Life Stinks

Plot synopsis:
Goddard Bolt (Mel Brooks) is the callous CEO of Bolt Enterprises. Bolt shows little regard for other people's needs or for the environment, and has his eye on the slum of Los Angeles so he can tear it down. Bolt makes a bet with his biggest rival, Vance Crasswell (Jeffrey Tambor), who also has an interest in the property, that he can survive on those streets for 30 days. Should Bolt lose, Crasswell owns the property, but should Bolt win, Crasswell will sell it for practically nothing.
There are three conditions: #1) Bolt will be completely penniless; #2) He must wear an electronic anklet that will activate if he leaves the boundaries, forfeiting the bet if he exceeds 30 seconds out of bounds; #3) At no time can he reveal to any of the slum area residents that he is Goddard Bolt. To add to the look, Bolt has his mustache shaved off, then Crasswell confiscates his toupee and rips the top pocket of his jacket.
Unbeknown to Bolt, Crasswell schemes to make Goddard's stay on the streets as bad as possible. Bolt, homeless, hungry and filthy, is befriended by skid-row inhabitants like Sailor (Howard Morris) and Fumes (Theodore Wilson) and given the nickname "Pepto" after falling asleep in a crate with a Pepto-Bismol logo on its side. In the process, he meets and eventually becomes attracted to Molly (Lesley Ann Warren), a homeless woman who used to be a dancer on Broadway. During a scuffle with two muggers, Bolt is pushed out of bounds, which activates his anklet. To prevent the "30-second forfeiture", Bolt rushes back in, which impresses Molly with his supposed bravery as it looks like he is tackling the muggers.
Bolt learns a series of important life lessons during his 'adventure', namely that life is not about accomplishments or material success but rather the integrity of the human spirit. However, Bolt is unaware that the unscrupulous Crasswell has no intention of honoring their bet. When Crasswell realizes Bolt is honoring the bet fair and square, Crasswell bribes Bolt's lawyers into fabricating the story that Bolt had lost his mind and has his property seized. Forced to live on the streets for good and remanded to a free clinic by mistake, a drugged Bolt murmurs that "life stinks", but Molly implores him to remember small things such as the two of them waltzing that make life livable. Crasswell, meanwhile has his own plans for the slum area, planning to tear it down as well. Bolt incites Fumes and the other slum residents to stage a mock battle on the ceremony while it is televised. Crasswell attempts to stop Bolt with a steam shovel, to which Bolt fights Crasswell in another steam shovel akin to "dinosaur fights". When Bolt's shovel has plucked Crasswell and has him hanging by his jacket, the scene is freeze-framed into a news report saying that Crasswell, in a court case, was forced to admit he made a bet with Bolt in order to get him to understand the slum conditions, then reneged on the terms. Bolt, now in control of the area, has plans to renovate it into the "Bolt Center" which will give the slum residents employment, renovate the tenements into livable homes and give the children a private school financed entirely out of pocket by Goddard Bolt. The news report ends by saying Bolt has married Molly and the press are expecting an extravagant CEO-type event, only to then be shown Goddard and Molly taking their wedding vows in a simple chapel in the slum area, then driving off in a limousine with a vanity plate "PEPTO".

Tags: satire

Review:
Growing up around downtown LA as a kid in the seventies didn't look much different than it does today as far as the kinds of odd characters you'll run into while passing through it and I think this movie really captures some of the authentic types of characters you meet when you really get to know them, but you also run into those other types that are always looking for trouble as also depicted in this Mel Brooks movie who brings a lighter and even comical side to this scenario that is so prevalent and filmed in downtown Los Angeles.Mel Brooks also stars as Goddard Bolt, a ruthless billionaire who soon begins to experience how the other half lives by unintentionally making a bet with his conniving business associates, from there he goes from riches to rags and meets some strange, funny but good hearted souls on the streets as well as endless comical mishaps, but with the help of a bag lady (Lesley Ann Warren) he begins to discover what really matters most unlike his former business associates.Although this is one of my favorite movies, I still think the ending could have been done much better, but the comedy throughout never ends..
Many Mel Brooks fans like the laugh-a-minute spoof humor that is usually incorporated into the movies.
A lot of my friends who are also Mel Brooks fans, found this movies to be less enjoyable simply because of the lack of humor.
A few of my friends who had never really cared for Mel Brooks movies liked this one more simply because it was more serious, and with less of the typical Brooks styled jokes.
While this movie isn't my favorites of the Mel Brooks movies (how can one compete with Spaceballs, Robin Hood: Men in Tights, Young Frankenstien, etc.?) it was still enjoyable, and I don't think it's nearly as bad as some people are making it to be..
Mel Brooks gives a great performance as the lead character, I think somewhat different from his usual persona in his movies.There's not a lot of knockout jokes or something like that, but there are some rather hilarious scenes, and overall this is a very enjoyable and very easy to watch film.Very recommended..
It certainly has its moments(Mel's dancing, getting knocked into the dumpster), and forms a more cohesive whole then most recent Brooks movies(it contains more then a series of gags loosely tied together by a plot that could have been created by a 3 year old).
