Jump to content
Welcome to the new Earwolf Forums! Read more... ×
JulyDiaz

Episode 193 - Blues Brothers 2000: LIVE!

Recommended Posts

Live from Onion Fest in Chicago, Paul, June, and Jason discuss the 1998 film Blues Brothers 2000. They cover everything including child abduction, the “stripster” club, the return of the car pile up, and more. Plus, stay tuned at the end for all the extra amazing 2nd Opinions theme songs!

 

 

Subscribe to Unspooled with Paul Scheer and Amy Nicholson here: http://www.earwolf.com/show/unspooled/

Check out our new website over at www.hdtgminfo.com!

Check out new HDTGM merch over at https://www.teepubli…wdidthisgetmade

Where to Find Jason, June & Paul:

@PaulScheer on Instagram & Twitter

@Junediane on IG and @MsJuneDiane on Twitter

Jason is still not on Twitter

Share this post


Link to post

All children I don't know the name/ can't remember the name of since this night have now been known to me as Scribbles. It's been life changing

  • Like 8

Share this post


Link to post

I didn't watch this movie because I had a difficult enough time getting through the movie for the NYC live show. But if any of you try to spoil me with Scribbles' actual name, I will be furious.

  • Like 6

Share this post


Link to post

Listening to the ep (in pieces because of work) I can not WAIT to get into this movie as I was one of 5 people who saw this in theaters, own it on DVD and have watched it multiple times (not because I like it)

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post

Wikipedia actually says Jim Belushi agreed to do it but was forced to drop out because of a production deal with ABC (some show I never heard of). But that makes it extra crazy b cause it had been 18 years, why not just wait for him to be available.

 

Or did they think of the title first and say, "it's called Blues Brothers 2000 we have to get it out in 1998!!!"

  • Like 6

Share this post


Link to post

Someone should force Aykroyd to listen to this skewering as penance for "creating" this garbage.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post

BB2000 was the second show on Saturday night. By the first show on Sunday night some clever audience members had printed up "SAVE SCRIBBLES" T-shirts and brought them to the show.

  • Like 6

Share this post


Link to post

I've got a genuine question since we covered Blues Brothers on Musical Mondays: why is this movie garbage and the original a classic?

 

I think the original is pretty good and 2000 is kind of bad. But not such a stark difference to make 2000 one of the 25 worst sequels of all time. What's this one missing? What's the original have that the sequel doesn't.

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post

What's this one missing? What's the original have that the sequel doesn't.

 

John Belushi

  • Like 4

Share this post


Link to post

 

John Belushi

I'm not sure I totally buy this.

 

Belushi is great but I'd argue John Goodman is an excellent actor and can play anything including Belushi if he wants. So, he is a theoretical perfect replacement.

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post

I'm not sure I totally buy this.

 

Belushi is great but I'd argue John Goodman is an excellent actor and can play anything including Belushi if he wants. So, he is a theoretical perfect replacement.

 

Goodman is fine. His character is a sniveling loser.

Share this post


Link to post

What's this one missing? What's the original have that the sequel doesn't.

I decided to love myself and not watch this last night like I had planned, but from the podcast it sounds like it's missing an original plot, coherent editing, and good music.

  • Like 4

Share this post


Link to post

I've got a genuine question since we covered Blues Brothers on Musical Mondays: why is this movie garbage and the original a classic?

 

I think the original is pretty good and 2000 is kind of bad. But not such a stark difference to make 2000 one of the 25 worst sequels of all time. What's this one missing? What's the original have that the sequel doesn't.

 

I'm going to swoop in and steal this from Cameron H but he'll come on later and articulate it a bit better.

 

For me at least I think the biggest thing that makes the original and this different movies is the unoriginality of the sequel. The sequel while a different story hits almost all the same beats, gags and moments as the first but a lot of them to lesser degrees. Just think about how many things are the same? Released from prison to start, go on a quest to put the band together, recruit their former members who are now doing other things, get a mismatched gig and win the audience over, race to get to the big show, big final number the crowd loves. That's not even mentioning the various gags and moments they repeat like James Brown in Church and seeing the light, Aretha Franklin mad at her husband and singing a song to tell him off, making white nationalist mad and have them chase after them, etc. Just so much of this movie repeats the same notes and doesn't really do that much new or different with them. I hate to bring it up but take The Force Awakens for example. It hits so many notes of the original Star Wars and the original films, but the spin they put on it makes it more original and fresher. It is not just a simple rehashing of it. So with the original Blues Brothers the gags and story and fresh and original and therefore have more life to them. In 2000 they are just going through the motions and it doesn't have the same life. And when you've seen that all before it is boring for you, and when the actors and director have done it all before it is just as boring for them which in turn you feel and get more bored.

