1. Welcome to SportsJournalists.com, a friendly forum for discussing all things sports and journalism.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register for a free account to get access to the following site features:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Access to private conversations with other members.
    • Fewer ads.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!

Last movie you watched......

Discussion in 'Anything goes' started by Jenny Jobs, Dec 29, 2008.

  1. typefitter

    typefitter Well-Known Member

    I think you're right, but I also think it's understandable. If you watch 1,000 movies a year from a critical perspective, and you watch a dozen movies a year for a good time, your expectations and, more important, your wants and needs, are going to be vastly different. I'm not necessarily looking to be challenged when I go to the cinema. I'm looking for a couple of pleasant hours in the dark.
     
    Deskgrunt50 likes this.
  2. Just the facts ma am

    Just the facts ma am Well-Known Member

    Mel Brooks' movies ranked:

    1. Young Frankenstein

    A perfect blend of satire and gags, this has to be in the top tier of all time comedy films. An all star comedy cast delivers the goods.

    2. Blazing Saddles

    The best known and most influential of his films because of the groundbreaking racial humor which is losing traction over time. First rate cast for the most part, (sorry Cleavon). Slim Pickens steals the show.

    3. High Anxiety

    This is an underappreciated gem. It has the perfect ensemble cast of Brooks, Harvey Korman, Cloris Leachman, Madeline Kahn not to mention Ron Carey (“I don’t got it”). The Hitchcock satire bumps it way up.

    4. Spaceballs

    The best production values but without his A list comedic cast. Some great gags here, including the cultural differences mocked in “combing the desert”.

    5. The Producers

    Famous satire and wit which has transcended the original film. I am guessing Mr. Brooks made a ton of money off of this, he deserved it.

    6. The History of the World Part I

    A lot of funny innuendo in this one. Gregory Hines stood out for me.

    7. Silent Movie

    'Nuff said

    8. Dracula, Dead and loving it.

    Leslie Nielsen makes this the best of the worst.

    9. Robin Hood, Men in Tights

    They should have let Dave Chappelle direct and write rather than give him his first acting job as “Achoo”.

    10. Life Stinks

    The only thing I remember is that they had a Richard Pryor movie with the same premise.
     
    Last edited: Nov 23, 2018
  3. Starman

    Starman Well-Known Member

    Cleavon only suffers (marginally) by theoretical comparison because he's not Richard Pryor.

    And IMO Pryor was too edgy to have delivered Sheriff Bart's lines with a wink and twinkle as Cleavon did.

    If Bart is bitter and vengeful, the crass racist lines out of the white characters fall flat. They're not funny.

    Maybe later in his career, the mellowed-out post-cleanup Pryor would have been a good Bart.

    But in the mercurial fiery early coke-stoked years of his stardom, he'd have made Bart too vicious and menacing.
     
    Last edited: Nov 23, 2018
  4. Alma

    Alma Well-Known Member

    Yes. But rarely has critical consensus been so...uniform...on so many movies. The range used to be wider. I think many critics have similar worldviews at this point.

    Music criticism is nearly a lost cause at this point, with critics purposely staking out esoteric territory that suits the interests of whatever trend exists at that moment.
     
  5. TigerVols

    TigerVols Well-Known Member

    Wait, movie critics still exist?
     
  6. typefitter

    typefitter Well-Known Member

    There's a good case to be made that music criticism harbours the worst writing on the planet. So much of it is fart sniffing.
     
  7. justgladtobehere

    justgladtobehere Well-Known Member

    What about the one about the Polish theater troupe before Germany invades in 1939? Is it 'To Be or Not to Be'?
     
  8. Just the facts ma am

    Just the facts ma am Well-Known Member

    I agree Cleavon is better in this part than Pryor would have been. He was essentially playing the cool, wise cracking, straight man, see Dean Martin. It's hard for me to go back in time and say who would be better, if anybody.
     
  9. Starman

    Starman Well-Known Member

    Yeah. In 85% of potential roles Pryor would be the pick. But in that one particular role at that particular time, Cleavon was perfect.

    It was kind of funny "Saddles" didn't boost Little's profile more than it did. Four or five years later, he was playing a minor role as a bit player on a "Rockford Files" episode -- a guy with five lines in the whole show.
     
    Last edited: Nov 24, 2018
  10. cyclingwriter2

    cyclingwriter2 Well-Known Member

    He just starred in it. It was a remake and directed by someone else.

    Also, he was the producer of the Elephant movie.
     
  11. Michael_ Gee

    Michael_ Gee Well-Known Member

    Brooks spoke at a screening of Blazing Saddles in Boston two years ago and said the reason they didn't cast Pryor was that they could get no insurance for the production if he'd been in the lead.
     
  12. Starman

    Starman Well-Known Member

    Right, Pryor's health habits and work-attendance habits weren't too good throughout the Seventies. But whether it was intentional or not, I think Brooks was better off with Cleavon Little as Bart.
    For instance, in the quicksand scene, can you imagine Bart as played by Richard Pryor just whacking Taggart in the head with the shovel -- as opposed to taking his head off?
     
Draft saved Draft deleted

Share This Page