this post was submitted on 29 Jul 2025
63 points (90.9% liked)

movies

1287 readers
264 users here now

A community about movies and cinema.

Related communities:

Rules

  1. Be civil
  2. No discrimination or prejudice of any kind
  3. Do not spam
  4. Stay on topic
  5. These rules will evolve as this community grows

No posts or comments will be removed without an explanation from mods.

founded 4 months ago
MODERATORS
top 31 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] TropicalDingdong@lemmy.world 19 points 4 days ago* (last edited 4 days ago) (1 children)

I had a head cannon version of "Happy Gilmore 2" where Happy has a daughter who he trains to be a golfer from a young age, but she wants to play hockey as an enforcer. I'm just gonna pretend this is what the story was actually about.

[–] SnotFlickerman@lemmy.blahaj.zone 8 points 4 days ago (1 children)

That sounds like my headcanon sequel to Sneakers where Bishop (Robert Redford) uses his newfound anonymity to start over in a small town where he accidentally ends up the high school basketball coach to a bunch of skinny nerds. They make it to the state championships through a combination of phone phreaking and social engineering.

[–] pinball_wizard@lemmy.zip 2 points 3 days ago

I would watch that.

[–] UKFilmNerd@feddit.uk 19 points 4 days ago (4 children)

But how many of those people watched the whole film? 😆

[–] hypnicjerk@lemmy.world 13 points 4 days ago

i don't trust any of these self-reported view counts

[–] 0_o7@lemmy.dbzer0.com 3 points 3 days ago (1 children)

This seems like a film you put on while doing chores, talking on your phone, working, having it on when your neighbor is over or just wanting to fall sleep.

[–] hovercat@lemmy.blahaj.zone 3 points 3 days ago

I mean, that's literally what Netflix is going for. They don't want engaging content, they want stuff that's "second-screenable" i.e. to have on in the background while you're on your phone/laptop.

[–] tigeruppercut@lemmy.zip 7 points 3 days ago

I did, and it was kinda crap.

[–] Taco2112@lemmy.world 5 points 4 days ago

I did and I’m pretty against these legacy sequels. They never seem to do a good job and they are obvious cash grabs but Happy Gilmore 2 was a fun watch.

[–] Okokimup@lemmy.world 6 points 3 days ago

Watched the first one multiple times with my cousin as kids. Apparently it made such an impression on him, this sequel made him reach out to me after not speaking for 20+ years.

[–] Beacon@fedia.io 14 points 4 days ago

Why? Don't get me wrong, i find Sandler movies amusing generally, but I'd never be like "Dude! The new Sandler movie is out! We gotta see it ASAP!"

[–] orca@orcas.enjoying.yachts 12 points 4 days ago (1 children)

Watched it the other day and thought it was a lot of fun. He got a ton of cameos in there and you can tell they had fun filming it.

[–] SnotFlickerman@lemmy.blahaj.zone 13 points 4 days ago* (last edited 4 days ago) (2 children)

Yeah, imagine that, being so rich that you can do dumb shit with your friends (who are all celebrities) and that dumb shit somehow prints even more money being fun.

Gee, I wonder if I could have fun doing that? Never having to worry about things like finances and doing every stupid thought that ever came to me without real consequence?

I mean, like, no shit they had fun.

[–] orca@orcas.enjoying.yachts 14 points 4 days ago (1 children)

I get it. I’ll always hop on the “fuck the rich” train because fuck the rich, but I also need a laugh and a win somewhere before I fucking smash everything in a 12-foot radius with a baseball bat.

I also watched it on Stremio because fuck streaming companies.

[–] SnotFlickerman@lemmy.blahaj.zone 8 points 4 days ago (1 children)

Right, sorry, wasn't trying to imply that them having fun was a bad thing or saying they shouldn't have fun... It's just more like... Who wouldn't have fun doing that??

[–] orca@orcas.enjoying.yachts 3 points 3 days ago

It’s a dream scenario. Getting to fuck around with people you like hanging out with.

[–] Taco2112@lemmy.world 0 points 4 days ago

I don’t know you but based on this one comment it seems like you’re not fun.

[–] Jhex@lemmy.world 4 points 3 days ago

This stat is literally worthless

[–] DrSleepless@lemmy.world 11 points 4 days ago

Mmmm member berries

[–] jbone@lemmy.dbzer0.com 5 points 4 days ago (4 children)

Sandler is back! Surprised this was so popular.

The OG Happy Gilmore is fun (rewatched it a few years ago), but I can't imagine watching a sequel (and I am not going to watch it).

Good for Sandler though!

[–] RonnieB@lemmy.world 29 points 4 days ago

He really needed a win after being exceedingly rich and famous for 30 years

[–] UnderpantsWeevil@lemmy.world 4 points 4 days ago

Surprised this was so popular.

Nostalgia prints, especially at the box office.

Shame, because Sandler's best work tends to be original. Would have loved to get something on the quality of Uncut Gems again, but I guess retreads like this pay the bills.

[–] SnotFlickerman@lemmy.blahaj.zone 2 points 4 days ago (2 children)

Unpopular Opinion: Billy Madison was his first and last good comedy movie.

[–] ech@lemmy.ca 2 points 3 days ago (1 children)

You can just say you don't like him. Not sure why it has to be a judgement on his whole life.

[–] SnotFlickerman@lemmy.blahaj.zone 1 points 3 days ago* (last edited 3 days ago)

How is it a judgment on his whole life?

It's more that Billy Madison was the first to put down the Sandler formula of lovable idiot faces challenge that attracts a beautiful woman way out of his league. It's more that basically every comedy film he's made since then has followed that same formula, which just makes them highly derivative of the stellar original.

Also, it's notable that Billy Madison featured Chris Farley, and the loss of Chris Farley to future Sandler films was honestly a huge blow. He could have potentially been in Happy Gilmore but wasn't, and by the time Sandler was making The Wedding Singer Farley had passed.

I am fairly sure it was also the only one that featured Norm MacDonald as well (but I'm not 100% sure on that, didn't follow the more recent ones as closely).

Steve Buscemi, on the other hand, has been a staple in Sandler film casts since the beginning, and his role on Billy Madison was one of the best.

So it's really more that Billy Madison built the formula, had the best cast overall, and was just lightning in a bottle that it felt like he spent a career trying to recreate the exact conditions that made Billy Madison so good.

EDIT: One final piece of why Billy Madison works where other Sandler films don't work as well (except maybe The Water Boy): Billy Madison's real villain isn't Eric Gordon, who wants to stop Billy so Eric can take over the company. The real villain is Madison's own loser past, where he has consistently shown himself to be a contemptuous, boorish fool. His own past behavior is why nobody has faith that he will succeed, and he has to overcome people's prior expectations of him to succeed. Some of the only people who have faith in him are the young children that he befriended while he was in elementary school. Happy on the other hand has that epic swing and all he has to do is practice the rest of golf. Shooter McGavin is also a more sympathetic villain because he's an actual professional being showed up by this jerk amateur who acts like he's king shit because he can hit long drives. Billy Madison just works better thematically, overall, because Billy is actually, genuinely awful at everything and has to start at the absolute bottom where Happy comes in already halfway good by pure chance.

[–] Revan343@lemmy.ca 1 points 4 days ago

Your loss, I guess

[–] superglue@lemmy.dbzer0.com 4 points 4 days ago

I havent finished it yet because it got late but I was surprised, I thought it would be a train wreck and its good so far.

[–] mindbleach@sh.itjust.works 2 points 3 days ago (1 children)