 

On a side note, 2000 looks terrible. Bad lighting and clearly shot on sound stages while the original was shot in real locations and little things like that really affect the mood and vibe a film gives off too.

  • Like 6

Share this post


Link to post

 

I'm going to swoop in and steal this from Cameron H but he'll come on later and articulate it a bit better.

 

For me at least I think the biggest thing that makes the original and this different movies is the unoriginality of the sequel. The sequel while a different story hits almost all the same beats, gags and moments as the first but a lot of them to lesser degrees. Just think about how many things are the same? Released from prison to start, go on a quest to put the band together, recruit their former members who are now doing other things, get a mismatched gig and win the audience over, race to get to the big show, big final number the crowd loves. That's not even mentioning the various gags and moments they repeat like James Brown in Church and seeing the light, Aretha Franklin mad at her husband and singing a song to tell him off, making white nationalist mad and have them chase after them, etc. Just so much of this movie repeats the same notes and doesn't really do that much new or different with them. I hate to bring it up but take The Force Awakens for example. It hits so many notes of the original Star Wars and the original films, but the spin they put on it makes it more original and fresher. It is not just a simple rehashing of it. So with the original Blues Brothers the gags and story and fresh and original and therefore have more life to them. In 2000 they are just going through the motions and it doesn't have the same life. And when you've seen that all before it is boring for you, and when the actors and director have done it all before it is just as boring for them which in turn you feel and get more bored.

 

On a side note, 2000 looks terrible. Bad lighting and clearly shot on sound stages while the original was shot in real locations and little things like that really affect the mood and vibe a film gives off too.

I'm 100% willing to go with this. It's one of those death by a thousand cuts situations. It's the same but not as good.

 

I guess my biggest issue is I just don't think it's *that* much worse or the original is *that* much better. However you want to say it. Maybe that's just a matter of taste and I don't get the extreme love for the original. That's fine. I'd like to hear what someone like Cakebug thinks since we know he's a huge fan of the original.

  • Like 4

Share this post


Link to post

BB2000 was the second show on Saturday night. By the first show on Sunday night some clever audience members had printed up "SAVE SCRIBBLES" T-shirts and brought them to the show.

Oh god, ihtm, PLEASE tell me you were the guy who actually got to hold the mic.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Posted (edited)

I've got a genuine question since we covered Blues Brothers on Musical Mondays: why is this movie garbage and the original a classic?

 

I think the original is pretty good and 2000 is kind of bad. But not such a stark difference to make 2000 one of the 25 worst sequels of all time. What's this one missing? What's the original have that the sequel doesn't.

 

Here's my thoughts as someone who loves the original and has tried with BB2K (I will admit that I think the MUSIC in BB2K is almost as good).

 

A) John Belushi. Belushi was such a charismatic presence that he lights up the screen

B ) Tighter Script. As the pod points out, the plot to the OGBB, while being a series of vignettes, it followed an easy to summerize plot. Elwood picks up Jake, they go to the orphanage, get their "mission from God" to save said orphanage, put the band back together, put on a show. Everything is building up to that show. The final show feels like a show. Yes there are only two numbers, but you get the impression it would go on longer if John Candy hadn't showed up. The climax makes sense (the car chase) to pay the bill and ending up in jail. In BB2K, it is just vignettes. The plot makes no sense, why does Elwood want to go to Erkahau Badu's BotB? When the state police (and seriously at this point it would be the FBI and not Nia Pepples--or why wasn't Joe Morton and Nia Peeples just FBI agents) show up, they run but there's no climax to the run. Why do Mighty Mack and Joe stay (they would be held as accessories to the crime--ESP. Joe Morton) but Elwood and Scribbles run?

C) Inherent Logic. The OGBB, while having crazy stuff happen, has an explanation (it's a former police cruiser with a souped up engine--there's also a cut bit where the powerlines Elwood parks under have given it some abilities but that's cut so neither here nor there). The car that they use in BB2K makes no sense and has no inherent logic. It goes underwater, it has a bedroom, it just does things for no reason.

