The LEGO Movie 2: The Second Part
The Walking Dead
Log in with Facebook
Forgot your password?
Don't have an account? Sign up here
and the Terms and Policies,
and to receive email from Rotten Tomatoes and Fandango.
Already have an account? Log in here
Please enter your email address and we will email you a new password.
We want to hear what you have to say but need to verify your account. Just leave us a message here and we will work on getting you verified.
Please reference “Error Code 2121” when contacting customer service.
There's fine spoofery and amusing characters in Spaceballs, though it's a far cry from Mel Brooks' peak era.
All Critics (38)
| Top Critics (8)
| Fresh (22)
| Rotten (16)
| DVD (15)
It`s a close call on recommending this movie, but ``Spaceballs`` does have some big laughs that are not to be missed
The crew flings itself energetically through space in search of laughs, but it will never penetrate the galaxy where Blazing Saddles and Young Frankenstein traced their giddy orbits.
The film's low-tech styling is roughly the cardboard inversion of the cinematic machines it parodies, and Brooks seems less inclined than usual to push the overkill urges too far.
Mel Brooks will do anything for a laugh. Unfortunately, what he does in Spaceballs, a misguided parody of the Star Wars adventures, isn't very funny.
Typically, the best conceits end in pratfalls, and non-Brooks fans may find that the gravitational pull towards the thumpingly obvious outweighs the wit.
If it isn't likely to generate what Mr. Brooks himself refers to as 'Spaceballs II: The Search for More Money, neither is it anything less than gentle, harmless satire that occasionally has real bite.
Spaceballs remains a funny enough movie on its own, even after all these years.
This sendup by director Mel Brooks incorporates the silliest aspects of all the major space adventures of the last decade, and the whole is a hilarious combination of its parts.
The jokes about the more calculating aspects of George Lucas's franchise are particularly telling. Remember, the Schwartz will be with you always.
Unforgiveable then, unforgiveable now.
It's mostly forced humor all the way, a movie that rarely measures up to adequate kitsch.
Goofy parody mocks the Star Wars series.
It easily gets lost in its own sarcasm, but Spaceballs has its share of parodies and laughs to make for a decent film. Mel Brooks, Rick Moranis and the rest of the cast are able to make humorous performances even if its attempt at spoofing its intergalactic saga seems to feel stale. 3/5
Moments of real humor, but it relies to heavily on the cornball schtick.
It's just great. The unique movie which you see John Candy, Rick Moranis, Mel Brooks and John Hurt! A great Star Wars spoof.
Spaceballs is downright bad filmmaking, but it's OK because it's a parody, right? Well, it's certainly not as funny as the Mel Brooks classic range which includes films as witty and downright hilarious as "Blazing Saddles". Therefore, I sadly noticed the flaws with the direction, writing, acting and production values of this nostalgic parody following the eye rolling mishaps going on in a galaxy far far away. What really depresses me about Spaceballs is how desperate it is, there are many jokes in the film that are repeated supposedly because Brooks ran out of ideas. The talented comedian Rick Moranis plays a knock off of Darth Vader with an unnaturally enormous helmet, named Dark Helmet. The central gag with the parody of Vader is that he struggles to maneuver with the helmet on. Funny the first time, yes, funny any other time, not really. Also if this is parodying "Star Wars", why wasn't their much parody? I think it's down to the fact it just wishes to be a delightfully goofy slapstick comedy and nothing more, that just happens to have an all star cast and a massive budget. Which brings me to the most mind boggling aspect of watching this film, all the way through I thought to myself why the film looked so cheap. After all, it was made 10 years after the original "Star Wars" film, and also had 3 times the budget. Why the special effects were worse and the set designs more cardboard, i'll never know. Perhaps because the money went into the writing and convincing John Candy to get in a fur-suit. I personally find that hilarious, and especially the opening, but as a whole it could have been funnier, and should have been another Mel Brooks classic. I am sad to report that it isn't, but it's undeniably fun, if quite tiresome. Only by the inch of it's life does it carry just about enough material for a generic parody. However a cast this talented should have been able to pull off something a little better than this.
View All Quotes