Que Droga de Vida!

Mel Brooks has been in a serious decline. This is commonly accepted fact. This movie was guaranteed to not even touch early Brooks, for it was made during his decline. It was to be no Young Frankenstein, no Silent Movie, no Producers,not even a History of The World. What I wanted to find out was how close it came to these classics.

Quite close, in fact. It certainly has its moments(Mel's dancing, getting knocked into the dumpster), and forms a more cohesive whole then most recent Brooks movies(it contains more then a series of gags loosely tied together by a plot that could have been created by a 3 year old). I didn't find it offensive - the way it dealt with homelessness may not be the whole truth, but remember, this is a PG-13 movie and is meant to be suitable for family viewing.

Overall, this is a decent movie, and certainly doesn't deserve a 4.8. It's not Brooks' best(not even close), but is an inoffensive comedy which only has one particuarly objectionable scene and will certainly entertain. Worth a rental.

This is not the typical Mel Brooks film. It was much less slapstick than most of his movies and actually had a plot that was followable. Leslie Ann Warren made the movie, she is such a fantastic, under-rated actress. There were some moments that could have been fleshed out a bit more, and some scenes that could probably have been cut to make the room to do so, but all in all, this is worth the price to rent and see it. The acting was good overall, Brooks himself did a good job without his characteristic speaking to directly to the audience. Again, Warren was the best actor in the movie, but "Fume" and "Sailor" both played their parts well.

This is easily the most underrated film inn the Brooks cannon. Sure, its flawed. It does not give a realistic view of homelessness (unlike, say, how Citizen Kane gave a realistic view of lounge singers, or Titanic gave a realistic view of Italians YOU IDIOTS). Many of the jokes fall flat. But still, this film is very lovable in a way many comedies are not, and to pull that off in a story about some of the most traditionally reviled members of society is truly impressive. Its not The Fisher King, but its not crap, either. My only complaint is that Brooks should have cast someone else in the lead (I love Mel as a Director and Writer, not so much as a lead).

Mel Brooks won't one of my favorite filmmakers, however this time he got hit in the target in this dramatic comedy and pay tribute to those invisible people who lives in the streets as human remains, scorned by the society and must to be hidden to landscape, people likewise "Sailor" who bring to character homeless's heart and ends up died on the sidewalks of the cities, Mel leaves a sublime message to the audience and his critic to the society and how says the tittle life stinks!!!

Thanks for reading.

Resume:

First watch: 1996 / How many: 3 / Source: TV-DVD / Rating: 7.5.

I guess as we all get older, we feel the need to be more enlightened socially, and that's what this movie's all about. Take a rich man, throw him on the streets for 30 days, and a little backstabbing and you get a movie.

This movie, while not on par with most of Mel's previous ambitions, is a nice movie. Leslie Ann Warren is pleasing as the bag lady. I enjoyed it, but it's not like Mel Brook's other movies. That's where most criticism comes in. If anyone else made this movie, I think it would of recieved a lot more praise.

That's not to say Mel made no mistakes. Some of the scenes are downright dumb and make no real sense other than trying to make a joke. Then again, I think you can say that about almost every other movie too.

I think most people could enjoy this movie on some level if they forget it's a Mel Brooks project, which is hard since he stars in it.