I enjoyed it, but it's not like Mel Brook's other movies.
I think most people could enjoy this movie on some level if they forget it's a Mel Brooks project, which is hard since he stars in it..
A different Mel Brooks movie, but manages to make you smile and think.
Most people think of the homeless as just a lost cause while worrying about things such as racism, the war on Iraq, pressuring kids to succeed, technology, the elections, inflation, or worrying if they'll be next to end up on the streets.But what if you were given a bet to live on the streets for a month without the luxuries you once had from a home, the entertainment sets, a bathroom, pictures on the wall, a computer, and everything you once treasure to see what it's like to be homeless?
That is Goddard Bolt's lesson.Mel Brooks (who directs) who stars as Bolt plays a rich man who has everything in the world until deciding to make a bet with a sissy rival (Jeffery Tambor) to see if he can live in the streets for thirty days without the luxuries; if Bolt succeeds, he can do what he wants with a future project of making more buildings.
He's given the nickname Pepto by a vagrant after it's written on his forehead where Bolt meets other characters including a woman by the name of Molly (Lesley Ann Warren) an ex-dancer who got divorce before losing her home, and her pals Sailor (Howard Morris) and Fumes (Teddy Wilson) who are already used to the streets.
He's not used to reaching mutual agreements like he once did when being rich where it's fight or flight, kill or be killed.While the love connection between Molly and Bolt wasn't necessary to plot, I found "Life Stinks" to be one of Mel Brooks' observant films where prior to being a comedy, it shows a tender side compared to his slapstick work such as Blazing Saddles, Young Frankenstein, or Spaceballs for the matter, to show what it's like having something valuable before losing it the next day or on the other hand making a stupid bet like all rich people do when they don't know what to do with their money.
Mel Brook's imitation of the little guy dancing is one of the funniest things I have ever seen in a film.
It is really good and funny movie, and if you like Brooks - this is a must!
In short - Brooks (billionare) gets to the streets as homeless for 30 days in order to win the entire poor district from his competitor.
This movie has some Capra flavor, that´s why is so  good.There are some unforgettable gags such as the one when Brooks tries to earn some money dancing in the street, and all the people passing by just ignore him, or when he meets a funny crazy man who believes is Paul Getty and then start arguing and slapping each other.If you haven´t seen it, you don´t know what you´ve missed.This movie tells us about the old and eternal struggle of the poor against the rich.
True, it did not have the adults rolling around the floor, but the sound of the children's enjoyment made it seem so.It is a true Mel Brooks farce, with plenty of moral content - how sad it is to be loved for our money, not for whom we are, and how fickle are our friends and associates.
Every character is lovable in someway and I personaly think shows homeless people in a positive way, true this isn't real life.
The plot centres around a bet that Brooks can't live without his millions.As film plots go, this one is easy to follow and very enjoyable..
Goddard Bolt (Mel Brooks) is a wealthy businessman who doesn't understand why cutting down a rainforest or tearing down an old folks home might create problems, if such a thing is counter to his plans.
If you like Mel Brooks, do not shy away from this film.
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.
I liked the way Mel Brooks pays homage to Charles Chaplin in this film.
If you have watched Chaplin's earlier silent films then you'll get the humor as well.Recommended for Mel Brooks fans..
It starts out nicely enough, with Mel as Trump-like mogul Goddard Bolt ("You can call me God"), who accepts a bet that he can't live on the streets for 30 days.
But the moment the movie hits the streets, it turns into a pathos-laden mess, with occasional "funny" bits interjected (Mel sees a black kid break-dancing for money and tries to do a vaudeville buck-and-wing, yuk, yuk).
The worst part is this movie's musical number, in which Brooks and Warren do a silent dance to Cole Porter's "Easy to Love." Brooks's musical parodies are usually the highlights of his movies; here he plays the whole thing straight, like a dancing excerpt from an aging guest star on "The Carol Burnett Show" (on which Rudy DeLuca, this film's co-writer, began his career).
It's their job.Perhaps those who are less than satisfied with the film were expecting something similar to "Blazing Saddles" "The Producers" and "Young Frankenstein." But "Life Stinks" is a new direction for Brooks.
Mel Brooks is hilarious and Leslie Ann Warren is wonderfully paired with him in this film.
Long before Wall Street and the greed mongers took so much from average citizens in such a big way -- Mel Brooks understood how to send a message about a very serious issue, using comedy.It's always been very easy for well-heeled and also even average citizens to be repulsed by homeless people and the less fortunate.
Mel Brooks won't one of my favorite filmmakers but this time he gets to the target in this dramatic comedy and pay tribute to those invisible people who lives in the streets as human remains,scorned by the society and must to be hidden to landscape,people like "Sailor" who bring to character homeless's heart and end up died on the sidewalks of the cities,Mel leave a sublime message to the audience and this critic to society and how says the tittle life stinks!!!
