The Maltese Bippy

This curious filmic transplant of Rowan and Martin's "Laugh-In" is notable for being the first movie I've ever seen in a movie theater and the first one I recall seeing at all. I was five years old and my family was traveling in a rinkydink town in Minnesota (Duluth, if you're interested) and it was on the same day as Neil Armstrong and company's landing on the moon. The only scene I remember from the original viewing was the one in which Dan Rowan is under the impression that the foxy vampiress can transmogrify into a tiger and, consequently, acts strangely intimate with the tiger. A most strange movie, like the TV show, and worth seeing for sixties psychedelia buffs.

After watching Rown & Martins Laugh In I expected something better than this. There are a few humor touches but I really thought the scenes with Rowan & Martin doing stand-up including in the opening credits would have been better.

The plot such as it is is strange in that there are no vampires next door even though plot synopsis of the movie says there is. The center of the plot has to do with a large diamond everybody is looking for, yet at the end we are never quite sure if it was found or not.

Some major continuity moments happen when the film jumps from day to night suddenly & some of the scenes ending & the next one beginning make no sense either. This would have been better if they had stuck more to comedy & less with a plot that falls kind of flat.

This film does have some well known television folks. Carol Lynnely was better known for other films & isn't given much script in this. Julie Newmar is best known as a Catwoman on TVs Batman. Even though she is already 36 in this one, for many years she was ageless in the beauty department. She is the only cast member who worked with another comedy team Noonan & (Peter) Marshall during the 1950's.

Leon Askin is better known for Hogan's Heros roles. Robert Reed in a small supporting role is more known for Mr. Mike Brady.

For Rowan & Martin fans, this is OK. Both of them get to use Dick Martins line "I didn't know that!" The opening & closing of the film are bits of whimsy, but the rest is only sporadically funny. Say Good Night Dick.

This is essentially an updated Abbott and Costello film for 1969 with Rowan and Martin standing in for Bud and Lou. The plot has the boys wandering around a "haunted" house looking for hidden jewels while trying to remain alive and avoid "werewolves" and "vampires". Its a weird mix of comedy horror and mystery put together in a psychedelic blender. Its very much of the time, and of Laugh-In with the brand of humor that was a huge hit on TV interlaced into a murder mystery. Forgive me I have no idea how to explain this movie except that its a bunch of very good actors being very silly, I mean where else can you see Fritz Weaver channeling Bela Lugosi for giggles? The humor is uneven, with some of the jokes dating badly to the point that unless you lived in 1969 you won't get the joke. Its an odd film. I don't know if I can really recommend it, though if you like Laugh-In you stand a good shot at enjoying this 90 minute fluff ball. (though I do have to point out I grew to dislike Dan Rowan's character a great deal since he was much too mean spirited and sleazy for my tastes)

A number of people have commented negatively on this film, and also slam Rowan and Martin, Laugh-In, and the fact that this movie was made in 1969 and is therefore dated. I wonder why they bothered watching it.

I was but a toddler when Laugh-In was on, but I watched it with my older siblings. I've seen clips from it more recently, and yes, it is horribly dated now. So are bell bottoms, peace signs, and harvest gold appliances, but they were very popular at the time. People seem to have a hard time believing that something they really like today will ever look ridiculous, but it happens to every generation.

This movie is not particularly dated. Maybe 3 lines will go over your head if you have no knowledge of Sixties culture. This film is a silly spoof of monster/mystery films. Rowan and Martin act a lot like Hope and Crosby in their "Road" pictures, without any singing, and even speaking to the audience and acknowledging that they are in a movie. Every cliché from the aforementioned genres is skewered in this film, and I think it accomplishes everything it sets out to do.

You don't need to know anything about Laugh-In, Rowan & Martin, or the Sixties to enjoy this film. If you've ever enjoyed, or enjoyed groaning at, movies about werewolves, vampires, old houses, hidden treasures, and dead bodies appearing unexpectedly, you will get a laugh out of this movie. Personally, I watched it expecting the worst, and was very pleasantly surprised.

I liked a previous comment posted here that voiced the probable concerns of the studio "heads" of the era: What kind of films should we make for these kids who like to go to the movies stoned? The problem with BIPPY is...the stoners evidently were the ones MAKING the film (that NO ONE went to see). This dog was hardly ever shown on TV (at least not in NY area) FINALLY caught it on a cable movie channel decades and decades later.My only viewing of the film for years was the print feature that ran in FAMOUS MONSTERS magazine.

After years of build-up...boy what a let-down. There are only two reasons for a normal guy to sit through this; Julie Newmar (post-catwoman already) and Carol Lynley (pre-Poseidon Adventure).

I never understood the appeal of Rowan & Martin to begin with--even on Laugh-In. They were acceptable as low-end comedians at a bowling ally, but didn't deserve the run they were able to have IMHO

But they were OK...this movie makes like a vampire, though-and SUCKS