Started By
Message

Why didn't Mel Brooks make History of the World Part II?

Posted on 8/12/16 at 9:05 pm
Posted by DoUrden
UnderDark
Member since Oct 2011
25965 posts
Posted on 8/12/16 at 9:05 pm
I still watch part I?
Posted by mizzoubuckeyeiowa
Member since Nov 2015
35619 posts
Posted on 8/12/16 at 9:11 pm to
It was a stand alone movie.

The title was a joke.

To name his epic farce, Brooks played on Sir Walter Raleigh’s historical tome, The History of the World.
Raleigh, who was beheaded, never got to finish his epic, and with “PartI,” Brooks was referencing the fact that Raleigh’s work was incomplete.

But the director also had a personal reason for the title — he wastired of people asking him what his next movie would be. This way, theywould assume a sequel was up next, and leave him alone.
Posted by John McClane
Member since Apr 2010
36708 posts
Posted on 8/12/16 at 9:54 pm to
Best joke
Posted by Breesus
House of the Rising Sun
Member since Jan 2010
66982 posts
Posted on 8/12/16 at 11:51 pm to
You know, you look like the piss boy?
Posted by drizztiger
Deal With it!
Member since Mar 2007
37426 posts
Posted on 8/13/16 at 12:01 am to
It's good to be the king.
Posted by quail man
New York, NY
Member since May 2010
40930 posts
Posted on 8/13/16 at 12:03 am to
Because the execs wanted him to do part 2 with an all female cast
first pageprev pagePage 1 of 1Next pagelast page
refresh

Back to top
logoFollow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News
Follow us on Twitter, Facebook and Instagram to get the latest updates on LSU Football and Recruiting.

FacebookTwitterInstagram