BUT, films like Life Stinks and Space Balls are chock full of Mel and are pretty dopey movies (yes, I DID NOT LIKE Space Balls--but this isn't the place to talk about that).Second, apart from cancer, rectal itch and mental retardation, I can't think of a less funny topic than homelessness.
The FUNNIEST(?) scene in the movie has Mel making whoopee with Leslie Ann Warren in a dumpster!!
Preachy, self-indulgent, depressing, but not funny.I consider Mel Brooks' "Blazing Saddles" to be on the short list for Funniest Movie Ever.
The ending is cute but unrealistic to say the least, as are many Mel Brooks films.
In this, it has a lot of similarities with Dan Akroyd's character in Trading Places, an earlier hit comedy.There's a palpable second tier somewhat budget look to this film, but that gives it a charm that aligns with it's unusual theme.Where this film really shines is in showcasing for long periods of time, the struggles of being homeless and broke in modern urban America.
Here, Brooks does less hamming, plays his character, and employs others to do much of the slapstick, while at the same time, creating a strong romantic bond between him and Leslie Ann Warren's character, a homeless woman.
Before viewing it I had heard it was considered Mel Brooks' worst movie and that it was more of a serious film in comparison to his older work.
I thought maybe it got a bad rap because being serious it was not what people were expecting from a Mel Brooks film at the time, and I enjoy seeing filmmakers break their usual territory in branching out to try something different.
Also this was Mel Brooks' first film in four years after Spaceballs which had developed a massive cult following by that time, so I am sure audiences were expecting comedy gold yet again from Brooks'.
Mel Brooks' is universally known as a comedic director, but if he wanted to take a more serious approach in directing, he should have focused on the film being a drama entirely and getting someone else other than himself to play the lead role.
The film does have its merits and I guess Brooks is trying to give his audience a message, that there are always people who have it worse than we do, and that we need to pay more attention to the homeless people on the street because they aren't begging for what we think they might be, they really need help, but what is funny about that when it's all said and done?
Granted the film does have a few laughs, very little of them come from Brooks' signature parody- style comedy, but I laughed maybe about five times, which is really unusual for a Mel Brooks' film which have reputations for being laugh out loud all the way through.
Leslie Ann Warren provides some nice comic support to Brooks' here and makes the film at least watchable, several other actors playing the homeless also keep the film afloat.
And then the film just gets downright annoying at the end with Brooks' recycling old jokes from earlier in the film, that weren't really even that funny the first time.
Those guys really brought Mel Brooks' to a rapid decline in his work, and this film is proof of that.
And it's sad, though not hard to see why Brooks only directed two more films after this before taking a step away from the director's chair for good.
A filthy rich businessman (Mel Brooks) bets a corporate rival (Jeffrey Tambor) that he can live on the streets of L.A. without the comforts of home or money, which proves to be tougher than he thought.This is not one of those Mel Brooks films you hear about.
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.
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.
A funny Mel Brooks film.
Well, if you like Mel Brooks' films but for one reason or another haven't seen this one, it is a good one.
Homeless Molly (Lesley Ann Warren) comes to his rescue when two crazy thugs try to rob him.A rich man bets to live as a poor man.
"Life Stinks" (Mel Brooks, 1991).
This movie was a kind of turn for Mel Brooks.
Of course, Brooks has not made a comedy about _real_ homeless people.
Charming little film from Mel Brooks.
By directing 'Life Stinks',director Mel Brook was able to give viewers a basic idea about the problems of homeless people..
I agree with those who see a different Mel Brooks in "Life Stinks," and one whom they like better.
"Life Stinks" has a real story line and good plot – qualities others have noted that are missing from most early Brooks films.
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.
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..
Don't read this review if you haven't seen this film, but please see it.Life Stinks was very very very funny, and they say that the best way to get a point across is to do it with humour.This film had billionaire business man Mel Brooks via a bet with his colleagues, thrown into the dark hidden world of America's underclass, their homeless, with stark, hilarious and very moving moments.Mel Brooks learned what being alone, hungry, and helpless felt like, he also learned that there was much more community among the homeless than there is among suburbia.And at the end of the film he realised that people needed homes, so he built low cost homes for the homeless and other facilities they needed.What I got from this film was the darker unseen side of America's free market, and Britain is the same.I was left wondering if Mel Brooks made this film to highlight homelessness in America, or whether homelessness is an accepted part of corporate America, and that Mel Brook just wanted to make just another comedy ?Either way, this film said much more about America's awful political system, than it did Mel Brooks as a comedian..
Dark comedy not Brooks' best work, got better toward end (SPOILERS).
Toward the end, the movie takes a more positive tone.Brooks is wonderful, but I've seen better work from him.
This year is the 20th anniversary for Mel Brooks' underrated comedy Life Stinks, which was a departure for Brooks in that it was the first straight story he had done since The Twelve Chairs in 1970.
As to this film, the best moment to me is when Brooks' character sees a homeless friend has died and he is just being taken away to the morgue.
Good, easy to watch comedy from Brooks.
This is a good film by Mel Brooks.
'Life Stinks' could have been a better film if was written and executed in a different way..
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.
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.
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.