Why wasn't this movie more popular in the U.S.?
-
NeoLeo — 22 years ago(February 28, 2004 05:29 PM)
That sounds like Hollywood to me, but you forgot the ubiquitous CGI effects.
That doesn't mean we all like them, though. We're just presented with little else to choose from.
Personally, I find Young Einstein to be 91 minutes of inspired lunacy. Is it silly? Of course it is, but don't we all need a little unadulterated silliness every so often?
"You came here in
that
? You're braver than I thought." -
northeastkc1 — 21 years ago(June 26, 2004 01:15 PM)
Please recall that I was simply quoting the statements of another. That said, I wouldn't actually say that the "ubiquitous CGI effects" were actually forgotten, they simply are the underpinnings of the three previously mentioned elements.
-
NeoLeo — 21 years ago(July 19, 2004 06:04 PM)
they simply are the underpinnings of the three previously mentioned elements.
Not necessarily. Have you seen The Phantom Menace and Attack of the Clones? Hollywood loves CGI for the sake of CGI. Just one more gimmic they can sell.
"You came here in
that
? You're braver than I thought." -
kstone2 — 22 years ago(March 06, 2004 10:04 AM)
I think this movie just requires an open mind. And that's pretty hard to come by in most American audiences.
Also, you have to think of cinema as an art form. Not everyone has the same tastes. This film is certainly a lot different than most movies I've seen. I guess that's why I liked it so much. -
TheSalmonOfDoubt — 22 years ago(March 21, 2004 06:58 PM)
Well - I actually thought this movie was awful
To the poster who stated this movie was above the head of the Mainstream American .. what are you on?
Call it personal taste or whatever you like - but it is quite possible to be sophisticated and still (and I know your gonna find this hard to believe)consider Yahoo Serious a complete one joke pillock. -
TheSalmonOfDoubt — 22 years ago(March 23, 2004 05:15 PM)
Ok - so your real position is that you like the movie cos it appeals to your tastes.
Let's leave sophistication out of the argument - personally I don't find this to be a sophisticated movie at all and actually forgive its shortcoming on the basis of that (totally misstated the whole premise behind the theory of realitivity) Sight Gags - of which it abounds - aren't generally considered the hall mark of the high brow .. really not seeing how being in anyway shape or form Sophisticated would allow you to enjoy this film anymore than simply taking it for what it is a few moments of nonsensical comedy grounded in pseudo science for the masses. -
theclarkone68 — 22 years ago(April 01, 2004 07:58 PM)
I stand by my earlier assertion that this movie probably does go over the heads of mainstream Americans,<<<<
Gee, could it not be liked because maybe, just maybe, it was simply a terrible movie? Nah, that can't be it because we're just too stupid to 'get it'. Sh!t, why do people always use suck weakass excuses like "it's too sophisticaed" or "they just don't get it" when people are trying to defend a terrible movie? Mainstream audiences aren't as stupid, lazy, uneducated, unsophisticated, etc as you think. Sure, they like terrible movies, but there's usually a reason for that whether it be because the characters are engaging/charismatic, special effects, they can identify with with the movie, nonstop action, etc. I thought this movie was full of dry, lifeless humor from unengaging characters in situations I didn't give one sh!t about. -
Bitter_Almonds — 20 years ago(August 04, 2005 01:06 PM)
I sort of liked the movie back in the late 80s, but most of the proponents of this movie are making me think otherwise. I don't get how lambasting American movie-goers can be construed as an informed/intelligent opinion for how good or funny a movie is, but maybe that's 'cause I live in the US
Do The Mussolini! Headkick! -
theclarkone68 — 20 years ago(January 06, 2006 07:10 PM)
I'm not trying to propose Mr. Serious as a latter-day Picasso, but simply suggesting that naive work can cloak a very sophisticated mentality.
Isn't it funny how some people have to invent excuses as to why this movie wasn't terrible? You can dress the movie up all you want, but that still doesn't make it good. This movie is barely more sophisticated than
Bio-Dome
.
Nothing's too good for the man who shot Liberty Valance. -
Dengar — 21 years ago(April 19, 2004 09:31 PM)
I agree wholeheartedly with Momoro, in every way. I am an avid film watcher (and involved in the business), and rate this film right up there in my top 10, along with The Godfather trilogy and Citizen Kane. Now let's be realistic, in that comedy is the most subjective to taste, so I don't expect people to "get" or "not get" the film. Comedy aside, I think the technical achievements it offers, including art-direction, casting, acting, and soundtrack all merit much attention, whether one enjoys slapstick or not.
-
bingeboi — 21 years ago(June 26, 2004 01:54 PM)
Citizen Kane is an unwatchable piece of crap that everyone is to afraid to speak truly about. The Godfather films are only really interesting in that the Corleone family is a bunch of lawless criminals and most "Americans" are morbidly fascinated by their story. You "industry types" are alway talking about technical achievements or "dramatic sophistry". Point is that you would not understand what we Americans like in movies because we have so many choices, if we choose to exercise them. Unfortunately all to many of us do not. Before you start spewing your prejudices on here again come to America and see what we are really like. We can watch all sorts of films foreign or domestic, and I at least chooose which movies I like by watching them, not by who directed them. Even the best directors make mistakes, and so on down the totem pole.
Young Einstein is a funny entertainig film, but it does NOT have half the talent or technical achievements, dramatic sophistry, that the Lord of the Rings contains. J.R.R. Tolkien should have been American!!
Peter Jackson in collaboration with George Romero, the best movie of all time would be created.
"The Realm of Sauron is ended forever"
When there's no more room in Hell, The Dead will walk the Earth" -
lgattell — 21 years ago(July 18, 2004 10:44 AM)
Although i have rather enjoyed reading your various opinions about the movie in question I don't think peoples personal tastes are the major factor in why this movie did/does not rate that well with americans.
Being a low budget australian movie it did/does not get the "air time" for people in the US to be aware of it.(Already stated by some of our American friends)
True it is not for all tastes but name a film that is, im willing to bet that if someone were to put up the capital to get this film "out there" and in peoples faces in the US it would have the same appeal it does anywhere else in the world.
What im trying to say is although people of the same "race" may have certian common beliefs at the end of the day were all humans and were all individuals.
Some poeple like apples and others like oranges and thats all there is to it. -
fuzzipuao — 21 years ago(July 27, 2004 10:23 PM)
And some prefer bannanas.
I think this movie has cult potential just because it is a fun, silly movie. I think Yahoo Serious was going for the Einstein who stuck his tongue out at the world. He did a wonderful job! And the sound track is amazing.
I wouldn't even put it in the same catagory as LOTR movies, none of which I have seen, nor am interested in seeing. This does not put down the amazing work done on those movies, just says that I don't like fantasy that takes itself too seriously. Give me silly fun any time! -
tpnance — 21 years ago(August 23, 2004 06:18 AM)
I so agree. I loved this movie along with the movie "Reckless Kelly". It is pure silliness and loads of laugh of loud fun. The only films to be compared to this of only films of this category. I rank the film out there with "Cry-Baby", also that film didnt make it to box offices here in the states where i live. But is so funny and that is all it is ment to be.
