What is it you hate about 1941
-
kurt-2000 — 12 years ago(May 21, 2013 08:47 PM)
The people who don't like it are just little bitches. This is a perfectly good film. Even people that I've met who are a part of mainstream society enjoy this film. The critics in these IBDb boards need to get a Kotex and go to bed.
-
DD-931 — 12 years ago(December 07, 2013 08:01 PM)
This isn't a particularly bad film, and I have a certain fondness for it (John William's score is great, actually). But sometimes the movie was too desperate, as if it was shrilling proclaiming, "This is FUNNY! You must LAUGH!" Whenever a movie does that, the last thing I'm going to do is laugh. Sounds like I'm not the only one who felt that way.
-
Squeeth2 — 12 years ago(December 09, 2013 09:57 AM)
It was on last night here. I agree, far from a bad film but a curate's egg to watch. I really like the get in the back of the tank gag though ;O)
Marlon, Claudia and Dimby the cats 1989-2005, 2007 and 2010. -
discowhale — 11 years ago(June 01, 2014 03:13 PM)
I gave this flick 45 minutes, WAITING for it to get better. It just wasn't funny.
Belushi chasing the plane, shooting into the air? He LOOKED like HE couldn't believe he was doing it.
And every scene was just, that, contrived.
Zemeckis, Gale and Milius ARE good at what they do. But, trying to write for that crowd, back then, they missed the target. -
beresfordjd — 11 years ago(July 06, 2014 05:17 AM)
The SNL crew are among the least funny actors I ever saw. Their schtick just does not travel beyond the US in my opinion. I dislike most of the output of people like Dan Ackroyd, John Belushi, John Candy,Will Ferrell and my list goes on and on. Even Steve Martin is uneven in his output.
1941 is, put simply, boring and unamusing. I find it incredible that a filmmaker as great as Spielberg could not make a credible comedy. You can see a great deal of money was spent on it but expense does not translate into funny. -
darkzero — 11 years ago(August 06, 2014 10:59 AM)
The SNL crew are among the least funny actors I ever saw. Their schtick just does not travel beyond the US in my opinion.
An ironic statement, considering that "1941" was received much more warmly abroad than it was in the states.
Originality needs a reboot. -
darkzero — 11 years ago(August 01, 2014 03:26 PM)
It's entertaining, and I love the visuals, but most of the humor is sorely misfired. There is an over-reliance on slapstick and obvious sexual innuendo. The humor is at its best when it is deadpan.
Zemeckis and Gale's original script was supposed to be more of a dark satire. I think the film would have been much funnier had Spielberg chosen this route. (Think the same tone as "An American Werewolf in London".)
Originality needs a reboot. -
twhiteson — 10 years ago(April 19, 2015 05:48 PM)
As few others have mentioned, it was Spielberg's attempt to make his own screwball/madcap comedy similar to "It's a Mad, Mad, Mad World" and other big budget comedies from the mid-1960's that featured large all-star casts and lots and lots of yelling. Essentially, he was trying to make a comedy similar to ones that he grew-up loving. However, it didn't work.
Instead "1941" turned-out to be an overlong mess that tries WAY too hard to generate the few laughs it does and with a sense of humor that came across as dated in the post-"Animal House" world of 1979. Even Spielberg refers to "1941" as his "unfunny comedy." Yes, it's a spectacle and, at times, it's an amusing one, but it fails at being a "gut buster."
Another big problem was the casting of Bobby Di Cicco and Dianne Kay as the two "leads." Who? Good question. It was a good question in 1979, too. Yes, Dianne Kay was gorgeous, but she wasn't a comedic actress. -
jmillerdp — 10 years ago(June 07, 2015 03:02 AM)
Apparently, Spielberg and Zemeckis think it's hilarious! to have a "comedy" mocking Californians who would understandably be scared after the Japanese attack on Pearl Harbor.
Would Spielberg think that it would also have been hilarious! to have a comedy mocking New Yorkers who were understandably scared after the Muslim attacks of 9/11?
As out of it as Spielberg is, I am guessing so. Many of his fellow Jews ranged from confused to horrified when he used Nazis as cartoon villains in the Indiana Jones movies.
Maybe "Schindler's List" was Spielberg's way of trying to regain credibility among his fellow Jews. But, here with "1941," he's clearly oblivious.
I. Drink. Your. Milkshake! [slurp!] I DRINK IT UP! - Daniel Plainview - There Will Be Blood -
Mickyfinn — 10 years ago(June 08, 2015 11:22 AM)
Not the same thing. Hawaii is over 2500 miles from California. And the Pearl Harbor attack was 38 years before the film. Those are big distances in miles and time.
You just have to be resigned-
You're crashing by design -
jmillerdp — 10 years ago(June 09, 2015 03:13 PM)
Psychologically, they are quite similar. Californians could certainly have suspected they were the next targets, and the Japanese could be there any moment.
I. Drink. Your. Milkshake! [slurp!] I DRINK IT UP! - Daniel Plainview - There Will Be Blood -
Mickyfinn — 10 years ago(June 10, 2015 06:16 AM)
I think you were criticizing the tastefulness (for want of a better word) of the comedy. I am saying that time (30 some years) diminishes that. Comedians are presently talking about 9/11 all the time. How long was it after when that photoshopped "tourist" at the top of one of the towers appeared?
Beside that, the humor is so over the top - I don't see how you can go anywhere into a serious conversation about anything.
1941 is a disjointed, irreverent, goofy, fast paced, and very funny wild ride. That's it.
You just have to be resigned-
You're crashing by design -
kvnbhovis — 10 years ago(June 13, 2015 01:53 AM)
It is not very funny. There were some jokes that made me crack a smile but nothing that really made me laugh. The plot was thin and there was no character other than Stack that I really cared about. Also, some of the direction is a bit sloppy. Case in point, Murray Hamilton and Eddie Deesen switch places on the ferris wheel. I don't hate it but it is a disappointment. There are some good things about it. The special effects and cinematography is excellent.