Anyone else a fan of parodies?

Patrick Smith44 said:Some people dismiss The Naked Gun as total garbage, but honestly, it’s one of the greatest comedies ever made in my book. I don't know where else I find this much laughs; even on my twentieth viewing, it still hits just as hard.



Come on, who wouldn't love a classic like that?! 😁

Car😁

No.

nimblemarlin6 said:I mean, yeah, great parodies exist.
> is solid. Then you have >, which pokes fun at > and its entire fandom, and >, which hits both > and that whole 60s vibe.
Has anyone brought up > yet?

If you ask me, a lot of movies end up being unintentional satires or parodies anyway. Most remakes, for instance, act as a parody of the original while simultaneously serving as a satire of Hollywood itself. I was watching the 2007 version of > the other day—honestly, it feels like a parody of the 1986 >!

I guess the only way I can actually respect this as a decent parody is because they play it totally straight. They treat it like a regular movie, which honestly makes it better—it doesn't try too hard with the horror spoofs. It just works.

Like, that school janitor Fred looking like Freddy Krueger, or that scene where Randy stops Halloween: you don't know the rules?????
🙏
Nothing even comes close to Scream.

Oh, I absolutely love them. Honestly? They’re better than the originals. It’s wild how they can be so incredibly bad yet still be so damn good. 😍

I’ve never been a fan of those mindless parodies like Epic Movie or Meet the Spartans. They might have a few decent, chaotic moments, but at their core, they're just shallow and tedious.

Parodies are just a low-rent genre... Honestly, you’ll never find a real filmmaker—someone with actual talent or even a shred of cinematic craft—who would ever deign to make a parody.
It's just bottom-of-the-barrel hacks, those third-rate types at the very bottom of the Hollywood food chain, who churn them out.
The end result? Just a bunch of nauseatingly bad movies made for people who clearly have zero taste in cinema.
Fortunately for them, that demographic is massive, which makes making parodies a pretty lucrative business model...
But it has absolutely nothing to do with film as an art form. Or common sense.

Aren't those films by the Monty Python member a certain type of parody? In my view, Mel Brooks' movies are also quite trashy.

Patrick Smith44 said:Some people dismiss The Naked Gun as total garbage, but honestly, it’s one of the greatest comedies ever made in my book. I don't know where else I find this much laughs; even on my twentieth viewing, it still hits just as hard.



Come on, who wouldn't love a classic like that?! 😁

Legend.

I live for parodies like this. Those other mindless junk movies? Not for me. In The Naked Gun, even O.J. could be funny. ☕

Elizabeth Garcia2 said:But it has absolutely nothing to do with film as an art form. Or common sense.

It actually has everything to do with both. You can't argue with taste, but you can certainly say the same about any other genre. Take horror, for instance—you’ve got some hack director who just films creepy faces to try and jump-scare you. Or comedies where the director just stuffs the dialogue with cheap one-liners. 🙂 So, parodies are definitely a legitimate form of cinematic art, and they rely on common sense just as much as any other genre.😉

Elizabeth Garcia2 said:Parodies are just a low-rent genre... Honestly, you’ll never find a real filmmaker—someone with actual talent or even a shred of cinematic craft—who would ever deign to make a parody.
It's just bottom-of-the-barrel hacks, those third-rate types at the very bottom of the Hollywood food chain, who churn them out.
The end result? Just a bunch of nauseatingly bad movies made for people who clearly have zero taste in cinema.
Fortunately for them, that demographic is massive, which makes making parodies a pretty lucrative business model...
But it has absolutely nothing to do with film as an art form. Or common sense.

Come on, don't talk nonsense... those highly acclaimed Mel Brooks and Monty Python member movies aren't "low art" like David Price5 claims. Taste is one thing, but movie quality is something else entirely...
Honestly, parody is an incredibly tough genre. You actually have to be clever and funny to parody something effectively, especially if it's a cult classic, because you don't want to just be offensive for the sake of it. Sure, most of what's out today is total trash and makes no sense, but some of those old classics? They’re legit masterpieces of the genre...👍

By the way... forgot to mention a phenomenal parody series... "Sledge Hammer!"... the way they poke fun at Dirty Harry... it's brilliant hahah... when he pulls a bazooka out of the trunk, aims at a sniper on a rooftop, levels the whole building, and goes..."I think I got him", legendary!🙏

^^🤣It’s precisely these little flashes of parody that make everything worth it.🤣

The absolute pinnacle of parody in my estimation is The Hollywood Walk of Fame, which happens to be Carpenter's debut. It’s a masterpiece from start to finish and stands as one of the finest entries into the realm of art I've ever encountered. It really is a door kicked wide open. 👍

