The Reviews Are In: "The Honeymooners" Film Is Junk

Internet Movie Database Report ^ | 6-9-05

[My Favorite Headache]

Reviews: 'The Honeymooners' Just Junk

June 9,2005

Both critics who love the updated movie version of the classic Jackie Gleason series The Honeymooners and those who hate it (and there are far more of the latter than the former) agree that the movie has little in common with the TV show.

"Change may be good for the characters, but not necessarily for the audience," writes A.O. Scott in the New York Times. And it's not just that the movie has an all-black cast, headed by Cedric the Entertainer. "Badly paced and leadenly scripted, with jokes that only register because characters pause for the expected laughter (almost nonexistent at the screening I attended), The Honeymooners is one of the biggest disappointments of this still-young movie year," writes Chris Kaltenback in the Baltimore Sun.

"The Honeymooners doesn't work because of an extremely lame script attributed to four writers, which takes a concept that would barely have supported one of the original 'Classic 39' episodes and stretches it to a 90-minute feature that ... feels at least twice as long," comments Lou Lumenick in the New York Post.

Glenn Whipp in the Los Angeles Daily News doesn't mince words. "This new version of The Honeymooners stinks," he writes. "There is no reason for it to exist other than cashing in on a brand name." Wesley Morris of the Boston Globe, one of a handful of black film critics, begins his review by remarking, "An uncle of mine used to joke that he'd know racial parity had been achieved in Hollywood when black people started making movies as bad as white people's. I always thought his joke aimed too low. But according to his logic, the predominantly black update of The Honeymooners would be an achievement. It's not as bad as the average Hollywood movie, it's stupendously worse."

However, Roger Ebert in the Chicago Sun-Times calls it a "surprise and a delight, a movie that escapes the fate of weary TV retreads and creates characters that remember the originals, yes, but also stand on their own." Lowe Returning

[Inspectorette]

Remember the time when Norton was reading a book, and he turned the page and said, "Paganini". Ralph did a double take, and said "What"? Norton: "Paganini". Ralph grabbed the book, and screamed, "Page Nine!!!!!"

[fatnotlazy]

Now that's one I forgot.

Funny. :)

[Rca2000]

Yeah.. And I had an original idea, for a film,(my novel was originally intended to be a script) , and so far, have not been able to get anyone to take it seriously. Guess the fact that my story shows the Arabs/enviros, as the enemy, and terrorists; and the Christian Americans, as the heroes, and ultimately, the ones who, with God's help, save the world from total Nuclear holocaust, I guess that just does not sit well with most of the elites today.

If I had written the story as one that showed a bunch of ANGRY WHITE MEN, as the terrorists, and Greenpeace as the heroes, well, then Hollywood would probably beat a path to my door.

[chaosagent]

I really hate to be the one to tell you this, but ABC is redoing "Kolchak - The Night Stalker" for this fall.

[warchild9]

Ebert married a black woman. After that, his stance on racial relations in movies became suspect.

[hattend]

Roger Ebert in the Chicago Sun-Times calls it a "surprise and a delight, a movie that escapes the fate of weary TV retreads and creates characters that remember the originals, yes, but also stand on their own."

Ebert is wrong 9 times out of 10. If I hear a "thumbs up" from this dufus, I avoid the movie.