You won't be disappointed!

Good movie but grossly overrated

A film with more than the usual spoiler issues. Talking about it in any detail feels akin to handing you a gift-wrapped present and saying, "I hope you like it -- It's a thriller about a diabolical secret experiment."

A terrific literary drama and character piece that shows how the process of creating art can be seen differently by those doing it and those looking at it from the outside.

The Master of Parody takes on the Master of Suspense in "High Anxiety."As insinuated in the headline for this review, this movie seems to operate to me as a sort of "Blazing Saddles" Lite. The two films even share two actors besides Mel Brooks, those being Madeline Kahn and Harvey Korman. I make this comparison because this film has a similar style of humor, yet the jokes are not quite as clever and they don't come as fast as in "Saddles."But, it's not exactly fair to compare these two films, so let's look at "High Anxiety" on its own.Starting with the script, the dialogue is written in a way that is rather corny at times to parody the seriousness and arguable melodrama of films like "Vertigo." It's fairly amusing, but not as much so as the visual gags, which really drive the humor of the film.As for the acting, in comedies like this, the way to judge an actor's performance is by judging their ability to react to the comic goings on around them. As to this, everyone here does a fine job. Kahn and Brooks play their straight dialogue in just that way while Harvey Korman and Cloris Leachman relish their roles as villains who are so cartoonishly evil that they might as well be twirling their mustaches the entire time.Finally, the direction. The whole thing is shot and scored very dramatically, going as far as to have the characters look into the camera during loud and bombastic music cues. This also serves to parody the style of Hitchcock.As mentioned earlier, most of the jokes are visual in nature. They are consistently funny and there are only a few that don't quite land. Brooks paces the action in a way that makes the jokes somewhat unexpected, if nothing else.Overall, this is a solid tribute to Alfred Hitchcock and a decent entry in Mel Brooks' filmography. It's main flaw is that it simply isn't quite as funny as some of Brooks' other work. On its own, however, it works quite well. Sit back, relax, and try not to get any "High Anxiety."

By 1977 Mel Brooks had already spoofed the western, Universal horror films and movies of the silent era, so with High Anxiety he decided to take an affectionate aim at the suspense films of Alfred Hitchcock. It would probably be fair to say that the results are quite mixed, although in fairness even Brooks at his best can be uneven. The humour is a mixture of the very broad to the somewhat subtle. There are a few dud moments sprinkled throughout but it is successfully funny on occasions too. But High Anxiety sort of gets away with the poorer moments more or less and is really quite enjoyable from the point of view of its Hitchcockian references alone. If you are a fan of the master of suspense you will probably get a kick out of this one to some extent. The story has a psychiatrist with a fear of heights appointed the head doctor at the Institute for the Very, Very Nervous, when there he discovers a web of crime.Many of the films in Hitchcock's filmography are targeted, such as Spellbound (1945), Dial M for Murder (1954), Vertigo (1958), North by Northwest (1959), Psycho (1960) and The Birds (1963). I'm sure there must've been others too but, those ones I actually noticed. Some of the references are dealt with in very obvious ways such as the shower scene from Psycho and the climbing frame moment from The Birds. Those ones aren't especially clever really but they have some good things about them. At other times the spoofing is less directly obvious but it's fun spotting them in any case. I have to say though that I thought the funniest sequence in the film wasn't even connected in any way to the films of the master of suspense, it was an uproarious scene where Brooks and Madeline Kahn get through airport security by being loud and annoying. It's definitely true that Brooks in the main role isn't necessarily a good thing. He's not exactly bad but he's no Gene Wilder either. If a better comic actor had played this character it might have improved the film overall I reckon. A few regular actors from his other films return here to greater effect, like Madeline Kahn as the requisite Hitchcock ice blonde, while Cloris Leachman and Harvey Korman give amusingly spirited performances as fellow doctors who are up to no good. In the final analysis, while High Anxiety isn't a total success, it's very likable and for this reason I find it very easy to get on board with it.

I love stuff from this time period, probably due much to the fact that it's what I grew up on. Nostalgia is a powerful thing. I love seeing how ridiculously innocent the world was when I was young-- apparently, it isn't false memories. You've really got to be familiar with Alfred Hitchcock movies to get most of the jokes and references in this film, but, even if you aren't, you might still like it if you appreciate films from the '70s. I have big doubts though about how much this movie will appeal to more modern audiences. I can't imagine this film being either being made or being commercially successful today. I think many or most younger people will find it too slow and not nearly hip enough (probably not the right slang to use there). Therefore, while I think liking this movie will be a highly idiosyncratic thing, I personally loved kicking back to it and remembering the way we were.

There's more plot here than expected from a Brooks' movie. Can he kick his aversion to high places, overturn the hospital's bad reputation, and bring the baddies to justice. That's a lot to coordinate into 90-minutes of intended laughs. Overall, it's a movie of funny moments, but lacks the consistent absudity of, say, Young Frankenstein (1974). The only really wacky character is Cloris Leachman as a nurse from heck. And, oh yes, there's an outrageous bit by Charlie Callas as a guy you might find at the local dog shelter. Meanwhile, Barry Levinson has a funny bit as a bellboy with a screeching sound and homicidal urges. Surprisingly, however, Brooks' doctor is pretty restrained except for his anxiety shakes. But then his character has to carry the plot.The satirical parts are just okay, except for the clever take-off on Psycho's celebrated shower scene. It's a hoot and a half. The other Hitchcocks I could detect are Vertigo (1958), The Birds (1963), and North by Northwest (1959). But none come off in very humorous fashion. I suspect the writers had trouble blending the satirical elements into plot requirements. Thus, the two don't combine as well as they should. Too bad, Madeleine Kahn doesn't get more screen time. She was such a funny performer and without half trying. She should have done the musical number instead of Brooks who unfortunately does it fairly straight. Still, that scene in the convention hall is pretty funny. When the little kids come in, Brooks has to use evasive words like woo-woo instead of more adult language.I guess I was somewhat disappointed, not because the movie isn't generally funny, but because it doesn't reach the wacko heights of either Blazing Saddles (1974) or Young Frankenstein. All in all, the movie's a two-base hit instead of a homerun.