Anthony Smith3 said:Come on, don't talk nonsense... those highly acclaimed Mel Brooks and Monty Python member movies aren't "low art" like David Price5 claims. Taste is one thing, but movie quality is something else entirely...
Honestly, parody is an incredibly tough genre. You actually have to be clever and funny to parody something effectively, especially if it's a cult classic, because you don't want to just be offensive for the sake of it. Sure, most of what's out today is total trash and makes no sense, but some of those old classics? They’re legit masterpieces of the genre...👍

By the way... forgot to mention a phenomenal parody series... "Sledge Hammer!"... the way they poke fun at Dirty Harry... it's brilliant hahah... when he pulls a bazooka out of the trunk, aims at a sniper on a rooftop, levels the whole building, and goes..."I think I got him", legendary!🙏

I really can't debate film with someone who lacks even basic knowledge.
Monty Python isn't doing parodies; their whole vibe is satirical humor. And those two things aren't even remotely the same...
They are original above all else. Parody, by its very definition, is unoriginal; you take something someone else already built and you reshape it. That is the exact opposite of being original.
Maybe pick up a film encyclopedia or something and learn the basics if you're trying to act smart...

That parody is a lower tier of filmmaking is obvious to anyone who actually knows movies. You just have to look at a list of directors throughout history who specialized in it, and anyone with even a tiny bit of film knowledge will see that not a single great director's name is on that list. It's beneath them to "parody"—they are auteurs, they make auteur films. Instead, they leave it to these third-rate, talentless hacks (like Aaron Seltzer, Ezio Greggio, Bob Koherr, Allan A. Goldstein, Gen. Quintano...) to do the parodying.

And what can these third-rate "wannabe" filmmakers create? Total third-rate garbage. The parody genre.

Elizabeth Garcia2 said:I really can't debate film with someone who lacks even basic knowledge.
Monty Python isn't doing parodies; their whole vibe is satirical humor. And those two things aren't even remotely the same...
They are original above all else. Parody, by its very definition, is unoriginal; you take something someone else already built and you reshape it. That is the exact opposite of being original.
Maybe pick up a film encyclopedia or something and learn the basics if you're trying to act smart...

That parody is a lower tier of filmmaking is obvious to anyone who actually knows movies. You just have to look at a list of directors throughout history who specialized in it, and anyone with even a tiny bit of film knowledge will see that not a single great director's name is on that list. It's beneath them to "parody"—they are auteurs, they make auteur films. Instead, they leave it to these third-rate, talentless hacks (like Aaron Seltzer, Ezio Greggio, Bob Koherr, Allan A. Goldstein, Gen. Quintano...) to do the parodying.

And what can these third-rate "wannabe" filmmakers create? Total third-rate garbage. The parody genre.

Says the guy using the nickname Ed Wood 🤣

Look, interpret Pythonesque humor however you want, but at its core, it's a parody... a parody of history, specific events, and plenty of other things... just remember their parody of the Packinpahov style and films...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=M1-NpyaOWV0

Honestly, I don't even want to argue with idiots who think they've mastered all the world's wisdom just because they skimmed a few encyclopedias...🙄 I have some advice for you... get real before you start any argument. You think you know me and my level of knowledge? Don't bet on it, kid...👍
The fact is, you're just looking down on parodies because you don't personally care for the concept, and that's fine—that's your right. But saying parodies are the absolute bottom of cinematic art is a stretch; there are way too many quality comedies out there for me to agree with that. And as for that point about famous names... LOL.😂 Does having a big name automatically mean a movie is good, regardless of the genre?? I wouldn't say so.👍

Parodies basically work like this: you take dozens of scenes from recent movies—films actually made by people with imagination, skill, and the genuine talent to create something original—then you just tweak one little detail so it becomes "hilariously funny" to people who can't tell the difference between quality cinema and garbage... and then you market the hell out of it in major US theaters, specifically targeting those mindless American teenagers.

Since I don't fit into any of those categories, and since stupid, low-brow humor just doesn't do anything for me, I really don't think there's any actual value in it. I mean, I know there isn't.

Honestly, I’d much rather sit through my 20th rewatch of something original by W. Allen, Billy Wilder, Charlie Chaplin, Menzel, Jim Jarmusch, DiCill, the Coen brothers, or even Monty Python (who don't just do parodies). That stuff actually has value...

It’s a pathetic genre, even if Mel Brooks is its leading figure. Just pathetic...

