IMDb > Life Stinks (1991) > Reviews & Ratings - IMDb
Life Stinks
Quicklinks
Top Links
trailers and videosfull cast and crewtriviaofficial sitesmemorable quotes
Overview
main detailscombined detailsfull cast and crewcompany credits
Awards & Reviews
user reviewsexternal reviewsawardsuser ratingsparents guidemessage board
Plot & Quotes
plot summarysynopsisplot keywordsmemorable quotes
Did You Know?
triviagoofssoundtrack listingcrazy creditsalternate versionsmovie connectionsFAQ
Other Info
box office/businessrelease datesfilming locationstechnical specsliterature listingsNewsDesk
Promotional
taglines trailers and videos posters photo gallery
External Links
showtimesofficial sitesmiscellaneousphotographssound clipsvideo clips

Reviews & Ratings for
Life Stinks More at IMDbPro »

Filter: Hide Spoilers:
Page 1 of 4:[1] [2] [3] [4] [Next]
Index 37 reviews in total 

17 out of 18 people found the following review useful:
Adventures on the streets of Downtown LA, 26 December 2004
Author: ICMovies2 from United States

Growing up around downtown LA as a kid in the seventies didn't look much different than it does today as far as the kinds of odd characters you'll run into while passing through it and I think this movie really captures some of the authentic types of characters you meet when you really get to know them, but you also run into those other types that are always looking for trouble as also depicted in this Mel Brooks movie who brings a lighter and even comical side to this scenario that is so prevalent and filmed in downtown Los Angeles.

Mel Brooks also stars as Goddard Bolt, a ruthless billionaire who soon begins to experience how the other half lives by unintentionally making a bet with his conniving business associates, from there he goes from riches to rags and meets some strange, funny but good hearted souls on the streets as well as endless comical mishaps, but with the help of a bag lady (Lesley Ann Warren) he begins to discover what really matters most unlike his former business associates.

Although this is one of my favorite movies, I still think the ending could have been done much better, but the comedy throughout never ends.

Was the above review useful to you?

15 out of 19 people found the following review useful:
Underrated, 2 July 1999
7/10
Author: Quetzl from Detroit

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).

Was the above review useful to you?

11 out of 13 people found the following review useful:
It wasn't bad, just different., 17 July 2006
6/10
Author: krowley13 from United States

Being a fan of Mel Brooks movies in general, it wasn't hard for me to find this movie enjoyable. Many Mel Brooks fans like the laugh-a-minute spoof humor that is usually incorporated into the movies. This one was slightly more serious then his other movies, not having as many puns and witty banters and physical humor jokes. It was really more of a drama with a couple scenes here and there with the Mel Brooks humor. A lot of my friends who are also Mel Brooks fans, found this movies to be less enjoyable simply because of the lack of humor. A few of my friends who had never really cared for Mel Brooks movies liked this one more simply because it was more serious, and with less of the typical Brooks styled jokes. All in all it was a really good movie, and I thought it was well written. While this movie isn't my favorites of the Mel Brooks movies (how can one compete with Spaceballs, Robin Hood: Men in Tights, Young Frankenstien, etc.?) it was still enjoyable, and I don't think it's nearly as bad as some people are making it to be.

Was the above review useful to you?

9 out of 10 people found the following review useful:
This was a surprisingly GOOD movie, 15 April 2006
8/10
Author: rdcop from United States

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.

Was the above review useful to you?

8 out of 9 people found the following review useful:
Not even close to as bad as some make it out to be, but still below normal pre-Spaceballs quality Brooks, 12 June 2002
Author: elurker

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.

Was the above review useful to you?

8 out of 10 people found the following review useful:
A charming comedy, 2 February 2008
9/10
Author: ido50 from Israel

Seeing as the vote average was pretty low, and the fact that the clerk in the video store thought it was "just OK", I didn't have much expectations when renting this film.

But contrary to the above, I enjoyed it a lot. This is a charming movie. It didn't need to grow on me, I enjoyed it from the beginning. Mel Brooks gives a great performance as the lead character, I think somewhat different from his usual persona in his movies.

There's not a lot of knockout jokes or something like that, but there are some rather hilarious scenes, and overall this is a very enjoyable and very easy to watch film.

