Outdated or Unfunny??
-
enfilmigult — 17 years ago(March 17, 2009 05:46 AM)
I'm guessing this was considered funnier back in the 80s. I feel like the comedy of today has a totally different edge to it, and I guess I've gotten lost in it.
No, this wasn't very well liked when it first came out, either. It's a pleasant movie full of nice people, but it was never very funny. The 80s have done better for movie comedy, believe me. -
willydoe71 — 16 years ago(June 07, 2009 08:14 AM)
Like RockytheBear pointed out, this movie wasn't laugh out loud funny, but it was very humorous and extremely entertaining. The scene of John Candy walking in, all pimped out, after he said the money wouldn't change him was absolutely hilarious. To date, this is still one of my all-time favorite movies.
-
puschit-1 — 16 years ago(July 31, 2009 04:13 AM)
Maybe it just isn't meant to be an all-out comedy!? It's also a story about rich vs. poor, about the power of money and what great amounts of it can do to you and of course it was a story about friendship and the things in life that are really important.
The story itself is timeless and thus can't ever be "outdated". In fact this is about the 4th or 5th remake, the original being a silent movie from 1914! -
flashpenguin86 — 16 years ago(January 09, 2010 06:35 AM)
The message of the movie is: "To be careful what you wish for because it might come true!" and "In the end, the best and only friend you can rely on is yourself".
I havent seen the movie in years, but it still stays with me. I dont think it was supposed to be a slap-stick, but a touching and endearing film about finding oneself. I thought it was well acted and Pryor and Candy definitely hit it off.
I hope you gave it another try.
House: Hey I can be a jerk to people I haven't slept with. I am that good. -
kedrell — 15 years ago(December 06, 2010 01:06 PM)
1914? Even that was just an adaption of the original 1902 book of the same name. In the book, he has a year to blow the money(1 million there to get 7 million) but he not only can't tell anyone WHY he has to spend it, but he can't even just tell anyone that he's trying to spend it all away without the WHY. He basically has to keep the entire thing a secret.
-
rickb69 — 12 years ago(October 17, 2013 04:50 AM)
I don't think the 1902 book was to spend $1million to get $7million. The 1945 movie version was $1million to get $7 million. I don't think there were millionaires in 1902, maybe there were but, that would be like a BILLIONAIRE by today's standards.
Charles Chaplin Making a Living (1914) $150/week -
matt-whittall — 15 years ago(June 25, 2010 11:24 PM)
its one of my fav pryor movies, i mean the part where he first meets ms drakes fiance and they leave, and he goes, "now that was a real beep or something to that effect. perfect comedic timing.
now close your eyes and picture this mesopotamia meets busby berkeley.
ITS A KNOCKOUT!
i mean come on thats just plain funny. -
dboone1025 — 15 years ago(August 07, 2010 02:55 AM)
It's not laugh out loud funny, but its a good character movie.
"America, what a country, love it!" Haha. Between the cab driver, mrs drake, the crooked lawyers, rupert horn. Pryor wasn't hysterical, but he gave good energy. Stephen Collins. Jerry Orbach. I think the characters save the movie from complete disaster.
I can quote this movie, more than other 80's flicks. I think morty king, king of the mimics was hysterical. Luther. The movie is sort of a case study in who you run into if you make a lot of money. The accountant. He was pretty funny.
A lot of little people and situations that add up to make it funny.
The way he spent the money was pretty good, like the stamp. Also the music, and soundtrack were good. A solid 6/10. -
RobBase086-1 — 15 years ago(January 28, 2011 10:51 PM)
This movie is still comical to watch in my opinion and I watched it the other night for the first time in years! I cannot remember the last time I saw this on cable TV. That might have been back in the lat 80's I believe when FOX use to show movies like this in the weekend afternoon matinee. Now all they want to show is other crap on there. I mean they still show movies but nothing like this though.
Dedicated to USA UP ALL NIGHT and the fans!
www.usaupallnight.webs.com/ -
WarpedRecord — 15 years ago(February 02, 2011 11:49 AM)
This movie has been remade so many times that it was bound to run out of steam sooner or later. This feels like a '40s film more than an '80s film. Really, it originated much earlier. Still, the cast is very pleasant, and I was never bored though I chuckled only once or twice. 6/10 stars.
-
mcfly-31 — 14 years ago(June 01, 2011 01:15 PM)
There's no way a story of inheriting money and being forced to spend it to inherit more could ever get stale. I think the OP was asking if he thought the humor was outdated. I don't even know if it was current when it came out. The humor in the film is more of a preference for whoever is watching it. As Dboone mentioned, there's a lot of smaller roles that get big laughs (for me, anyway). Rick Moranis' mimic guy ("Spike, choke this guy!"), the pissed off bookey, smart-ass photographer, Spike's consternation at everything ("Chuck Fleming??!!!"), Collins as the kiss ass yuppie ("You think I came down with the last drop of rain" is still a line I use to this day). Pryor's energy level is probably the best it is in any of his films.
Most of all, just the premise makes it a classic for me. For a light comedy to actually draw you in to the conditions, stipulations, and pitfalls of ending up in this situation, is unheard of. So, no, the actual laughs in this film are not why I've always loved it. How much humor can you derive out of a spending situation (you're sort of shoehorned into one kind of joke)?. You'd need the non-sequitirs of the random characters (iceberg guy, Moranis, Orbach's crotchety manager).
"If I had ya where I wanted ya, they'd be pumpin your ass full of formaldehyde!" -
rob599999 — 14 years ago(December 25, 2011 04:22 AM)
It is a shame that you feel this film was no good just because it didn't have many funny parts to it. I too never found it all that funny but I did love it, it was a great story line and good to watch. Does a film have to be funny for it to be good?
I don't know if you are from England or not but people said the same thing of a classic episode of Only Fools and Horses - To Hull and Back. Some people moaned it was not good as it wasn't funny, but it was just a brilliant storyline and it is a shame they cannot see that.
] — 2 years ago(February 16, 2024 12:24 AM)