MovieChat Forums > Brewster's Millions (1985) Discussion > Outdated or Unfunny??

Outdated or Unfunny??

posted 17 years ago by o1977jp
35 replies | jump to latest

Just watched this for the first time last night. Had high hopes for it but didn't laugh once. Actually, I did laugh once, at the beginning when Montgomery said "How can I concentrate when there's a god damn train going through the outfield?"

I feel that the movie portrayed what a real person would do in that situation. There was really no comedy to the story or to the acting, other than people thinking Montgomery was nuts (which was humorous for about 3 minutes). Even John Candy, who is usually very funny, really had no funny bits in the film, and couldn't really "flex his muscles" with the role he was given. Seems almost like a waste of time for two of the top comedians of 1985.

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.

Does anyone really think this is a laugh-out-loud funny movie, or just more of a humorous situation?

[–] RobBase086-1 14 years ago

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 14 years ago

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

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 I think the OP was asking if he thought the humor was outdated.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!"

[–] wiiztec 13 years ago

I just finished watching this for the first time a half hour ago and there were several moments that I laughed out loud at

[–] rob599999 13 years ago

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.

[–] Phil_Cassidy 13 years ago

Neither.

[–] 13tongimp 13 years ago

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

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

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.

[–] emuri99198 10 years ago

Just a humorous situation, but I find the whole movie more confusing than funny.

[–] Prismark10 10 years ago

The film rather failed as s comedy but it was still an enjoyable film.
Its that man again!!