Nancy Nelson55 said:Everything featuring Leslie Nielsen is just pure gold. Honestly, that blank, deadpan stare of his is absolutely lethal.
Take that one scene from The Naked Gun: Leslie says, "When I see five weirdos in costumes murdering an innocent man, I take them out. That's my policy."
And then the police chief hits him back with, "That was an open-air production of Julius Caesar, you idiot. You just killed five actors—five great actors."
And then you just get that classic, clueless look on his face. It’s priceless...🙏🙏🙏

🤣🤣🤣🤣

Lt. Frank Drebin, Police Squad. 😂

Agreed. Priceless. And what about that narration? Total noir style. Genius.🙏

Elizabeth Garcia2 said:Parodies basically work like this: you take dozens of scenes from recent movies—films actually made by people with imagination, skill, and the genuine talent to create something original—then you just tweak one little detail so it becomes "hilariously funny" to people who can't tell the difference between quality cinema and garbage... and then you market the hell out of it in major US theaters, specifically targeting those mindless American teenagers.

Since I don't fit into any of those categories, and since stupid, low-brow humor just doesn't do anything for me, I really don't think there's any actual value in it. I mean, I know there isn't.

Honestly, I’d much rather sit through my 20th rewatch of something original by W. Allen, Billy Wilder, Charlie Chaplin, Menzel, Jim Jarmusch, DiCill, the Coen brothers, or even Monty Python (who don't just do parodies). That stuff actually has value...

It’s a pathetic genre, even if Mel Brooks is its leading figure. Just pathetic...

Yeah, if you're talking about the latest parodies, because they are genuinely terrible, like > and such.

---

If anyone else still appreciates the dialogue from >:

[Frank Drebin is emptying out his files after being kicked off the force]
Frank: Hey! The missing evidence in the Kelner case! My God, he really was innocent!
Ed: He went to the chair two years ago, Frank.
Frank: Well, uh...
[Frank Drebin quickly shoves the evidence back into the file cabinet]

...

[offering a cigar]
Vincent Ludwig: Cuban?
Frank: No, Dutch-Irish. My father was from Wales.

...

After Nordberg ends up in the hospital because he was beaten up for uncovering a heroin shipment:

Det. Nordberg: Drugs... drugs...
Frank: Nurse! get this man some drugs!
[nurse administers drugs]
Det. Nordberg: No... no...
[pulls Frank towards him]
Det. Nordberg: Heroin. Heroin, Frank.
Frank: Uh... that's a pretty tall order, it'll take a couple of days for that one.

...

Frank: A good cop - needlessly cut down by some cowardly hoodlums.
Ed: No way for a man to die.
Frank: No... you're right, Ed. A parachute not opening... that's a way to die. Getting caught in the gears of a combine... having your nuts bit off by a Laplander, that's the way I wanna go.
Wilma Nordberg: [cries] Oh... Frank. This is terrible.
Ed: Don't you worry Wilma. Your husband is going to be alright. Don't you worry about anything. Just think positive. Never let a doubt enter your mind.
Frank: He's right, Wilma. But I wouldn't wait until the last minute to fill out those organ donor cards.
[Wilma cries again]
Ed: What I'm trying to say is that Wilma, as soon as Nordburg is better, he's welcome back at Police Squad.
Frank: Unless he's a drooling vegetable. But I think that's only common sense...
[Wilma cries again]

There are plenty more, but since they pop up every ten seconds in the movie, it would take pages to list them all, so I won't... 😁

And you? You’ve written some absolute nonsense too...

Elizabeth Garcia2 said:Parodies are just a low-rent genre... Honestly, you’ll never find a real filmmaker—someone with actual talent or even a shred of cinematic craft—who would ever deign to make a parody.
It's just bottom-of-the-barrel hacks, those third-rate types at the very bottom of the Hollywood food chain, who churn them out.
The end result? Just a bunch of nauseatingly bad movies made for people who clearly have zero taste in cinema.
Fortunately for them, that demographic is massive, which makes making parodies a pretty lucrative business model...
But it has absolutely nothing to do with film as an art form. Or common sense.

Look, since I’m stuck talking to someone who clearly doesn't know anything, I'll just say it: I have taste. Real cinematic taste. And I'm good at it, too. But yeah, I've got a thing for parodies.
Why? Because I’m an objective person. I refuse to get trapped in those narrow little boxes where people try to define film as "art," and I definitely won't flirt with the snobbery you're clearly indulging in.
Look, it's fine if you don't like the genre. Totally get it. But there's a difference between having an opinion and just being a jerk about it. Why does it have to be such a total smear campaign?
Is it harder to make someone laugh or to make them sad? Think about that for a second. Then tell me how parodies are just "disgusting trash." Honestly, I don't get how someone calling themselves a cinephile can even let themselves go on those kinds of verbal rants. You'd think you were talking to some moody teenager going through a phase because they got stuck in one specific genre.

