Neighbors

not a mainstream comedy by any means This movie fails on nearly every front but has 2 things going for it, the cast, its an almost forgotten piece of Ackroyd and Belushi in their prime, secondly its off kilter pace and atmosphere, these alone are enough to give it a place in my collection.

If your not into either of the above then give this a wide berth as its sure to disappoint. apparently the film had a difficult gestation and this seems plausible as its very inconsistent and aimless at times, shifting gear unexpectedly. an eclectic and patchy dark comedy it should suit die hard fans who want to see more of A&B

As is evident from the many split decisions to be found on this site, "Neighbors" is not everyone's cup of tea. However, for those who have a taste for dark comedy, it is quite a good film. As has been stated numerous times, this film was a critical and box-office failure, and there were many tensions between Belushi and the director on set. Despite this turmoil, or maybe because of it, "Neighbors" has an authentically skewed, uncomfortable tone. This works in it's favor, however, considering the subject matter. As does the casting of Aykroyd and Belushi in the roles of tormentor and victim, respectively. This choice is probably most responsible for some's dislike of the film. Unfortunately, Belushi, near the end of his life, was being pigeon-holed as a crass, boorish "wild man" of comedy, mostly due to his turns in "National Lampoon's Animal House" and "1941." However, he was a fine comedic actor capable of great subtlety and fine nuance, which is why he consciously chose the role he did (the film was originally conceived with John in the role of Vic). This film and many scenes from his first year on "Saturday Night Live" grandly illustrate his range. Likewise, Dan Aykroyd was quite an intense performer back then - in many "SNL" scenes (again, mostly from the first year), Aykroyd paraded out a variety of high-strung bizarre characters which practically vibrated with energy... indeed, though he did not end up playing it, the role of "D-Day" in "Animal House" was conceived with Dan in mind. Here, he really gets to cut loose and, as always, his and John's interplay are priceless. Not to be overlooked is the incredibly hot Cathy Moriarty who, not to take away from her own formidable comedic prowess, was quite the piece of ass (she was also stunning in "Raging Bull"). This is by no means a perfect film, and it does slow in spots, but it is by no means the disaster many make it out to be. See for yourself... love it or hate it, at least admire it for trying to be different. Funny stuff!

This turd won't send many running to Thomas Berger's rich novel, which is a shame. The book is everything the film failed to be: a scathing satire on moronic American suburban life.

The problem is a director far out of his depth. Though armed with a script largely faithful to its subversive source material, director John Avildsen (Rocky, Karate Kid) is a maker of feel-good entertainment who hasn't a clue how to handle satire or absurdity. It's like asking John Ashcroft to rap.

While Belushi is serviceable and Akroyd is fun, we can only imagine how this last partnership might have turned out in competent hands. They're frequently misdirected by Avildsen who thinks he's doing Reagan-era Abbott and Costello. Painful; read the novel.

A plot synopsis here would be something of a waste of time, as one or more already appear on this site, but I felt some comments might attract another viewer to this unique film. The movie was very poorly received upon its release, by critics and audience alike. Many fans of Belushi and Aykroyd did not take to their reversal of what was typically their typecasts: here Belushi plays the straight man against Aykroyd's lunatic, which is what I beleive makes the movie so incredibly funny.

On another note: when watching this film, give some attention to the soundtrack, brilliantly done by Bill Conti. The soundtrack, which would probably not work with any other movie, fits Neighbors perfectly. Using the Wagnerian technique of leitmotives, Conti assigns themes to each character: Earl is portrayed by some "shlub" music on bass trombone, Vic gets an eerie theremin melody, Ramona's appearances are always underscored by a sultry saxophone, and native american drums accompany Earl's wife Enid. The way the music underlines the drama is hard to describe without sounding like it cheaply "mickey-mouses" the actions onscreen, so I will forgo an in-depth analysis.

Suffice to say: great movie, brilliant soundtrack.

Anyone familiar with John Belushi's work will remember him as rarely being reputed for his subtle acting style. While Aykroyd delivers his usual quality performance, for me, the brilliance of the film lies in Belushi's performance as a suburban loser. They say that outsiders are the best observers of any culture. Examples might be De Tocqueville's book Democracy in America or even Christian Bales's performance in American Psycho. In Neighbours, Belushi is no exception. He plays the suburban American loser better than the real thing! Consider his appearance, his sexual frustration, the way he automatically goes for the TV when he gets home, how he expects his wife to make dinner when he comes home from work... In fact, he's so devoted to this role that through the entire film he manages to invariably avoid slipping into the hysterical personality that made him famous. He is fantastic at satirizing everything that his lifestyle defies.