Very recommended.

Was the above review useful to you?

8 out of 10 people found the following review useful:
Funny Social Commentary, 24 February 2002
6/10
Author: John Langbein (medrjel) from Dixie, USA

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.

Was the above review useful to you?

9 out of 12 people found the following review useful:
A different Mel Brooks movie, but manages to make you smile and think, 10 August 2008
8/10
Author: departed07 from United States

Homelessness (or Houselessness as George Carlin stated) has been an issue for years but never a plan to help those on the street that were once considered human who did everything from going to school, work, or vote for the matter. Most people think of the homeless as just a lost cause while worrying about things such as racism, the war on Iraq, pressuring kids to succeed, technology, the elections, inflation, or worrying if they'll be next to end up on the streets.

But what if you were given a bet to live on the streets for a month without the luxuries you once had from a home, the entertainment sets, a bathroom, pictures on the wall, a computer, and everything you once treasure to see what it's like to be homeless? That is Goddard Bolt's lesson.

Mel Brooks (who directs) who stars as Bolt plays a rich man who has everything in the world until deciding to make a bet with a sissy rival (Jeffery Tambor) to see if he can live in the streets for thirty days without the luxuries; if Bolt succeeds, he can do what he wants with a future project of making more buildings. The bet's on where Bolt is thrown on the street with a bracelet on his leg to monitor his every move where he can't step off the sidewalk. He's given the nickname Pepto by a vagrant after it's written on his forehead where Bolt meets other characters including a woman by the name of Molly (Lesley Ann Warren) an ex-dancer who got divorce before losing her home, and her pals Sailor (Howard Morris) and Fumes (Teddy Wilson) who are already used to the streets. They're survivors. Bolt isn't. He's not used to reaching mutual agreements like he once did when being rich where it's fight or flight, kill or be killed.

While the love connection between Molly and Bolt wasn't necessary to plot, I found "Life Stinks" to be one of Mel Brooks' observant films where prior to being a comedy, it shows a tender side compared to his slapstick work such as Blazing Saddles, Young Frankenstein, or Spaceballs for the matter, to show what it's like having something valuable before losing it the next day or on the other hand making a stupid bet like all rich people do when they don't know what to do with their money. Maybe they should give it to the homeless instead of using it like Monopoly money.

Or maybe this film will inspire you to help others.

Was the above review useful to you?

6 out of 8 people found the following review useful:
This movie just gets better, 11 January 2008
10/10
Author: hintjens from Netherlands

Brilliant over-acting by Lesley Ann Warren. Best dramatic hobo lady I have ever seen, and love scenes in clothes warehouse are second to none. The corn on face is a classic, as good as anything in Blazing Saddles. The take on lawyers is also superb. After being accused of being a turncoat, selling out his boss, and being dishonest the lawyer of Pepto Bolt shrugs indifferently "I'm a lawyer" he says. Three funny words. Jeffrey Tambor, a favorite from the later Larry Sanders show, is fantastic here too as a mad millionaire who wants to crush the ghetto. His character is more malevolent than usual. The hospital scene, and the scene where the homeless invade a demolition site, are all-time classics. Look for the legs scene and the two big diggers fighting (one bleeds). This movie gets better each time I see it (which is quite often).

Was the above review useful to you?

3 out of 3 people found the following review useful:
Good, easy to watch comedy from Brooks, 17 January 2000
Author: petervee from Ottawa, Canada

*** This review may contain spoilers ***

This is a good film by Mel Brooks. On the easy-to-watch side, it is the story of two very rich men who bet the ownership of a homeless area of LA on whether one of them (Brooks) can stay alive homeless, paperless and pennyless in the slums of LA. The dance number with Brooks and Warren is good as is the scene in Brooks house "my Rodin....my van Gogh...." This is a nice movie, portraying the dirty and awfull side of homelessness in a perhaps un-true manner (for younger audiences). Also shows how bad lawyers are and how easily money changes people.

Was the above review useful to you?


Page 1 of 4:[1] [2] [3] [4] [Next]

Add another review


Related Links

Plot summary Amazon.com summary Ratings
Newsgroup reviews External reviews Parents Guide
Plot keywords Main details Your user reviews
Your vote history