Elizabeth Garcia2 said:Parodies basically work like this: you take dozens of scenes from recent movies—films actually made by people with imagination, skill, and the genuine talent to create something original—then you just tweak one little detail so it becomes "hilariously funny" to people who can't tell the difference between quality cinema and garbage... and then you market the hell out of it in major US theaters, specifically targeting those mindless American teenagers.

Since I don't fit into any of those categories, and since stupid, low-brow humor just doesn't do anything for me, I really don't think there's any actual value in it. I mean, I know there isn't.

Honestly, I’d much rather sit through my 20th rewatch of something original by W. Allen, Billy Wilder, Charlie Chaplin, Menzel, Jim Jarmusch, DiCill, the Coen brothers, or even Monty Python (who don't just do parodies). That stuff actually has value...

It’s a pathetic genre, even if Mel Brooks is its leading figure. Just pathetic...

If it’s really that easy, why are you still wasting time on this forum instead of out there making movies? Go get 'em. Hollywood is waiting.🤷

Since I don't fit into any of those categories mentioned above—and honestly, stupid, mindless humor doesn't do anything for me—I don't think it has any real value. Period. I know it doesn't.

So, what you're saying is parody lovers just can't tell a good movie from a bad one? Is that it?

Honestly, parodies actually tend to have some pretty sharp humor. You have to be a real cinephile to even get half of it. If you don't deeply understand film as an art form, how are you supposed to recognize all the movies they're mocking? Most people just don't get it.

Ever wonder if you just don't get humor? Believe it or not, some people actually exist in that category. Seems like you belong right up there with them.

Honestly? I’d rather sit through some random W. Allen flick or a Billy Wilder classic for the twentieth time than deal with this. Give me Charlie Chaplin, Menzel, Jim Jarmusch, DiCill, the Coen brothers, or even Monty Python—as long as they aren't doing cheap parodies—any day. At least those movies actually have value.

Man, you're just too cool. It's honestly unreal.

Patrick Smith44 said:Yeah, if you're talking about the latest parodies, because they are genuinely terrible, like > and such.

---

If anyone else still appreciates the dialogue from >:

[Frank Drebin is emptying out his files after being kicked off the force]
Frank: Hey! The missing evidence in the Kelner case! My God, he really was innocent!
Ed: He went to the chair two years ago, Frank.
Frank: Well, uh...
[Frank Drebin quickly shoves the evidence back into the file cabinet]

...

[offering a cigar]
Vincent Ludwig: Cuban?
Frank: No, Dutch-Irish. My father was from Wales.

...

After Nordberg ends up in the hospital because he was beaten up for uncovering a heroin shipment:

Det. Nordberg: Drugs... drugs...
Frank: Nurse! get this man some drugs!
[nurse administers drugs]
Det. Nordberg: No... no...
[pulls Frank towards him]
Det. Nordberg: Heroin. Heroin, Frank.
Frank: Uh... that's a pretty tall order, it'll take a couple of days for that one.

...

Frank: A good cop - needlessly cut down by some cowardly hoodlums.
Ed: No way for a man to die.
Frank: No... you're right, Ed. A parachute not opening... that's a way to die. Getting caught in the gears of a combine... having your nuts bit off by a Laplander, that's the way I wanna go.
Wilma Nordberg: [cries] Oh... Frank. This is terrible.
Ed: Don't you worry Wilma. Your husband is going to be alright. Don't you worry about anything. Just think positive. Never let a doubt enter your mind.
Frank: He's right, Wilma. But I wouldn't wait until the last minute to fill out those organ donor cards.
[Wilma cries again]
Ed: What I'm trying to say is that Wilma, as soon as Nordburg is better, he's welcome back at Police Squad.
Frank: Unless he's a drooling vegetable. But I think that's only common sense...
[Wilma cries again]

There are plenty more, but since they pop up every ten seconds in the movie, it would take pages to list them all, so I won't... 😁

Nah... he means every single parody ever made...

Anthony Smith3 said:Come on, don't talk nonsense... those highly acclaimed Mel Brooks and Monty Python member movies aren't "low art" like David Price5 claims. Taste is one thing, but movie quality is something else entirely...
Honestly, parody is an incredibly tough genre. You actually have to be clever and funny to parody something effectively, especially if it's a cult classic, because you don't want to just be offensive for the sake of it. Sure, most of what's out today is total trash and makes no sense, but some of those old classics? They’re legit masterpieces of the genre...👍

By the way... forgot to mention a phenomenal parody series... "Sledge Hammer!"... the way they poke fun at Dirty Harry... it's brilliant hahah... when he pulls a bazooka out of the trunk, aims at a sniper on a rooftop, levels the whole building, and goes..."I think I got him", legendary!🙏

Yeah, totally. Or that part where he goes to defuse an atomic bomb and says, "Trust me, I know what I'm doing," followed immediately by a mushroom cloud.🤣😂