Both definitive Mel Brooks classics, both released the same year. Which movie do you guys prefer, and why?
Do NOT open this door...
Open this door... you rotten sonsabitches open the door!!!!
I love both, but my mood and what I'm doing determines which one I watch.
shareI think YF is more timeless. It never seems like a 70's movie probably because it's straight humor as opposed to social commentary. BS is obviously a 70's movie by style and topic. As we all know it couldn't be made today, which is quite a hypocritic ( not ironic) stamen about our modern world.
That being said I enjoy YF more.
Though Gene Wilder is in both pictures, I think he did Blazing Saddles rather as a favor to Mel Brooks when a couple of other actors fell through -- Dan Dailey and Gig Young(Young tried to play the role but was felled by his alcoholism.) I don't think Wilder contributed much to the Blazing Saddles script.
But the Young Frankenstein script -- and Wilder's role AS Young Frankenstein -- had a lot of Wilder's own writing in it, I think.
Thus, Young Frankenstein feels more like a "Gene Wilder movie" than a Mel Brooks movie -- later Wilder films like Sherlock Holmes Smarter Brother and The World's Greatest Lover would follow its tone -- and "Blazing Saddles" felt more like Brooks(with a heavy dose of Richard Pryor in the script.)
I think Young Frankenstein is the better movie...but Blazing Saddles is the funnier one, more harsh and sexual.
Interesting to me: Though Mel Brooks won an Oscar for his screenplay of "The Producers" in 1968, it was a long 6 years(and only one movie, "The Twelve Chairs") to Brook's big "one-two punch of 1974" with Blazing Saddles and Young Frankenstein in the same year.
But that same year was: 1974. The very next year -- 1975 -- brought the debut of Saturday Night Live and a sudden influx of new comic actors, writers and filmmakers -- Chevy Chase , John Belushi, Bill Murray, Dan Ackroyd, Gilda Radner and Steve Martin(guest host) among them -- and suddenly Mel Brooks' style of humor looked too much like "old fashioned Borscht Belt vaudeville." Brooks next films -- "Silent Movie"(saved by big star cameos) and High Anxiety(a Hitchcock spoof that was too silly to score; with no Gene Wilder in it) were "old hat" and soon Brooks was over as a major comedy force, despite still managing to make "History of the World" and "Spaceballs" later on.
Personal note in passing: I lived in LA in the 70's and got to "interact with the stars" sometimes at Hollywood events, just as a regular civilian. There were movie premieres and seminars, etc.
In February of 1974, I read of a premiere of Blazing Saddles; I went into the movie theater early and saw whatever was playing, stayed in my seat until the premiere started. In a row in front of me sat Brooks, Wilder, Madeleine Kahn -- at least.
In December of 1974, I read of a premiere of Young Frankenstein, at the SAME movie theater.(The Avco in Westwood.) I again went into the movie theater early and saw whatever was playing(I think it was Jon Voight in The Odessa File) and again stayed in my seat until the premiere started. There they were again -- Brooks, Wilder, Kahn.
Needless to say, both premieres had a lot of "positive audience reaction" and standing O's for the cast members present.
A nice 70's memory.
Oh I like both. It's really hard to say which is better, because they're both good.
shareI prefer Young Frankenstein. Both are very good though. "More beans, Mr. Taggart?" I'm not a fart joke enthusiast, but that takes the cake. I also love The Producers, History of the World, Part I and High Anxiety. He was also great in Curb Your Enthusiasm.
shareI love both but I prefer Young Frankenstein.
share