D) Why the band reforms makes sense. In the OGBB, these guys, for the most part, are living the lives of working musicians. Two work in a soul food restaurant (for Aretha Franklin-Matt Murphy's on-screen wife), some are working as lounge musicians at a holiday inn, only the trumpet player seems to have a good job (as the maître d') and reluctant to join them. In BB2K, everyone but Elwood has seemingly good jobs. Willie owns his own strip club, the Murphy's own a Mercedes-Benz dealership, the keyboard player seems to have a good job at the sex phone line as a supervisor, two are radio DJs. Their second vehicle is a Benz! it seems like for everyone, this is dad rock, it's a lark. So why would they risk getting mixed up with Elwood Blues, who according to the first movie has sent them to jail at least two previous times. Jack was the charismatic force in the first one that drove them, without Jake and Elwood these guys have seemingly got their lives together and have no reason to go back on the road.

E) MAGIC! I mean crazy stuff happens in OGBB, but nothing that is flat out magic. The closest is Jake's revelation at James Brown's church (similar to Joe Morton's but without the full Blues Brother's transformation) but that could be interpreted as a demonstration of Jake's internal revelation. in BB2K you have Joe Morton's transformation, you have Erkah Badu turning them into ZOMBIES and turning Darrell Hammond's white supremacists into mice.

 

That's just off the top of my head

Edited by EvRobert
  • Like 5

Share this post


Link to post

John Belushi

I'm not sure I totally buy this.

 

Belushi is great but I'd argue John Goodman is an excellent actor and can play anything including Belushi if he wants. So, he is a theoretical perfect replacement.

I'd agree that Blues Brothers just does not work without John Belushi. The whole concept from SNL was originally just putting Belushi in front of a band and letting him blow everyone away with what a pure goddamn entertainer he was. Blues Brothers was his baby ... Aykroyd just danced crazy and played harmonica in the background.

 

Goodman might have been a decent replacement if they had let him ... his performance in the stripster club was great, but he never really gets another moment like that. Instead of letting Goodman be Belushi, they tried to make Elwood into Jake, they tried to turn Scribbles into Elwood, and they just added Goodman probably for the same reason they had 104 cars in the pile-up ... just to add one more.

 

I don't know what they were doing with poor Joe Morton.

  • Like 5

Share this post


Link to post

I'd agree that Blues Brothers just does not work without John Belushi. The whole concept from SNL was originally just putting Belushi in front of a band and letting him blow everyone away with what a pure goddamn entertainer he was. Blues Brothers was his baby ... Aykroyd just danced crazy and played harmonica in the background.

 

Goodman might have been a decent replacement if they had let him ... his performance in the stripster club was great, but he never really gets another moment like that. Instead of letting Goodman be Belushi, they tried to make Elwood into Jake, they tried to turn Scribbles into Elwood, and they just added Goodman probably for the same reason they had 104 cars in the pile-up ... just to add one more.

 

I don't know what they were doing with poor Joe Morton.

 

here's my theory, Dan SHOULD have been in the Cab Calloway role, the old mentor who showed up once in awhile, Joe Morton and John Goodman should have been in the Elwood and Jake roles and put Blues Traveler as the backing band (their song in this is one of my favorite songs, period). You could have followed similar beats without it feeling so cheap.

 

I can't explain Scribbles.

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post

I'd agree that Blues Brothers just does not work without John Belushi. The whole concept from SNL was originally just putting Belushi in front of a band and letting him blow everyone away with what a pure goddamn entertainer he was. Blues Brothers was his baby ... Aykroyd just danced crazy and played harmonica in the background.

 

Goodman might have been a decent replacement if they had let him ... his performance in the stripster club was great, but he never really gets another moment like that. Instead of letting Goodman be Belushi, they tried to make Elwood into Jake, they tried to turn Scribbles into Elwood, and they just added Goodman probably for the same reason they had 104 cars in the pile-up ... just to add one more.

 

I don't know what they were doing with poor Joe Morton.

 

If you think to the original Elwood is the brains and Jake is the mouth. Elwood plays the harp, he doesn't sing. Jake sings, but doesn't play music. It's the perfect match. Now when you expand this out you get Scribbles to do the harp and dance and left with three lead singers. The balance is all wrong. The moment we find out John Goodman can sing, he should have been the singer with Elwood playing the harp and providing back ups. Then when Joe Morton joins you get two leads singers, two harp players and dancers. It's all about the balance.

