Film General : Spielberg's 1941 is more mediocre than bad

Spielberg's 1941 is more mediocre than bad

It's worse crime is that its a comedy that's only funny here and here, with the laughs only being mild instead of full belly laughs.

It doesn't have a clear main character to follow either.

But the setpieces are good and I quite like the look of the film and Spielberg's eye for camera movement is definitely on full display.

I think it's time we re-evaluate this movie.

Re: Spielberg's 1941 is more mediocre than bad

When ten-year-old me snuck into the local theater to see it, I immediately understood where the movie was coming from it's a John Ford spoof by way of Mad Magazine and framed ala It's a Mad Mad Mad World.

It's got an amazing cast, great John Williams and period music, ridiculous set piece gags and a lot of period-specific jokes and references (this is what I think most audiences miss).

I've never understood the hate for it.

How many syllables Mario?

Re: Spielberg's 1941 is more mediocre than bad

High expectations killed that movie. I've never watched it, but I was a kid when it came out. It was Spielberg's next movie after Jaws and Close Encounters (huge hits), it had a great cast for the time, and was heavily advertised. To then deliver a mediocre movie is a recipe for disaster.

Re: Spielberg's 1941 is more mediocre than bad

I personally really enjoyed it myself. Not laugh-out-loud funny, but pretty amusing.


"You're dead if you aim only for kids. Adults are only kids grown up, anyway". - Walt Disney

Re: Spielberg's 1941 is more mediocre than bad

It's better than mediocre.



Top