Billy Madison (1995) 4K UHD (Kino Studio Classics)

[Bluzarro]

Originally Posted by Jay Mammoth

Hell yeah. And with Vinegar Syndrome releasing Dirty Work with a new cut and extras I would love if they did Grandmas Boy.

I'm only now learning about Vinegar Syndrome because they started putting out comedies but they seem cool because they are fussing on Dirty Work. Last time I was on their site I saw something that said something like recommend a movie and I was really tempted with a couple of my big ones that haven't been on Blu-ray yet.

[DVDFreaker12345]

I am happy both Happy Gilmore and Billy Madison will finally be on 4K, now if we can get Bulletproof, Big Daddy, Waterboy, and Wedding Singer....

[Dellamorte13]

I'd be happy just to get Wedding Singer in 1080p as the theatrical cut.

That ancient WB blu with its "unrated cut" is trash!!!

[Imthebat]

Site review sucks and O'Doyle rules!

[Infallible Presence]

Originally Posted by Imthebat

Site review sucks and O'Doyle rules!

[WhiskeyGnome]

"There are two very specific reasons that ruin Billy Madison for me, and neither has anything to do with the silliness that gives it its identity. I like silly comedies, possibly even more than I should, and have many in my library. The main problem in Billy Madison that prevents me from enjoying it is also the most obvious one. Sandler's struggle to lead and be funny while switching personalities produces ripple effects that slice the narrative like a hot razor blade would butter. In other words, Sandler moves through a collection of uneven scenes where nine out of ten times it looks like he is guessing the most effective material for his character. He keeps guessing wrong, too, because even the few scenes that are remotely funny are, sadly, mediocre."

OMFG. Put this guy on the list, Danny.

[ihaveblink]

Yeah, the reviewer (guess who) doesn't really "get" the movie, or at least doesn't really explain why the comedy doesn't work. Sandler is doing a very specific, outlandish, tongue-in-cheek version of the old comedy bit of a fully grown man-child character eventually buckling down and working hard to become "normal" and successful. He's completely rewarded for the bare-minimum too. And the movie treats it as just that, a tired old cliché but also one that isn't "normal" and commenting on itself constantly.

The movie's premise is a joke. The performance by Sandler and his cohorts is a joke. The "movie logic" that is present throughout it is the joke. The more you're familiar with these SNL star comedy vehicles and how they operate, the better. Sandler's early "bad Billy" performance pushes it to an extreme that really makes it funny/dark/subversive to the point of anarchistic absurdity. The movie operates in a "of course this happened, he's the main character" type of reality, which kind is a statement on wealth, class, and how the game isn't fair for most people. In a sense, no matter how bad you are, money/class can bail you out and give you more chances than most. It's proto-Freddy Got Fingered.

However, there are moments of actual character growth (the bullied Buscemi character springs to mind, him treating his bullied classmates with respect, actually trying to to be good at ... something) that are not only satisfying, but kind of sweet (Sandler has a gift of being not only funny but likeable enough to root for despite his insane privilege and initial mean-ness). It's earned in such a great non-sentimental way that it feels more grounded than anything in the film and ultimately effective. As manipulative as it is, it does feel earned. It's also funny with these things, not just "hey Billy can be alright sometimes" sort of way.

I guess I could go on and on, but I truly just balk at anyone who doesn't see this film for what it is, which is a counter-culture love-letter to dumb comedies and tropes. If that doesn't work for you, fine, but it's not just a silly comedy and shouldn't be treated as such.

[ShrunkenHead83]

Originally Posted by WhiskeyGnome

"There are two very specific reasons that ruin Billy Madison for me, and neither has anything to do with the silliness that gives it its identity. I like silly comedies, possibly even more than I should, and have many in my library. The main problem in Billy Madison that prevents me from enjoying it is also the most obvious one. Sandler's struggle to lead and be funny while switching personalities produces ripple effects that slice the narrative like a hot razor blade would butter. In other words, Sandler moves through a collection of uneven scenes where nine out of ten times it looks like he is guessing the most effective material for his character. He keeps guessing wrong, too, because even the few scenes that are remotely funny are, sadly, mediocre."

OMFG. Put this guy on the list, Danny.

What he just wrote is one of the most insanely idiotic things I have ever read. At no point in his rambling, incoherent review was he even close to anything that could be considered a rational thought. Everyone in this forum is now dumber for having read it. I award him no points, and may God have mercy on his soul.

[Grimfrost]

Originally Posted by ShrunkenHead83

What he just wrote is one of the most insanely idiotic things I have ever read. At no point in his rambling, incoherent review was he even close to anything that could be considered a rational thought. Everyone in this forum is now dumber for having read it. I award him no points, and may God have mercy on his soul.

Reviewer just walked right into that one haha

[WhiskeyGnome]

Originally Posted by ihaveblink

Yeah, the reviewer (guess who) doesn't really "get" the movie, or at least doesn't really explain why the comedy doesn't work. Sandler is doing a very specific, outlandish, tongue-in-cheek version of the old comedy bit of a fully grown man-child character eventually buckling down and working hard to become "normal" and successful. He's completely rewarded for the bare-minimum too. And the movie treats it as just that, a tired old cliché but also one that isn't "normal" and commenting on itself constantly.