 

You are 100% right though. The movie should have been just Goodman and Elwood. Hell just Joe Morton and Elwood would have worked. Here's an idea for a better sequel. John Goodman picks up Elwood from prison. He's a big fan and was also raised by the penguin. He wants to be a blues singer like Jake and Elwood were. However, Elwood doesn't want to because without Jake there is no passion or drive anymore. So Goodman slowly gets the band back together to try to get Elwood to loves the blues again. Over the course of the film we see Elwood go from just standing around barely playing and moving to dancing and playing like a maniac with Goodman singing his heart out in the end.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post

 

Here's my thoughts as someone who loves the original and has tried with BB2K (I will admit that I think the MUSIC in BB2K is almost as good).

 

A) John Belushi. Belushi was such a charismatic presence that he lights up the screen

B ) Tighter Script. As the pod points out, the plot to the OGBB, while being a series of vignettes, it followed an easy to summerize plot. Elwood picks up Jake, they go to the orphanage, get their "mission from God" to save said orphanage, put the band back together, put on a show. Everything is building up to that show. The final show feels like a show. Yes there are only two numbers, but you get the impression it would go on longer if John Candy hadn't showed up. The climax makes sense (the car chase) to pay the bill and ending up in jail. In BB2K, it is just vignettes. The plot makes no sense, why does Elwood want to go to Erkahau Badu's BotB? When the state police (and seriously at this point it would be the FBI and not Nia Pepples--or why wasn't Joe Morton and Nia Peeples just FBI agents) show up, they run but there's no climax to the run. Why do Mighty Mack and Joe stay (they would be held as accessories to the crime--ESP. Joe Morton) but Elwood and Scribbles run?

C) Inherent Logic. The OGBB, while having crazy stuff happen, has an explanation (it's a former police cruiser with a souped up engine--there's also a cut bit where the powerlines Elwood parks under have given it some abilities but that's cut so neither here nor there). The car that they use in BB2K makes no sense and has no inherent logic. It goes underwater, it has a bedroom, it just does things for no reason.

D) Why the band reforms makes sense. In the OGBB, these guys, for the most part, are living the lives of working musicians. Two work in a soul food restaurant (for Aretha Franklin-Matt Murphy's on-screen wife), some are working as lounge musicians at a holiday inn, only the trumpet player seems to have a good job (as the maître d') and reluctant to join them. In BB2K, everyone but Elwood has seemingly good jobs. Willie owns his own strip club, the Murphy's own a Mercedes-Benz dealership, the keyboard player seems to have a good job at the sex phone line as a supervisor, two are radio DJs. Their second vehicle is a Benz! it seems like for everyone, this is dad rock, it's a lark. So why would they risk getting mixed up with Elwood Blues, who according to the first movie has sent them to jail at least two previous times. Jack was the charismatic force in the first one that drove them, without Jake and Elwood these guys have seemingly got their lives together and have no reason to go back on the road.

E) MAGIC! I mean crazy stuff happens in OGBB, but nothing that is flat out magic. The closest is Jake's revelation at James Brown's church (similar to Joe Morton's but without the full Blues Brother's transformation) but that could be interpreted as a demonstration of Jake's internal revelation. in BB2K you have Joe Morton's transformation, you have Erkah Badu turning them into ZOMBIES and turning Darrell Hammond's white supremacists into mice.

 

That's just off the top of my head

This is all great and explains to me why people are let down with the sequel. I guess I just glossed over a lot of the silliness in 2k because I see the original as pretty silly but it's definitely more grounded.

Share this post


Link to post

I will try to elaborate on this later (I’m at work) but the fact that this movie was NOT a 2 hour love letter to Belushi is completely beyond me. He is barely talked about, and at NO point do they even show his likeness. Was this a permission issue?

Share this post


Link to post

Scribbles is an instant classic, but Paul's re-enactment of how the Cab Calloway phone call must've gone made me spit out my fajita.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post

Was anyone else bothered by the moment when Mighty Mac was shaving in the bathroom of the Bob's Country Kitchen restaurant? He filled the sink up with water and would rinse his razor off in it.....that just made me feel incredibly icky.

Share this post


Link to post

Was anyone else bothered by the moment when Mighty Mac was shaving in the bathroom of the Bob's Country Kitchen restaurant? He filled the sink up with water and would rinse his razor off in it.....that just made me feel incredibly icky.

 

That's how I shave...

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post

When are we gonna get a "dirty balcony people" or "balcony monster" shirt?

 

This is me asking as a dirty balcony person from Austin!

  • Like 4

Share this post


Link to post

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

×