MovieChat Forums > High Anxiety (1977) Discussion > Madeline Kahn almost saved this one.

Madeline Kahn almost saved this one.

posted 13 years ago by HarveyManfredinStJohn
8 replies | jump to latest

While her standout performances in Brooks' Blazing Saddles and Young Frankenstein were instrumental in making those films the classics they are, she was the only bright spot in this cringe-worthy spoof of the great Hitchcock. The only time I laughed was when she was on-screen, with that odd way of phrasing her sentences and her overall delivery. She was a gifted comedienne.

I think this marked the decline in Brooks' catalog, in terms of quality (Silent Movie was fair, though I'd have to watch a Keaton film afterward to truly satisfy my fix). After this, his comedy became too spotty and juvenile. Even Kahn couldn't save the train-wreck that is History of the World: Part One.

Buster Keaton made me quit smoking.

[–] TheSolarSailor 13 years ago

Saved it from what? High Anxiety may not be on the same level of Brook's greatest films Blazing Saddles and Young Frankenstein, but it is still a damned funny movie and I happen to love it. I think it's only real weakness is in having Brooks as Dr. Thorndyke, as I feel that gene Wilder would have really brought the role to life.

- - - - - - -
Whose idea was it for the word "Lisp" to have an "S" in it?

[–] 13 years ago

[deleted]

[–] Danimal_77 10 years ago

This movie didn't need saving. Imo, it's one of Mel Brooks best movie. Hilarious from start to finish.

[–] NewtonFigg 9 years ago

I've seen most of Brooks' movies several times. In most of them, when Madeline Kahn walks in, I find that's when I start looking for something else to do.

[–] !!!deleted!!! (19664510) 8 years ago

High Anxiety and History of the World are widely regarded as two of Brooks' best. You're insane.

[–] SpaceMountainMike 8 years ago

...and History of the World are widely regarded as two of Brooks' best.

It might be, now, but at the time people were advising me not to see it and I'm guessing it bombed at the box office, but I loved it.

_______________

My iMDB profile http://www.imdb.com/name/nm4297325/?ref_=fn_al_nm_1

[–] christomacin (4539) 3 years ago

Not bombed, exactly, but it did underperform. From Wikipedia:

"Box office
The film opened in 484 theatres the same weekend as Raiders of the Lost Ark and Clash of the Titans and finished fourth for the weekend with a gross of $4.8 million, behind Raiders, Clash and Cheech and Chong's Nice Dreams. With a per-screen average of $10,000, it was Brooks' highest opening on a per-screen basis. Despite the strong start, poor word of mouth impacted its box office. Although it grossed $31.7 million, it was considered a commercial disappointment because the film had been "tracking" well and Brooks' previous films had been so successful."

[–] jgroub 8 years ago

Harvey, don't listen to these other people here. I love me some Mel Brooks, but you are absolutely right. This and History of the World just weren't anywhere near the level of Blazing Saddles and Young Frankenstein. A few chuckles here and there, but not great.

I want the doctor to take your picture so I can look at you from inside as well.