History of the World: Part I

History of the World: Part I might not be the best effort from Brooks, but it still remains one of his crowning jewels – a testament to bravado irreverent humor and biting wit.

An entertaining mishmash of skits which finds Mel Brooks back in lively form, both for better and for worse. The only consistent thing about this burlesque miscellany, which incorporates skits about the Dawn of Man, Moses, the Roman Empire, the Spanish Inquisition and the French Revolution, is its inconsistency.

The one interlude which really brings down the house has Brooks working as a waiter at the Last Supper and asking the assembled group. ‘Are you all together or is it separate checks?’..As the old ad line said, there’s something here to offend everybody, particularly the devout of all persuasions and homosexuals.

Mel Brooks, the writer, director and producer of History of the World, is an ecologically sound filmmaker, a staunch adherent of recycling. If you laugh the second or third time, you defend the repetition as a variation on a theme; if you don't laugh, the charges are self-plagiarism and lack of imagination. [13 June 1981]

A rambling, undisciplined, sometimes embarrassing failure from one of the most gifted comic filmmakers around.

Despite cameos by many superior comic actors and well-known celebrities, this episodic would-be laughfest comes up wanting as many of Brooks' elaborate gags fall flat.

The movie is so sour that its humor is often undermined, because so many of the jokes are either mean-spirited or scatological, or both. Women are either explicitly predatory or stupidly decorative, and homosexuals are made fun of regularly. Bathroom jokes are everywhere. Flamboyantly bad taste, which Mr. Brooks raised to the level of supreme wit in his ''Springtime for Hitler'' number in ''The Producers,'' is this time just bad.

A fine Mel Brooks comedy movie full of humor and ideas. Like the title suggest it is a humorous take on world history. If you like Mel Brooks style of humor this movie is a no branier. The movie is episodic and each episode deals with a part of history like for example the stone age, Roman empire or France revolution. Some parts are shorter like Moses getting the commandments or Inquisition but those are hilariously funny (the good way). Beware that this is a main criticism for others who say the movie lacks a narrative or clear vision. I disagree here and say Mel Brooks picked the cherries out of history he sees working for a comedy. You get a lot of great humor out of the movie. Be it satire, really black humor, wort puns or critique of society and systems. To be fair not all jokes are excellent but it works far more than it misses (and compared to modern spoof movies it is pure gold). The actors are good. Mel Brooks plays many roles himself (While also directing, writing and producing). I really enjoyed his performance. Also really good were George Hines, Madeline Kahn, Art Metrano and a lot of side characters whose actors I don’t recognize anymore (Shame on me). For a comedy we get a cast that fully delivers. Aside that the sets and costumes are fitting especially for a comedy. Overall I see this as an enjoyable Mel Brooks experience and give an 8/10. Again I don’t know what the critics saw and disliked as it is a Mel Brooks movie that gives you what you expected.

I miss this type of comedy in films today. This film utilizes puns and hilarious play on words to bring plenty of laughs!

One of Mel Brooks best movies. Lots to love. I wish they made movies like this again.

It was ok. I honestly wasn't the biggest fan of this movie and I think that Mel Brooks has done many better movies.