• Welcome to OGBoards 10.0, keep in mind that we will be making LOTS of changes to smooth out the experience here and make it as close as possible functionally to the old software, but feel free to drop suggestions or requests in the Tech Support subforum!

RIP Gene Wilder

McDonald's has fooled people for nearly sixty years. Lots of other businesses and actors have.

I like this review of Sandler:

"Nowadays, Adam Sandler is considered to be something of a scourge of cinema; an annoying little pest who - despite the intrinsic awfulness to everything he does - continues to find employment in Hollywood. Who is giving all that money to this guy, and why? The answer, it turns out, is Netflix, who signed him to four-picture deal this year. Ka-ching!

As an actor, Sandler has proven himself a capable actor on a few occasions (Punch-Drunk Love, for example), and yet continues to offer up filmic travesties such as That's My Boy.

Consider for a second that Johnny Depp (sub-par as his career is nowadays) isn't on this list. He didn't crack the top 10, and yet Adam Sandler - who plays the same insufferable character in every movie - did. Pixels, his latest sh*tpile comedy, was one of the worst of the year - a travesty pretending to be a love letter to video games - and featuring one of the laziest, non-act-y performances of Sandler's career: never has he been more banal."
 
A) How has McDonald's fooled people?

B) Hide behind snide critics all you want but the truth is that people pay Sandler lots of money because people like him, despite the low quality of the films. That's success. What's even better is that even that critic knows/admits that he has talent but he's figured out how to be very successful by being specific in his art.

You're ridiculous
 
No, you are ridiculous on many levels on this thread and on others. Let's look here:

1. Trying to say Sandler is in any a comparable talent to Mel Brooks.
2. Saying that money=quality.
3. Millions more people like McDonald's food than Morton's does that make McDonald's better?

I'm not hiding behind anyone. Adam Sandler has made a couple of good movies and found a character that fits a niche to make a lot money. This doesn't make him an actor that will stand the test of time. He's done nothing that others imitate or learn from to make comedy movies.

Millennials like to use Rotten Tomatoes to justify a movie. Well, 24 of Sandler's movies were rated under 20% versus only 3 over 70%.

I can't believe i'm wasting time with someone who thinks Adam Sandler is even in a discussion with Mel Brooks.
 
lol, RJ's take on McDonald's is just phenomenal.
 
1. I didn't compare sandler to brooks in talent. Miss
2. I didn't say money = quality, i said by most people's definition in hollywood (and comedy), money = success. Miss
3. Sigh, "quality" of art or a product and success in business are not the same thing and I never compared them. But objectively, I think it's pretty easy to argue that McDonald's is a more successful corporation than Morton's. But let's check in when McDonald's tries out high-steak or Morton's fires up it's rapid order/delivery burgers and fries.

so, three strikes, you're out.
 
Moving the goalposts is your MO like about who is in the military and how dumb it is to jump on a grenade to save your platoon.

You aren't having a good 24 hours.

I doubt you could find 10% of Hollywood to say this when comparing Sandler and Brooks:

2. I didn't say money = quality, i said by most people's definition in hollywood (and comedy), money = success. Miss

EDIT:

When adjust the gross to today's market figures, Blazing Saddles comes in #49. None of Sandler's movies make Top 100.

http://www.deseretnews.com/top/1557/52/Blazing-Saddles-100-top-grossing-films-of-all-time.html
 
Last edited:
RJKarl said:
Moving the goalposts is your MO like about who is in the military and how dumb it is to jump on a grenade to save your platoon.

You aren't having a good 24 hours.

I doubt you could find 10% of Hollywood to say this when comparing Sandler and Brooks:

2. I didn't say money = quality, i said by most people's definition in hollywood (and comedy), money = success. Miss
Click to expand...

I'm not comparing Adam Sandler and Mel Brooks...? you are.

I said Adam Sandler is a successful, relevant comedian. That's it. TimDunk compared the two but that's his deal. You're going bonkers.

And I think anyone in hollywood would equate money with success. Maybe a little too much, actually.
 
Last edited:
He's relevant to this era and nothing more.

To say it's that simply money=success is ridiculous.
 
RJKarl said:
McDonald's has fooled people for nearly sixty years.
Click to expand...
RJKarl said:
No, you are ridiculous on many levels on this thread and on others. Let's look here:

2. Saying that money=quality.
3. Millions more people like McDonald's food than Morton's does that make McDonald's better?
Click to expand...
Giggle.
 
sorry gene. you should not have kicked the bucket before the great sandler debate of '16 was completed.
 
Skipped a lot in the last 2 pages, but Tommy Boy is a classic.
 
bym051d said:
Skipped a lot in the last 2 pages, but Tommy Boy is a classic.
Click to expand...

Yep, I don't support this Farley bashing. While Sandler has made more steaming piles of shit than anyone else, he still made Billy Madison and Gilmore and deserves credit for those. And one can appreciate Brooks for what he has done for comedy and still not think all of his stuff holds up well. I couldn't sit through Spaceballs recently.
 
ImTheCaptain said:
do you think Warner Brothers considers Suicide Squad to be a success or a failure?
Click to expand...

I never said Sandler was a failure or that finances don't count. However, I did show that adjusted for today's market Blazing Saddles was more successful than any Sandler picture.

Looking at another site, http://www.boxofficemojo.com/alltime/adjusted.htm , Young Frankenstein was also more successful than any Sandler flick.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top