I watched It’s a Mad Mad Mad Mad World on TCM last night. That Mankiewicz guy came on at the end and said something like, “This movie may not be all that funny, but…blah blah blah…”
I hear this a lot about this particular movie, about how it has every comedy star up to that era playing in it, and how thrilled some of newer stars were to be playing next to veterans that they had admired, and how this movie is a true cultural artifact, etc.
But somehow, there’s always the disclaimer about the movie “not being that funny…” Like the movie needs an apology or something.
And I don’t get it. Because I’ve watched this movie several times…and I always laugh.
I mean, how could I not laugh at Milton Berle and Terry-Thomas’ incompetant fistfight? Dick Shawn’s insane tearful ride to his mom’s rescue? Ethel Merman’s loudmouthed shrew with the swinging handbag for a weapon? Phil Silvers conning a terrified Don Knotts out of his car? Jonathan Winters destroying a gas station?
Okay, humor is a matter of taste. But I like this movie. Am I the only one?
I do like it, although I’m too young to really know most of the stars of the time. That said, I think it goes on too long at 2:40 (I can’t imagine sitting through the original cut) and has some definite weak spots as the movie goes on.
Calling it not all that funny is a kind of unusual. It’s old, a lot of situational humor, and some of the attempted humor falls flat. But it’s a long movie with a lot of different characters in different situations, everyone ought to find some of it very amusing. There certainly is no need to apologize for it.
The movie had me doubled up in tears when it came out. Of course I was 11 years old, but it’s still funny enough.
The early gag where a dying Jimmy Durante literally kicks the bucket would play just as well in Airplane!, Scary Movie or any even more recent broad comedy.
Hilarious movie. The nuns took us on an outing to see it at the Cinerama when I was a kid. Today I have it on DVD and enjoy it as much now as I did then.
From my perspective, for a movie that had the 1963 Comedy Dream Team, you don’t get as much bang for your buck as you should. There are still some funny scenes (e.g., the aforementioned scene where Jonathan Winters single-handedly destroys the gas station) but I can think of at least 20 other movies I’ve seen that had more laughs-per-minute than** It’s a Mad, Mad, Mad, Mad World**.
That being said, my opinion on IAM4W has waxed and waned as I’ve gotten older. When I was eight, it was the greatest movie in the world. When I was 18, it was rather shrill, heavy-handed, and disappointing considering the amount of comic talent on screen. Now, I have a higher opinion of the movie but I still think it’s got a lot of flaws. For one thing, Stanley Kramer had no flair for comedy–especially the broad fast-paced slapstick variety that makes up much of the humor in IAM4W. Of course, given that his reputation was for making preachy message movies about such laugh-riot subjects as the after effects of nuclear war (On the Beach) and the Holocaust (Judgment at Nuremberg) it’s probably a miracle the movie turned out as funny as it did. Also, the story and script for IAM4W takes a very cynical view of America and humanity in general. Kramer was definitely not a cynic. Ideally, this movie should’ve been directed by Billie Wilder–someone who was a master at both broad comedy and sardonic humor.
It’s an homage to the silent comedies, with cameos by many of that era’s veterans. People who write about movies and host TV shows that play movies will have a solid appreciation for the original silents, and the homage will always fall short of the mark.
I’ve never heard the disclaimers. I think it is very funny. It seems strange to claim otherwise by an outlet that is airing it. It does run a little long, but there are so many memorable scenes. As goofy as it is my favorite is Winters tearing apart the gas station. Some of the physical choices he made in that scene are genius. The way he beats that guy with tires in his arms. . .
ETA (now that you’ve got me thinking about it), Milton Berle and Sid Ceasar were to TV comedy what Charlie Chaplin and Buster Keaton were to film comedy, so it’s understandable that they’d want to pay tribute. But they were masters of a different craft, out of a different age. Sid Ceasar breaking out of the basement didn’t have the same quality that a pure physical comedian could have brought. Jonathan Winters’ demolition of the gas station was funny, but it wasn’t a true “Jonathan Winters” bit; it was something Fatty Arbuckle was better at doing.
The only true silent comedy gag in the movie was Jerry Lewis’ cameo running over the hat; not just because it was done without dialogue, but because of all the participants, only Lewis was a genuine throwback to the earlier era. And maybe that’s why I don’t think his own movies are all that funny: by 1960, humor needed to be more sophisticated, but it only got in the way if applied to 1920 gags.
We watched it last night and my 14-year-old son was cracking up as was his 34-year-old mother. I’ve always liked the movie. Dick Shawn and his girlfriend dancing had my family laughing, Jim Backus flopping around the back of the airplane. The funniest thing was when my son asked “Whoa, what happened to Curly?”–not realizing the history of the Three Stooges.
I think it’s more than just an homage to silent comedies. It also owes a lot to the cynical comedies made by Preston Sturges during his prime in the 1940s. (It even has a regular member of Sturges’ stock company–William Demerest–as Police Chief Aloysius.) That was all the more reason why the movie should’ve been directed by someone who had a bit of jaundiced view of humanity. Everybody in the movie–from the mindessly destructive fortune-hunters to the crooked city government of Santa Rosita to, ultimately, Capt. Culpepper himelf–is greedy and/or corrupt. You pretty much have examples of the seven deadly sins demonstrated throughout the movie.
/Incidentally, in my last post, that should be “Billy Wilder”.
IMHO it’s a product of the times when movies felt they HAD to compete with television by offering longer running times. Too long. From what I remember there really isn’t anyone you want to root for and many of the actors such as Terry-Thomas and Ethel Merman are too shrill.