The movie's premise is a joke. The performance by Sandler and his cohorts is a joke. The "movie logic" that is present throughout it is the joke. The more you're familiar with these SNL star comedy vehicles and how they operate, the better. Sandler's early "bad Billy" performance pushes it to an extreme that really makes it funny/dark/subversive to the point of anarchistic absurdity. The movie operates in a "of course this happened, he's the main character" type of reality, which kind is a statement on wealth, class, and how the game isn't fair for most people. In a sense, no matter how bad you are, money/class can bail you out and give you more chances than most. It's proto-Freddy Got Fingered.

However, there are moments of actual character growth (the bullied Buscemi character springs to mind, him treating his bullied classmates with respect, actually trying to to be good at ... something) that are not only satisfying, but kind of sweet (Sandler has a gift of being not only funny but likeable enough to root for despite his insane privilege and initial mean-ness). It's earned in such a great non-sentimental way that it feels more grounded than anything in the film and ultimately effective. As manipulative as it is, it does feel earned. It's also funny with these things, not just "hey Billy can be alright sometimes" sort of way.

I guess I could go on and on, but I truly just balk at anyone who doesn't see this film for what it is, which is a counter-culture love-letter to dumb comedies and tropes. If that doesn't work for you, fine, but it's not just a silly comedy and shouldn't be treated as such.

Even though it's not a perfect mash-up like Happy Gilmore might be for some, BM is still a classic screwball send-off from SNL, and it's obviously pretty high-quality if you compare it to the whole library of these types of films. I mean it has classic scenes in it that are still lampooned, loved, and imitated today.

I don't have a problem with disliking the film or calling it a hit and miss affair. But he said RUINS it ffs. I mean lord almighty grandpa. Should have just kept it to himself. Svet is basically a WW2 vet or something. Grizzled drama and walking 10 miles to school is his bag. Whatever floats the boat I guess.

[cooey]

Originally Posted by ShrunkenHead83

What he just wrote is one of the most insanely idiotic things I have ever read. At no point in his rambling, incoherent review was he even close to anything that could be considered a rational thought. Everyone in this forum is now dumber for having read it. I award him no points, and may God have mercy on his soul.

[notops]

As the invisible hallucinatory penguin shows, Billy Madison is a serious psychological examination of a man coming to grips with and overcoming his own personal demons. Sandler’s asinine insistence on being funny in every scene utterly destroys this carefully constructed story puzzle. Complete fail

[GloveSlap]

Got a little chuckle out of the movie review portion, but it makes no difference to me. It's definitely not a movie for everyone. Glad to see it got a nice transfer though. I'll usually trust a positive Svet video score, just not his negative scores.

[ccateni]

I'm gonna buy Billy Madison just to spite the reviewer.
Sandler is GOAT.

[YodasFootPowder]

If you want to criticize Adam on anything, criticize him on all the trash movies he put out later in his career. Billy Madison is still a gem and was made at a time when Sandler still put a little heart into his movies and clearly had a ton of creative control.

[deanandmaria]

Originally Posted by YodasFootPowder

If you want to criticize Adam on anything, criticize him on all the trash movies he put out later in his career. Billy Madison is still a gem and was made at a time when Sandler still put a little heart into his movies and clearly had a ton of creative control.

I'm sorry - but come on now. No one in Hollywood seems to have more creative control that Sandler.

Step 1 - Decides where he wants to vacation.

Step 2 - Call up either Drew Barrymore or Jennifer Aniston to see if she would like to accompany to same location.

Step 3 - Slap together a script and film while there.

Special note - if Barrymore or Aniston are not available, then call Rock, Spade, James and the Boys and do another Grown-Ups flick.

[Joey9775]

Jesus what a miserable f*ck that reviewer is.

[Alvarius]

Originally Posted by ihaveblink

Sandler is doing a very specific, outlandish, tongue-in-cheek version of the old comedy bit of a fully grown man-child character eventually buckling down and working hard to become "normal" and successful. He's completely rewarded for the bare-minimum too. And the movie treats it as just that, a tired old cliché but also one that isn't "normal" and commenting on itself constantly.

I can trace this story only back to Arthur (1981). Does it go back further than that?

[CaptCanuck]

Svet really does fit the trope of "those" movie reviewers.

[ihaveblink]

Originally Posted by Alvarius

I can trace this story only back to Arthur (1981). Does it go back further than that?

Yes, that and Stripes are ones I was specifically thinking about, which was also the same year as Arthur. Stripes basically has it's own "reality" because it's a comedy and everyone kind of knows it and you just roll with the logistics of it. Arthur is more about a guy from obscene wealth and privilege. I do think BM was riffing on both of those. Coming To America also comes to mind.

Earlier in 95, we got Tommy Boy, and that film is way more sincere and grounded than BM but features a blue-collar but rich kid failing upwards until they have to save the family business. Both feature Farley and they show off how much range he had. I do believe he probably had a good chance to win an Oscar if he had lived, found the right role, and got away from his demons.