"Joysticks," is a 1983 sex comedy that revisits the clichéd theme of a small youth led endeavor fighting against traditional older hierarchy. The movie is essentially a "Porkys (1982)," knock-off. The cheesy double entendre of the title is an immediate indicator of what this film will deliver. J is a playful low budget romp touching on themes of video games, puerile sex humor, and underdog status. The distinguishing facets of this film have to do with the assumptions that the writers and film makers make. Specifically, two premises directly influence how such a playful but poor film was produced.
The reliance on currently popular slang and vulgarity is typical of this sub-genre of film. The assumption that separates J from other teen comedies involves what is allowed for humor. The writers seem to hold that creating humorous situations is more important than what those same situations may imply. Such an assumption leads to surface level giggles that actually become uncomfortable cringes. For example, two protagonist characters break into the antagonist's home to cause some troubles. In the process, one of the protagonists inevitably falls into the bed of the sedated wife of the antagonist. The wife begins unconsciously groping the protagonist. At this point, the other protagonist character encourages his friend to have sex with the unconscious wife. The entire scene and exchange is meant to be humorous due to an uncomfortable situation and silly opportunistic prodding. The issue arises when the audience considers what would be the outcome if the character in bed actually listened to his friend. Engaging in sex with an unconscious stranger is rape. Of course, the film did not intend to create a situation of cognitive dissonance; yet, the adherence to a premise of creating humor regardless of consequence will inevitably lead to ethically strained situations.
The second major assumption and premise follows from the first. The direction of the film relies on the idea that low-brow humor and moderate nudity make for an enjoyable film. This is not completely fallacious. The problems arise when the audience is treated to a film that only relies on sophomoric humor and nudity. The storyline, production quality, film quality, acting, and character development are almost completely neglected. The result is a clumsy vehicle for fart jokes and youthful curves. J comes off as a film directed toward 13 year old males from 1983. Furthermore, J is almost exclusively enjoyed today by the niche audience of males who were 13 years old in 1982.
Overall, this is a poor film. That it is a poor film was probably recognized by all who took part in the project. The goal of creating a substandard knock-off was accomplished. In fact, the film does have a few quirky scenes that elicit the occasional chuckle. However, the completed end product is highly dated 80's trash. J is only worth pursuing if 80's American culture was formative in one's life.
On a personal note, the film did bring back fond memories for me. I am slightly younger than the target audience, yet this was the type of film that friends and I would try to get video store clerks to rent to us. As to recommendations, I will more than likely do my part in letting this film slip into utter obscurity. 3 of 10 stars.
The reliance on currently popular slang and vulgarity is typical of this sub-genre of film. The assumption that separates J from other teen comedies involves what is allowed for humor. The writers seem to hold that creating humorous situations is more important than what those same situations may imply. Such an assumption leads to surface level giggles that actually become uncomfortable cringes. For example, two protagonist characters break into the antagonist's home to cause some troubles. In the process, one of the protagonists inevitably falls into the bed of the sedated wife of the antagonist. The wife begins unconsciously groping the protagonist. At this point, the other protagonist character encourages his friend to have sex with the unconscious wife. The entire scene and exchange is meant to be humorous due to an uncomfortable situation and silly opportunistic prodding. The issue arises when the audience considers what would be the outcome if the character in bed actually listened to his friend. Engaging in sex with an unconscious stranger is rape. Of course, the film did not intend to create a situation of cognitive dissonance; yet, the adherence to a premise of creating humor regardless of consequence will inevitably lead to ethically strained situations.
The second major assumption and premise follows from the first. The direction of the film relies on the idea that low-brow humor and moderate nudity make for an enjoyable film. This is not completely fallacious. The problems arise when the audience is treated to a film that only relies on sophomoric humor and nudity. The storyline, production quality, film quality, acting, and character development are almost completely neglected. The result is a clumsy vehicle for fart jokes and youthful curves. J comes off as a film directed toward 13 year old males from 1983. Furthermore, J is almost exclusively enjoyed today by the niche audience of males who were 13 years old in 1982.
Overall, this is a poor film. That it is a poor film was probably recognized by all who took part in the project. The goal of creating a substandard knock-off was accomplished. In fact, the film does have a few quirky scenes that elicit the occasional chuckle. However, the completed end product is highly dated 80's trash. J is only worth pursuing if 80's American culture was formative in one's life.
On a personal note, the film did bring back fond memories for me. I am slightly younger than the target audience, yet this was the type of film that friends and I would try to get video store clerks to rent to us. As to recommendations, I will more than likely do my part in letting this film slip into utter obscurity. 3 of 10 stars.