of his show. The demons however did not stop, he became dissatisfied with the character and format but was tragically unable to find a successor. Hancock was an acknowledged genius but with an elusive ill-definable talent. Here he looks uncomfortable and uncertain unsupported by a hit and miss script. He was never to find his feet in films, perhaps the validation of a live audience had been essential to calm his insecurities.In contrast Seller's performance was as complete and brilliant as it ever was, unsurprisingly he became a film star in his own right within a few short years. Few could have failed to notice his talent here as half of a crafty fiddling duo of barrack orderlies (the other half the excellent comic character actor Bill Fraser). Their short scene together about 50 minutes in, with Brian Reece as the amorous Captain, is a jewel and as complete, self-assured and accomplished as anything Sellers subsequently did for Ealing, with this part of the script at least fitting like a glove.Some reviewers scoff at the threadbare nature of the supposedly big American Sci-Fi feature shot at the barracks but this is to misunderstand almost everything. Clearly the fictional production was a very very budget affair, actual manned space flight was then still 3 years away. And Britain itself in 1954 was threadbare - rationing had only finished 2 years earlier and the film markets and actual budgets were around 10% of their American equivalents. That being said, the biggest grandest pre-war science fiction film of all "The Shape of Things to Come", was British, born apparently of a highly advantageous tax arrangement. Again, oddly, American budget sci-fi and pot-boiler feature films of this era were very adept at looking far grander than their actual budgets.For fans, watch this film to see the earliest appearance of the mega-star Sellers was to become. Either sit through or skip through the mainly "chaotic and shouty" parts another reviewer nicely describes.*Sellers had made 3 earlier films, zany unsuccessful very low budget affairs with his then {radio) "Goonshow" comrades, remembered now more for their names than the merits of the films.

Ephraim Gadsby Who is Brian Reece? He's the star of 1954's "Orders Are Orders." He died in 1962. In this film he is ably supported by the often overlooked, but always invaluable, Raymond Huntley. So much for them."Orders are Orders" is about an army base is overrun by motion picture people making a cheap sci-fi flick about an invasion from outer space.Three show-biz legends have parts in the movie. First, Peter Sellers, just finding success on BBC radio's "The Goon Show." Then, Tony Hancock, who was soon to embark on his own radio series, and would go on to great fame on BBC television. Finally, Sid James, anchor of many "Carry On" movies.Hancock is the most disappointing. He bumbles around trying to act funny as a military band leader. He does have a few good moments, as when he tries to turn the march his band has been playing into a waltz.Sellers, on the other hand, is too restrained. Arguably the finest slapstick artist in movies since the silent era, Sellers' modus operandi is often to let characters and jokes develop slowly. In a 78-minute movie chock full of characters it seems unlikely a beginning movie actor in a supporting role would be allowed such latitude. His low-key performance can probably be chalked up to inexperience. It's too bad, because Sellers (still in his early, chunky period) can go high-octane.Sid James, perhaps because of his role as a flamboyant movie-maker, gives the film the charge it needs. He bustles through trying to steal every scene he's in, and mostly succeeding. From the moment he appears, every time he goes off-screen the movie starts to die.All three of these stars-to-be have significant if not above-title roles in "Orders are Orders." Their long-time fans may be disappointed, but it's worth seeing these young performers feeling their way to stardom that was waiting just around the corner.In all this, I have talked little about the film itself. There's not much to talk about. If it were not for the fact that three of its performers went on to major stardom, two on film and one on British television, this movie would probably never see the light of day. Fans of bad sci-fi might enjoy it for insight into the making of those pictures.Donald Pleasence and Eric Sykes have bit parts. Don't blink.

Jonas Skjøtt Military men marching pridefully and gloriously in the the morning sun, with delightful music played by the military orchestra, just getting ready to another hard working day at the army barracks, or are they? In the setting of the rising sun there is a big line of cars and trucks heading for the barracks, what are they doing here and who are they? The question is solved fast, and to the military mens big surprise its a film production company, who has planned to make a "big blockbuster" science fiction movie at the army barracks, but one commanding officer is distend to make it very difficult for the Hollywood film crew... and for then on, the movie just shows a cheap slice of comedy and a little bit of romance, and thats about it.What we do get out of this comedy is a thin storyline, and some decent funny characters, but not memorable. The funniest character is Peter Sellers, and he is probably the only one you will remember the most, when you have sat through this movie.One thing that was a little bit funny, was the movie they were filming in the movie, its funny because it looks like a Ed Wood production, very unimagined and just cheap. There is not one time where you believe its a making of a expensive science fiction movie, and just looking at the film crew playing "big time Hollywood stars" is so laughable... and by the way I have never seen a badder costume design for a Martian in a movie, since 'Ghidrah, the Three-Headed Monster' 1964, and that is pretty bad!See it if you are in a good laughing mood, if your sad its just sad to look at.