Spaceballs (1987) - Adventure, Comedy, Sci-Fi

Hohum Score



A star pilot and his sidekick must come to the rescue of a Princess and save the galaxy from a ruthless race of beings known as Spaceballs.

IMDB: 7.1
Director: Mel Brooks
Stars: Mel Brooks, John Candy
Length: 96 Minutes
PG Rating: PG
Reviews: 33 out of 302 found boring (10.92%)

One-line Reviews (71)

The humor was contrived and trite, not to mention crass.

Jokes were so predictable and...

i found it boring and slower than molasses flowing uphill in January.

The cast are engaging, especially Candy and Morains have the biggest laughs.

This is the kind of performances that make you wonder if the likes of John Candy or Rick Moranis were ever really worth watching, something you'd need a heady does of nostalgia behind you to dispute.

Probably the worst movie I've ever seen.

It is a really enjoyable film, especially if you're seeing it for the first time.

I find the film enjoyable, amusing with some funny parts I didn't even get as kid, notably the Virginity alarm and the Valium yawning Prince.

Don't waste your time on this movie.

Lastly, the cameo by John Hurt was an unexpected treat.

Plus, he tends to wait far too long to spoof things.

Spaceballs may prove that bad acting makes any type of films unbearable.

But it makes the mistake of getting lost in itself, as if it should be real and engaging.

A waste of everybody's time.

I guarantee you this a parody worth watching and do not worry that parody may die because ,is alive and even thriving in the internet with seats like Screen Junkies, Cinemacins ,How it should have ended it and so on.

I found them tiresome by ten minutes into the movie.

Great, Funny, Exciting .

I will only say it was very funny and very exciting.

This movie is a junk pile compared to Mel Brooks' earlier films, but I like the way it revels in its cheesy, predictable badness.

The last Mel Brooks film worth watching.

It is sadly nowhere near the zenith of Mel Brooks' work, his glorious trio of The Producers (1968), Blazing Saddles (1974) and Young Frankenstein (1974), but is a consistently funny, intermittently hilarious and always entertaining comedy.

That SPACEBALLS also tells its own entertaining story that holds up as a stand-alone adventure is testament to its effectiveness.

I mean, even the Simpsons now sound slow when compared to Family Guy, South Park or Friends.

) is bland and poor although Rivers is quite good.

I laughed maybe one time and the rest of the time I was either crying out of boredom or sleeping.

To a true fan of the original series, this is simply depressing, to everyone else this is boring and irrelevant.

They make this movie long and tedious.

Most of the latter generations after mine just do not understand what is the big deal concerning Star Wars, and for that confusion, pay no attention to a parody of that movie.

even at 90 minutes, this is far too long.

It's the little things that makes this movie so enjoyable.

Mel's dialog is predictable and trite, and the language and innuendo are neither very funny, nor suitable for children.

First of all the fact that he always mixes really funny stuff with horribly dated and boring scenes.

Overall, noisy and uneven, but it is entertaining thanks to the cast.

There are some things in this Spoof that are mildly Enjoyable, Rick Moranis as "Dark Helmet" has the best Look and the best Lines.

The uncle was probably a funny kid back in high school - but now the years have caught up with him & his humor is just tired, dated, and boring.

A waste of money, talent and time .

Released a full decade after "Star Wars," critics at the time thought "Spaceballs" may have dragged its feet before taking on the task of spoofing the sci-fi masterpiece.

But, all personal bitterness aside, this is an enjoyable movie.

Worse still is the slow pacing, taking forever to set up single-line gags.

Jim Candy, Rick Moranis, and Bill Pullman seem poised for humor - but everything that comes out of their mouths is just predictable & childish.

For example, the Darth Vader version, Dark Helmet (Rick Moranis) finds it tedious to breath with his heavy metal helmet on.

I'm a big fan of parodies and generally love Mel Brooks' films but this waste of my time couldn't get a single out-loud laugh from me.

I grew up watching this and always enjoyed it.

It's actually an interesting and exciting story being told, while keeping the audience entertained enough to remember several quotes.

This is an extremely dull, lifeless, unfunny, vulgar piece of garbage that should not be viewed by anyone of any age.

I don't think that this is one of Mel Brooks' finest hours, but it was reasonably entertaining, though as far as Brooks' films go The Producers and Young Frankenstein are more entertaining and I think more watchable.

While not one of Mel Brooks' best, it still stands tall as a silly and highly entertaining riff on Sci-Fi classics.

Speaking of unpredictable, the late John Candy (Barf)was unbelievable.

But this movie is so simple, yet so entertaining.

Very funny, entertaining sci-fi comedy from one of the great comedic filmmakers of all time.

Space Balls is the best parody movie I've ever seen, Blazing Saddles was good, and Young Frankenstein was a bit hard to follow.

But back when parody films were still worth watching, Spaceballs came out to mock everything Star Wars with quotable dialogue and great actors making this one parody that was done right.

Children would quickly be bored and adults would rather stick their fingers in a light socket.

Brooks doesn't actually pick apart the films or genras he parodies, he just takes the given setting and fills it with a bunch of dumb sight gags and predictable jokes.

DVD includes an entertaining commentary track by the director, three featurettes and more.

(And one of the worst movies ever produced)There is no doubt in my mind that this is an awful, awful film.

When you're young, you don't understand the innuendo, you just think the movie is funny and a real exciting adventure, as an adult, you notice the innuendo and think it's a real exciting adventure.

I found Space Balls tedious, poorly acted and trying to be over funny at times.

I have fond memories of "Spaceballs" as a kid (you'd be surprised how enjoyable this is to those of an impressionable age - then again, maybe not; a lot of the humor is completely childish), and it effectively planted the seeds for a later Mel Brooks interest.

Even ignoring the complete lack of humour, the plot is tedious and makes no sense, the characters are dull, the acting dreadful and there is next to nothing to be gained from watching it.

I just found it rather a slow slog, maybe partly because I didn't get that much out of "Star Wars.

For me Spaceballs was a huge letdown and a huge bore.

Though probably not well known at the time, Bill Pullman (Lone Star) comes through with a flashy performance, terrificly handled and unpredictable.

And I enjoyed it.

Some scenes stretch on far too long, for example when the ship turns into a giant maid it takes like five minutes, when it would have been funnier if it took maybe twenty seconds.

What a waste of my time.

Uneven but reasonably entertaining .

Hang the barely serviceable plot over a wire-frame of the original Star Wars trilogy, add some take-off on original characters names that must have taken all but a second to dream up and you've got a tedious mess, well worth avoiding!

"We can't stop, we've got to slow down first.

Underneath all the special effects these films are spiffed up remakes of cheesy, predictable 1930's westerns and serials.

Ignoring the fact that it's all rather formulaic (it's a spoof of a Sci-Fi genre filled with billions of formulaic twists - so it fits), that it's obviously focused on Star Wars (but what other franchise offers itself up for such micket taking) with very few references to 'other' films of the genre it's a good, honest piece of entertainment.