Laikals The greatest movie ever made..!

Titreenp SERIOUSLY. This is what the crap Hollywood still puts out?

Brendon Jones It’s fine. It's literally the definition of a fine movie. You’ve seen it before, you know every beat and outcome before the characters even do. Only question is how much escapism you’re looking for.

Lela The tone of this movie is interesting -- the stakes are both dramatic and high, but it's balanced with a lot of fun, tongue and cheek dialogue.

Michael_Elliott Joysticks (1983) ** (out of 4)The nerd Eugene Groebe (Leif Green) is excited to start his first job, which just happens to be at the local video arcade. Before long the arcade comes under attack from a parent (Joe Don Baker) who wants to see it closed because he feels these type of games ruin the minds of young people.Greydon Clark wrote and directed this film, which is another in a long line of teenage sex comedies but of course this one here mixes in arcade games so that it can appeal to even more people. I went into this movie not knowing what to expect and to be honest it started off okay but it quickly started to fall apart. It's certainly not an awful movie but there's no doubt that it's lacking in regards to laughs.I think one of the biggest problems with the film is the fact that it's basically a rip-off of NATIONAL LAMPOON'S ANIMAL HOUSE as you've got the slob fat guy, a "mean" person trying to take away the place the kids love to hang and you've even got a court like sequence where the two sides discuss the "problems" with the arcade. All of these scenes just remind you that you're not watching that other film, which is certainly much better.Another problem with this movie is that there's just not much done with it. The film gets off to a fun start with the nerd being picked on by a couple sexy ladies. There's plenty of nudity early on and we get some rather funny sex scenes early on but then all of this pretty much goes away and we're left with people doing battles with video games. This here really wasn't all that interesting and there certainly weren't any laughs.JOYSTICKS is an okay movie that has a few laughs here and there but at the end of the day there's no question that it's a "C" level comedy that just doesn't have enough going for it.

bensonmum2 A powerful businessman starts a crusade aimed at shutting down the local video arcade. He's concerned about the effects the arcade is having on his daughter. The arcade's Manager, a nerdy employee, and a slovenly obese gamer will do battle to save their arcade. I remember seeing Joysticks in the 80s and "enjoying" it. I use quotes because I'm not sure I ever found it all that great, just a decent enough time killer. Re-watching last night, the movie doesn't hold up for me. I know that based on a lot of the schlock I watch, you might think a movie like Joysticks would be right up my alley. Unfortunately, it's got a world of problems that keep me from finding much in the way of entertainment. Chief among my issues with the movie is it's actually pretty boring. For a sub-90 minute film, this thing seems to go on and on. The drawn out video game contests, the community hearing scenes, and all the lame attempts at humor that completely miss their mark really put a drag on things. And I found the scene where the nerd and the fat guy end up in the lady's bedroom troubling and disturbing to watch. There's nothing funny at all about the idea of raping a semi-conscious woman. You might have been able to get by with this kind of thing in the more innocent 80s, but by today's standards, it doesn't fly. I generally enjoy Joe Don Baker, but not so much here. It's too obvious he's only in it of the paycheck. Instead, the lone highlight of the film for me is Jim Greenleaf as Dorfus. His fat dude shtick is occasionally laugh-out-loud funny.

smccar77 "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.

krazybob31 When I was living in California I always wanted to get into movies..I was watching them film a court room scene around the corner from where I was living.. I was talking to some of the cast members and they gave me a number to call to be an extra in movies and TV shows.. After getting some work in backgrounds on several TV shows I ended up playing a person from this film as a kid in a flashback scene in another movie. I played John Diehl and a kid in a flashback that his best friend had after he was killed in this movie.. It was a lot of fun..just wished the part had lasted a lot longer then it did.. I should try and get in touch with him and see if he still needs a younger version of himself..lmao