Cebalord Very best movie i ever watch

Actuakers One of my all time favorites.

Aubrey Hackett While it is a pity that the story wasn't told with more visual finesse, this is trivial compared to our real-world problems. It takes a good movie to put that into perspective.

Guillelmina The film's masterful storytelling did its job. The message was clear. No need to overdo.

RadiSadek Among the movies that I have seen so far, and I have seen quite a few , this movie represents Hollywood the best. Unfortunately, not the best of Hollywood, but its worse.Art, in its absolute definition, comes from within the person, through a complex yet mandatory process, mainly deemed as "inspiration". An artist must be inspired in order to achieve any kind of work of art, be it a painting, a building, or anything creative.Movies are mainly a product of art and artists.However, I have developed, through my 1400 movies that I have watched, a certain ability to detect uninspired movie directors, and boy Mel Brooks is one.This is my explanation of why this movie is so unfunny, distasteful, and even offending in its jokes: a director forced to continue to produce "comedies", at any cost. He is completely uninspired here, and as we saw it, art, and especially jokes, must come from within. They cannot be forced. If they are, then movies like this spurt out inexorably, like snakes in the desert.For the record, I have never considered Mel Brooks, nor his films, funny. How many times did you laugh while watching Life Stinks? I bet it is not more than 3 or 4 times, and probably a mild chuckle. And this is supposed to be a comedy...4/10, and I am giving 4 because at least he TRIED to make us laugh, which is much harder than it sounds.

Bryan Kluger When you hear or see the name 'Mel Brooks', your mind usually tells you to laugh and think of his spoof comedy work, including 'Blazing Saddles', 'Spaceballs', 'Young Frankenstein', and 'Robin Hood: Men In Tights'. There are many other films that fall into this spoof category that Brooks has made, but back in 1991, Mel wrote, produced, and directed a dramatic movie with comedy elements. It was more of an experimental film for him, as he wanted to explore other genres and make a satire of the class system in America.This movie was called 'Life Stinks', and unfortunately it was met with unfavorable reviews and even worse box office receipts. Don't get me wrong, there are a few slapstick moments, but they don't come often, and is a sidestep from the director's usual line of work. In short though, 'Life Stinks' just doesn't work all that well. The usual funny dialogue Mel writes for his parody films just doesn't fit into this movie, and the way the script is written to make jokes about the homeless people and their families, simply doesn't work. A good example of how to shed light on these subjects was with the film 'Trading Places'.It seems like Mel wanted to make the same movie, but was incapable of producing something of that valor that perfectly mixes comedy and drama, while shedding light on the lower class and homeless people of America. Mel stars as Goddard Bolt, a billionaire businessman who is planning on tearing down all the slums in Los Angeles, only to build high end condos and shops. The catch is that he only owns half of the land. The other half belongs to a man named Vance (Jeffrey Tambor), who doesn't want to sell.Hell-bent on his plan, Bolt makes a bet with Vance that if he can survive for 30 days in the slums on his own without leaving, Vance will sell him his half of the land for super cheap. The bet is on, and Bolt heads to the slums under three rules, including, he has to be penniless, he cannot leave the slums, and he can't tell anyone who he really is. Throughout this 30 days, Bolt learns all the life lessons he never knew, mostly being that being rich and having material things isn't what life is all about. Meanwhile, Vance has a sinister scheme in play that will destroy Bolt.'Life Stinks' could have been a better film if was written and executed in a different way. The slapstick comedy and the intent on trying to bring laughs to issues such as homelessness, just doesn't work with this movie. The dialogue is painfully bad, and the characters are clichés of themselves. That all being said, you have to give Mel Brooks some points for stepping outside his realm to make something different than his usual shtick.

Michael_Elliott Life Stinks (1993) ** 1/2 (out of 4) Mel Brooks co-wrote, directs and stars in this rather tasteless comedy where plays a billionaire who makes a bet with another billionaire who doesn't think he can live as a homeless person for a month. Brooks hits the streets and soon realizes that having nothing in life isn't that easy and this is especially true when he meets a homeless woman (Leslie Ann Warren) and soon finds himself without his fortune. I remember when LIFE STINKS was released it took a beating from critics with many of them calling it the worst picture in Brooks career. I remember several critics giving it a BOMB rating and while the film is incredibly uneven I think some people have been a tad bit too tough on the picture because while it's far from perfect there are still a few big laughs early on. I think the strongest part of the film is the first hour when Brooks really gets to show off that terrific comic timing and some of the best moments happen when his advisers are giving him a few updates and he's unable to see why kicking a group of rare Indians out of the rain forest isn't a good idea. The way Brooks reacts to what he's being told just shows what a perfect comedian he is. Things are also pretty good once he hits the streets and gets use to what all they have to offer. I think there are some nice laughs to be had out of some of the supporting players and there's no doubt that Brooks appears to be having fun. The problem lies in the screenplay, which you should know is going to have some problems when during the opening credits you notice four people are credited. The entire film never really feels complete and instead it just seems like we're watching a bunch of short scenes thrown together. The pacing of the film never really comes together but what really kills the film is the final thirty-minutes, which appear to forget it's a comedy and instead goes for some rather silly moral story and an insane ending with the two billionaires fighting with construction equipment. The film wants to have its cake and eat it to and this is especially true whenever it's making fun of the homeless and then a second later it's trying to get some sort of deep, dramatic message across. Brooks, as I said, is very good in the movie and he certainly helps raise the material when it starts to slag. Jeffrey Tambor is funny in his supporting role and Warren is clearly having a good time with her part. If you try comparing this to BLAZING SADDLES or YOUNG FRANKENSTEIN then there's no question that it's a disaster. However, when viewed on its own the film isn't nearly as bad as its reputation but at the same time we've all come to expect more from Brooks.

NaturalBornChilla ...this is a classic with so many great dialogs and scenes nobody should miss. Nice story, funny riches-to-rags situations, Mel Brooks is not a bad lead, maybe not perfect but he is funny ;D Don't pay attention to the rating, it's BS. Watch it, then watch something like final destination (2009) and tell me that Life Stinks deserves about the same rating. If you do, I don't think we can be friends XD At this point I recommend the fourth season of "Curb Your Enthusiasm" to every Brooks fan ;) Vote 10 against the ignorant opinions of inchworms! I've to make 10 lines here to post a comment? I don't wanna write a book here :P