Outdated or Unfunny??
-
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 I think the OP was asking if he thought the humor was outdated.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. -
13tongimp — 13 years ago(May 19, 2012 09:35 PM)
It isn't outdated and it is absolutely not unfunny. It isn't a lol a minute type of movie but it has a ton of charm and the two leads (Pryor & Candy) seem to be just having a ton of fun with their roles. There is something so endearing about the movie that makes you just smile and that is more than enough for me. I have fond memories of watching this on HBO back in the 80's and just watched it recently. It still holds up for all the same reasons as far as I'm concerned.
http://www.13tongimp.com/
http://omegafutureworld.blogspot.com/ -
AussieEighties — 12 years ago(May 29, 2013 09:48 PM)
It's a little bit of both. Unfunny for me but also outdated.
I love 80s comedies usually but couldn't get into this one. The problem is that they have an interesting idea/story for a movie like this but there's no comedy or comedic moments surrounding it. the 80s had some pretty out there ideas, unique ones which is what I love most about 80s movies but this ain't all that special.
it's outdated because if it were made and released today, it wouldn't attract audiences. the 80s however all these types of movies they had were new and unique, and the people back then were probably more entertained by such ideas like this. it's a simple story, but not engaging.
I was quite surprised this has more then a 6 outta 10 on Imdb actually. -
Pilgrim07 — 11 years ago(April 26, 2014 10:41 PM)
I was around when it was released - your reaction was the general reaction of audiences in '85 - it was a dud. This was the first Pryor film from 1976 onward where I felt it wasn't worth watching for Pryor alone - it was the first time I felt Pryor was truly weighed down by the flatness of the material.
-
bbally81 — 11 years ago(January 18, 2015 10:21 AM)
I've seen this film once a long time ago I remember enjoying it although not finding laugh out loud funny, but it does have a quote that I enjoy to use whenever there'a political election between 2 candidates I don't support I go "None of the above", love that line.
-
Intothenightalone — 10 years ago(December 24, 2015 09:02 PM)
I don't think this movie has punchlines or zingers, so it's more of a whacky roller coast ride story-type.
I found it funny when the photographer tells him that his job isn't to interpret reality.
I found it funny when the taxi driver says "America, what a country".
I found it funny when the posh guy in the hotel suddenly changes his mind with the big offer of money.
I found it funny how the guy who hits him plays along and gets a check, waving as he gets back in his car.
As for it being outdated, I enjoy seeing 1980s America, especially new york city. -