|
Re: The 8th Annual Criterion Collection Challenge Discussion Thread
Originally Posted by Trevor
(Post 12912235)
And speaking of humor, and I'm sure unpopular dissent, Mel Brooks' films stink in my opinion. Young Frankenstein is good, but everything else I've seen by him is bad to mediocre at best. But then humor is very hit or miss for me. Comedy is perhaps my second most represented genre, but I guess it's limited to a few very specific types of humor; Monty Python, the Muppets, Adult Swim, MST3K. Most mainstream sitcoms and comedies just don't float my boat.
I had the good fortune to see Young Frankenstein shortly after seeing Frankenstein, The Bride of Frankenstein, and Son of Frankenstein (WNET regularly did a horror movie marathon on Halloween), so that I even recognized some shots from those films copied in Young Frankenstein, which is rare for me. If you can, your best bet is to begin with The Producers (if you've seen it, can't watch it too many times). It's a rare example of a totally original (as far as I know) Mel Brooks movie. I think that the main problem with most of Brooks' films is that they are parodies, and he is content with silly jokes about genre conventions. I don't understand the love for Blazing Saddles, which for me had only one scene of real worth, Cleavon Little holding himself hostage. The townspeople freely used the word which must not be spoken, and the discordance between the racism apparent in their language and the conventional sentiment that they are expressing makes a real point in a movie that is otherwise mostly mocking a dead genre. Gene Wilder, Cleavon Little, Harvey Korman and perhaps a few others did brilliant work, but in service of a minor concept. High Anxiety tries to do to Hitchcock what Young Frankenstein does to Frankenstein, but is much less successful. It's been a long time since I've seen it, but my recollection is that I found The Twelve Chairs the third most enjoyable of Brooks' movies, probably because it wasn't a parody, and was quite manic. I haven't seen most of his other movies, because the idea of something like a parody of Robin Hood movies seems like killing a fly with an atomic bomb. The other problem that I have with Brooks is the Yiddishisms. He thinks that he is being hilarious, but if, like me and presumably most of his audience, you know at best ten Yiddish words, he is being deliberately obscure. I have read that blucher means glue in Yiddish, so that is the joke of the reaction of the horses to Frau Blücher's name in Young Frankenstein, but if I knew that at the time that I was watching the movie at best it would have earned the smallest of smiles. I would recommend My Favorite Year, which Brooks produced. Benjy Stone is supposed to be based on the young Mel Brooks working on Your Show of Shows. He is sweet, as is his romance with Jessica Harper, and Peter O'Toole is touching as Alan Swann (Errol Flynn). Sometimes I think Robin Hood: Men in Tights might be worth watching because of this connection to Brooks' youth, but then I think probably not, based on the reviews that I read when it came out. |
Re: The 8th Annual Criterion Collection Challenge Discussion Thread
Originally Posted by ororama
(Post 12912529)
The other problem that I have with Brooks is the Yiddishisms. He thinks that he is being hilarious, but if, like me and presumably most of his audience, you know at best ten Yiddish words, he is being deliberately obscure. I have read that blucher means glue in Yiddish, so that is the joke of the reaction of the horses to Frau Blücher's name in Young Frankenstein, but if I knew that at the time that I was watching the movie at best it would have earned the smallest of smiles.
In a interview, Wilder had this to say about the name: When I was writing the first draft, I said, 'I wonder if anybody would get it when someone said "Frau Blücher" and the horses neigh.' Mel (Brooks) said, 'Keep it in.' Well, the audience loved it in the previews. Actually, I chose the name because I wanted an authentic German name. I took out some of the books I had of the letters to and from Sigmund Freud. I saw someone named Blücher had written to him, and I said well that's the name. |
Re: The 8th Annual Criterion Collection Challenge Discussion Thread
Watched a lot of good - almost-all new - films this year. Highlights include:
Tie Me Up! Tie Me Down! The Exterminating Angel Simon of the Desert In the Realm of the Senses Il Sorpasso Juliet of the Spirits The Rules of the Game Harakiri The Player Le Grand Amour Zatoichi 1 8 1/2 Ali: Fear Eats the Soul The Hidden Fortress Corridor of Blood The Haunted Strangler Top three is tough, but top five would probably Harakiri, Le Grand Amour, Ali, Juliet of the Spirits and 8 1/2. And Zatoichi. And The Exterminating Angel... |
Re: The 8th Annual Criterion Collection Challenge Discussion Thread
Originally Posted by Ash Ketchum
(Post 12912118)
First time?! Wow. What was it like for you? I watched ISLAND OF LOST SOULS for a horror challenge a few years ago for the first time in decades and I loved it. I even went and bought the Criterion disc and rewatched it for a Criterion challenge.
Originally Posted by Trevor
(Post 12912235)
I'll be the voice of dissent and say that I have loved The Graduate each of the few times I've seen it, and none of those viewings were back in its day. That sort of tone and humor just works for me.
Originally Posted by Trevor
(Post 12912235)
And speaking of humor, and I'm sure unpopular dissent, Mel Brooks' films stink in my opinion. Young Frankenstein is good, but everything else I've seen by him is bad to mediocre at best. But then humor is very hit or miss for me. Comedy is perhaps my second most represented genre, but I guess it's limited to a few very specific types of humor; Monty Python, the Muppets, Adult Swim, MST3K. Most mainstream sitcoms and comedies just don't float my boat.
Originally Posted by BobO'Link
(Post 12912287)
Many disagree but I'd put The Twelve Chairs and his remake of To Be or Not To Be (although the Ernst Lubitsch version with Carol Lombard and Jack Benney is better) in the group of his best works. Add Blazing Saddles and you have the Brooks films I watch regularly.
|
Re: The 8th Annual Criterion Collection Challenge Discussion Thread
The new streaming service is going to be $10.99 but there's also a free two week trial. Unlike Hulu, they'll have extras like the commentary from Silence of the Lambs
http://www.filmstruck.com/?utm_sourc...ent=newsletter |
Re: The 8th Annual Criterion Collection Challenge Discussion Thread
Originally Posted by The Man with the Golden Doujinshi
(Post 12916437)
The new streaming service is going to be $10.99 but there's also a free two week trial. Unlike Hulu, they'll have extras like the commentary from Silence of the Lambs
http://www.filmstruck.com/?utm_sourc...ent=newsletter I'm curious about whether the basic service will still have extras.. |
Re: The 8th Annual Criterion Collection Challenge Discussion Thread
I was kinda figuring the price for FilmStruck with the Criterion channel would be $18-$20 so I was very pleasantly surprised with the $10.99/month and especially the $99.99/year price. I still have a large backlog of Criterion discs to watch, but I will subscribe.
|
Re: The 8th Annual Criterion Collection Challenge Discussion Thread
With over 600 Criterions, at least half unopened, I couldn't live with myself if I subscribed, even if it was $1.
|
Re: The 8th Annual Criterion Collection Challenge Discussion Thread
Originally Posted by davidh777
(Post 12916163)
I liked it quite a bit, hokey makeup aside. :) For all the 1930s musicals I've watched, the horror of the era is a bit of a void for me. I've been trying to catch up on the Universal monster classics, at least.
|
Re: The 8th Annual Criterion Collection Challenge Discussion Thread
iTunes has 100 Criterion titles on sale for $9.99 apiece right now!
$9.99: Bestsellers $9.99: Essentials $9.99: Zatoichi - The Blind Swordsman $9.99: More to Explore |
| All times are GMT -5. The time now is 05:19 PM. |
Copyright © 2026 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.