(Review originally written at 24 June 2010)
This is one lame comedy, that above all things is also extremely poorly made. Saving grace of the movie was Mel Brooks, that still kept the movie somewhat watchable and provided the movie with basically its only fun moments.
The jokes, the pacing, the story, the acting, the directing, the editing, the camera-work, the music, it's all absolutely horrendous. Still I'm glad that I did not quit watching after 10 minutes, though the majority of people will still most likely do. It's that lame. But let me tell you that from the moment Mel Brooks shows up the movie suddenly turns into a far better one. It amazed me that Mel Brooks at that age could still be that funny and was capable of carrying and lifting a comedy to greater heights. He was of course given the same material as every other actor in this movie to work with but yet he is the only one that managed to make it funny. Guess if you would read the script you could say that this is a typical Mel Brooks movie, like the ones he used to direct early on in his career but this movie shows that not just everybody is capable of handling this material and turn it into a funny, lame, simplistic comedy, that Mel Brooks always was a master at.
The movie is directed by Ezio Greggio, who also plays the main lead. Guess you could say that he's being somewhat of an Italian version of Mel Brooks, with the exception that he hasn't made any great classic comedies and just isn't that great and likable as a comedy actor. He's a close friend to Mel Brooks, which explains why all of his movies are like the movies Mel Brooks used to make. They had worked together before on the Mel Brooks directed movie "Dracula: Dead and Loving It", in which he appeared in as an actor, for a small bit part.
This movie still gives you the feeling that it could had worked out. I mean, the concept really isn't that bad for a type of comedy like this one and they could had done far more and better things with it. If only Mel Brooks would had directed this, about 30 years ago, imaging how great this movie probably would had been.
The movie now instead is just lame, lame and lame. Totally not funny. The jokes often don't work out due to its bad pacing, set-up and just overall execution. The editing truly helps to make it all, all the more horrible. its story is extremely poor and filled with holes and things that simply don't make any sense. The movie makes some horrible choices with the way it's heading to with its story. If it wasn't for Mel Brooks, this movie would had been totally unwatchable.
4/10
This is one lame comedy, that above all things is also extremely poorly made. Saving grace of the movie was Mel Brooks, that still kept the movie somewhat watchable and provided the movie with basically its only fun moments.
The jokes, the pacing, the story, the acting, the directing, the editing, the camera-work, the music, it's all absolutely horrendous. Still I'm glad that I did not quit watching after 10 minutes, though the majority of people will still most likely do. It's that lame. But let me tell you that from the moment Mel Brooks shows up the movie suddenly turns into a far better one. It amazed me that Mel Brooks at that age could still be that funny and was capable of carrying and lifting a comedy to greater heights. He was of course given the same material as every other actor in this movie to work with but yet he is the only one that managed to make it funny. Guess if you would read the script you could say that this is a typical Mel Brooks movie, like the ones he used to direct early on in his career but this movie shows that not just everybody is capable of handling this material and turn it into a funny, lame, simplistic comedy, that Mel Brooks always was a master at.
The movie is directed by Ezio Greggio, who also plays the main lead. Guess you could say that he's being somewhat of an Italian version of Mel Brooks, with the exception that he hasn't made any great classic comedies and just isn't that great and likable as a comedy actor. He's a close friend to Mel Brooks, which explains why all of his movies are like the movies Mel Brooks used to make. They had worked together before on the Mel Brooks directed movie "Dracula: Dead and Loving It", in which he appeared in as an actor, for a small bit part.
This movie still gives you the feeling that it could had worked out. I mean, the concept really isn't that bad for a type of comedy like this one and they could had done far more and better things with it. If only Mel Brooks would had directed this, about 30 years ago, imaging how great this movie probably would had been.
The movie now instead is just lame, lame and lame. Totally not funny. The jokes often don't work out due to its bad pacing, set-up and just overall execution. The editing truly helps to make it all, all the more horrible. its story is extremely poor and filled with holes and things that simply don't make any sense. The movie makes some horrible choices with the way it's heading to with its story. If it wasn't for Mel Brooks, this movie would had been totally unwatchable.
4/10
No comments: