The movie Blazing Saddle is a western comedy that was directed and written by Mel Brooks. The film carries on by poking fun at sensitive topics that back in the day were hard to watch. There was many times in the movie they would say black slang or call the Indians dumb. This kind of satirical comedy is what made Mel Brooks one of the best to do it. Most of his jokes pushed the envelope with the dangerous jokes that were made in the movie. One critic named, Roger Ebert, claimed that Brooks was one of the few people in the world that could get away with this sort of humor.
Not everyone thought this humor was very funny and some even thought it wasn’t well thought out. One critic said that the humor was very thrown about, irrelevant and disorganized. Another one said that the humor was tasteless and uneducated. This humor in my opinion was very funny and just the perfect amount of jokes. Many of the actors fit their roles perfectly which made the humor even better and making the racist jokes easier to hear.
https://www.imdb.com/videoplayer/vi4038721817
This film was one of the first of many that made Mel Brooks famous for his satire eventually leading to a an award for best musical. In 2006 Blazing Saddle was considered the most culteral, historical and asthetic for bringing attention to the problems at hand. This movie was an eye opener to the blatant racism that was occurring at the time which caused for some people to be turned away or brought to it for its history.
This movie was a conventional movie with its around 2 billion dollar budget and well known director. The actors and special effects in the movie definitely lead more to a conventional movie. There was a clear plot but the style was pretty different than was expected for a western movie. Many of the scene in the movie were very well thought out and professional. Along with the scenes the writing was excellent as there was not a lot of down time and the whole script was filled with humor. The actors in the movie did an amazing job delivering each line with precision and authority.
https://binged.it/2OLJYuO
Mel Brooks definitely didn’t discriminate in this movie as he did poke fun at just about every culture and race. Many times in the film the viewer would watch everybody make a fool of themselves no matter the culture. In fact most of the movie was making fun of the fact that most people in the west were pretty stupid and gullible as they fell for all of Bart’s tricks.
In the film there is a character by the name of Mongo who is actually played by an NFL football player. His name is Alex Karras and at the time it wasn’t very popular to use an athlete as a character in any film. The character was a big lumbering hulk of a man who terrorized the town. Mongo wasn’t very smart was treated poorly by the main antagonist which eventually lead to the betrayal.
https://binged.it/2Bd6gNK
Mel Brooks’ satire lead some people to disapprove of the movie but did he take it to far? In an interview focusing on the jokes of the film he claimed that he did end up taking out a few of the jokes that seemed to take the jokes too far. In the scene were Le Vonn Shtupp was supposed to seduce Bart there was a line that was cut out. When Shtupp said “is it true about black folk” as she turned out the lights and walked closer in her skimpy outfit. Bart then exclaimed “sorry to inform you but you are sucking on my arm”, but that last line was cut for going a little too far. In the movie she actually just made him sausages in the dark and ate them.
Zach,
I also watched the film “Blazing Saddles” and you added in interesting comments from different critics. Personally I found the film to be too “out there” and I am wondering if you felt the same. I disagree when you say that this movie is a conventional film because there was no clear plot to any of it. In fact in the ending the two rode off into the sunset in a car. But overall you gave a clear consensus of how the public reacted to the film. Nice job!
Zach,
Great post, I also watched Blazing Saddles and I found it funny in some parts but really did not like the ending. I just felt it went too far and was too silly. I really liked your perspective at arguing both sides; those that found it funny and those that found it in bad taste.
You mention the budget was $2 billion, is this is a mistype? If not I learned that Blazing Saddles had a HUGE budget 🙂 !
Zach,
I appreciated your essay. I agree with the movie “spreading the love” when it came to joking and poking fun at all the different groups represented in the film. It feels like the film did a nice job of creating an experience where people can laugh at traditionally serious issues, like race and discrimination. The film released during or after Vietnam, Watergate, and there was a significant divide between race in the United States. This film gave the audience an outlet for jest and laughter. I think the budget was ~$2.6M 🙂
Zach,
Same as you, I had a movie directed by Mel Brooks. I saw that Roger Ebert did state that Brooks was the most tolerated director regarding his humor and sometimes offensive jokes, which I kinda understand. I did not know that later , in 2006, the movie itself was recognized for the its cultural and historical compact regarding the issues and problems back on the time. I like how you brought information for the movie and its importance on the ‘modern times’ and how it actually caused a lot of changes to happen. I will seek to keep my essays updated more on this aspect. Overall your essay looks great!
Isuf