this is a COMEDY?? - Born Yesterday Discussion

[–] SaulGoodman 16 years ago

I found her funny, vibrant and charming, but then I watched the entire film before jumping on IMDb to comment on it

reply

[–] NaniUbanani 16 years ago

hahahaha, j_hughes, OWN3D

reply

[–] j_hughes2000 16 years ago

Well I DID finish the film and my perspective HAS changed a little...now I can honestly say that as well as not being funny it was painfully boring. You make it sound like it turns into Some Like It Hot by the end. Thrity minutes was quite enough to make a judgment on this one.

reply

[–] loocheeuh 13 years ago

She's funny and vibrant...and abused, too. And she rises above it and in the end rises above. That's one of the reasons I love her and the movie. But, no, I don't think it's a comedy. It has some funny moments, but a comedy--nope.

reply

[–] ajmal-m 11 years ago

hehe

reply

[–] Brennan-8 16 years ago

I lasted an hour though, then I was just too bored and annoyed to carry on. I had enjoyed Judy Holliday in "It Should Happen to You" and this film was said to be very funny and charming, but I just didn't get it. I found it really dull. Bill Holden sure was handsome though, wasn't he?

For some reason, a lot of people seem to love the "dumb, childlike blonde" archetype. It doesn't do anything for me.

reply

[–] Qanqor 15 years ago

I rather agree. I thought it was a pretty good movie, but as a comedy? Meh. I've read reviews that called it "hilarious". Sorry, I got a few chuckles here and there, but I didn't find it particularly funny, and now as I read people's comments, it seems like Judy Holliday was that part that was supposed to be funny. Well, I too don't get anything out of the "dumb, childlike blonde" type, so maybe that's why this movie didn't wow me either.

reply

[–] AlternativeReality 16 years ago

This was a comedy in the way "My Fair Lady" or "Pygmalion" were comedies, not with "in your face" humor, but that of more subtle variety. We are treated to a character who, at first, thinks her lot in life is to be less that those around her, but then she discovers through her mentor, the journalist Paul Verral, a world of knowledge she never dreamed existed and brains she never knew she had. The subtle humor is in watching not only the transformation of the female protagonist, but also in the simple, clever way that her teacher is taught by his pupil. Billie Dawn becomes smarter and more sophisticated without lossing her elemental charm. It is a charming character study of how two people from vastly different backgrounds complete each other, and so become stronger. Admittedly, it doesn't hurt if you already have a liking for Judy Holliday and her particular style. The comedy is in watching the "dumb broad" outwit everyone!

reply

[–] Kind67 16 years ago

Re: r-breden's comment:

Very well put! I couldn't have said it better myself, so I won't try! But I do want you to know that I agree with you 100%.

reply

[–] hairymusclez 9 years ago

So few know the difference between a farce and a comedy. Nicely explained!

reply

[–] lubin-freddy 14 years ago

Why do we expect films to fit into nice clear categories such as "comedy"? It's amazing how the American film-going public was more open to films outside usual boundaries than the seemingly more sophisticated audience today.

You know you should surrender
But you can't let it go...

reply

[–] bradford-1 11 years ago

Ever seen SULLIVAN'S TRAVELS? Now there's a flick that confounds categorization. Buster Keaton-like slapstick melts into Swiftian satire, which dissolves into harrowing Expressionism.

"May I bone your kipper, Mademoiselle?"

reply

[–] comedyfish 14 years ago

I've watched this film for 3 minutes and haven't laughed once

reply

[–] AlternativeReality 14 years ago

...Wow, three whole minutes...

It's not fast food or a video game, it's a story, and any good story needs time to develop.

If a book doesn't amuse you after three pages, do you give up on it?

"Patience is the companion of wisdom."
Saint Augustine (354 AD - 430 AD)

reply

[–] comedyfish 14 years ago

yeah i was joking... *rolleyes*

reply

[–] HarryHart 14 years ago

It's on British TV at present and I'm struggling with that dumb blonde screech after less than 3 minutes.

reply

[–] jtdeclercq 14 years ago

just watched on BBC, and am blown away, both with the script, which is immensely witty and sharp, but also with the performance of Judy Holliday. I missed the first half hour or so, and got in during the card game she's playing with that bully husband. Amazing! So incredible funny, and the timing is perfect. I loved it, couldn't get enough of her. They don't make clever films like this anymore. Sadly.

reply

[–] marktayloruk 14 years ago

it includes the funniest joke in motion picture history.When Paul tells Harry that most politicians are honest and can't be bought!

reply

[–] ridgerunner72160-609-362419 12 years ago

I agree. Also, this was before crooks like the Kennedys, Lyndon Johnson, Nixon, and the rest of them all the way up to Obama. But then back in the '40s I think most people were a lot more naive about the crooked lawyers and politicians who infest Washington. However it does remind me of a line in the movie, The Godfather, where Kay tells Michael Corleone, "You know how naive you sound Michael? Presidents and senators don't have people killed." And then Michael looks at her and asks, "Who's being naive Kay?", meaning that those politicians were just as guilty as any Mafia bigwig.

reply

[–] activista 10 years ago

@ridgerunner

How is Obama a crook, you right-wing stick-in-the-mud-who can't accept the-fact-that-times-have-changed, and that we actually have a black President,and you still can't deal with that? Enough of the whiny right-wing BS,please.

reply

[–] 10 years ago

[deleted]

[–] NothingButTheBest 14 years ago

I didn't laugh...but I liked the film.

Come fly with me, let's fly, let's fly away!

reply

[–] bohicatrucking 14 years ago

I enjoyed it immensely. The three leading characters were very well developed. Not a laugh-a-minute, but, it wasn't intended to be. If you need slapstick buffoonery, watch TV sitcoms. Personally, I would rather undergo a colonoscopy by a blind man with a seizure disorder. This film was truly well done, in terms of dialogue, casting and characters. You may find your oh-so-sophisticated, highly honed sense of humor bored by it, but you can't deny the acting was fun to watch and the players believable.

reply

[–] muito-merda 14 years ago

Your comments are funny considering they don't even know how to make comedies nowadays.

reply

[–] joseph_dixon63 13 years ago

Wow, I feel for you, j_hughes2000; this is comedy perhaps at its best. The writing is absolutely fantastic -- I laughed out loud at least a dozen times at subtle stuff that was almost sublime -- and Judy Holiday KILLED! Crawford was awesome, Holden, others held their own as well. I must also say that the bitter-sweet themes led to well-directed and quite touching moments.

Hope one day you're able to appreciate an overall fantastic movie (9 out of 10, and believe me, I'm really stingy with the 9's.)

reply

[–] standardmetal 13 years ago

I believe that "comedy", in the classic definition means a presentation with a generally happy ending which this is.

Dictionary.com gives this as its first definition: "a play, movie, etc., of light and humorous character with a happy or cheerful ending; a dramatic work in which the central motif is the triumph over adverse circumstance, resulting in a successful or happy conclusion."

Nowhere does it say it has to make you laugh.

Anyone that has read Dante's "La Comedia Divina" has to say that it is very serious throughout but nevertheless fulfills most of this definition. I agree it's not "light and cheerful" being on the subject of death and the afterlife.

My problem with most of these old films including this one are that they are simplistic and too "rah-rah" for me. (Goldie Hawn's "Protocol" was a late addition to the genre.)

I consider myself a liberal but maybe a bit more subtlety might be in order? (True, these films were rarely subtle.)

reply