Airplane! - Yeah, It's Stupid

This review was originally posted on cinekklesia on June 8, 2005.

The fact that Airplane! (1980) was judged the 10th funniest American Film by the American Film Institute shows how hard it is to judge good comedy. Airplane! beat Good Morning, Vietnam, This is Spinal Tap, and [gasp!] Raising Arizona? Yet another example of the scandal of popular criticism.

To be fair, I actually laughed pretty loud at this "classic" directed by Jim Abrahams, David Zucker, and Jerry Zucker. And I have to admit that I laughed hardest at the off-color jokes (I'm bad). And it's true that this movie's one-liners do not reside solely on the juvenile level (like some other films I could mention). Nevertheless, Airplane! loses steam about half-way through its repertoire, and it begins to remind you of the annoying guy who tells the same joke over and over. Literally.

Surely you can't be serious.

I am serious...and don't call me Shirley.

Plot? Basically, Airplane! is a parody of 1970s disaster films. Starring an ensemble cast of former Hollywood heavyweights (e.g., Lloyd Bridges, Peter Graves, Robert Stack), it recounts the tale of a Transamerican Airlines flight headed to Chicago. The pilot, co-pilots, and a large number of passengers contract deadly food poisoning and need prompt medical attention. Since the crew is out of commission, everything rides on Ted Striker (Robert Hays), a former fighter pilot who suffers from Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder associated with the death of his fellow airmen during The War. He must break free from the demons of the past in order to save the passengers; prove to himself and others that he has what it takes to be a regular, functioning member of society; and win back his love, Elaine Dickinson (Julie Hagerty).

The plot, of course, is beside the point. No time is wasted by Abrahams, Zucker, and Zucker as they throw in deadpan one-liners, gags, and off-color references at a furious clip. At some point, however, knowing that the movie would last only 87 minutes, I lost interest and started to bide my time quietly until the credits rolled.

Why is that? Contrary to popular opinion, good comedy is an intellectually demanding endeavor for both the performer and the audience. It relies on layers of historical and sociological context and functions at its apex when producer and consumer "are on the same page." That's why Seinfeld was so popular in the 90s. That show didn't create cynicism, irony, and sarcasm, but it successfully reflected the sentiment of its time. Seinfeld wasn't about "nothing" as was commonly assumed; it was about urbane, unattached twenty- and thirty-somethings living lives of social and cultural plenitude. Seinfeld, in short, was about its audience.

Successful stand-up comedy (a rare phenomenon) also works under the same logic. I recollect hearing David Letterman crack a cheap joke about (I believe) Monica Lewinsky several years ago; he followed up with a wide grin, a shake of the head, and the statement: "Oh, no, we're not proud." It was a brilliant moment because Letterman and the audience were in perfect synch. He told a cheap joke, the audience knew it was a cheap joke (but liked it anyway), he knew the audience knew that it was a cheap joke, and on and on. By adding the "we're not proud," Letterman indicated that (a) he knew what the audience was thinking and (b) he was willing to deprecate himself in order to continue the laughter. Producer and consumer were in harmony; they had bargained for an optimal comedic price.

Airplane! ultimately falls flat because its jokes lose resonance. Since the strength of comedy lies in its historical and social context, Airplane!'s decontextualized gags can carry it only so far. In addition, its use of cameo appearances by former celebrities like Kareem Abdul-Jabbar and Ethel Merman eventually will have no effect on future audiences (except in generating confusion — "Who's that guy? I guess he was some famous basketball player back then").

One final note: Comedy, humor, and laughter are rarely discussed among Christians. Besides the common pastoral refrain, "You know God must have a sense of humor because..." (a completely unjustifiable claim that only reflects the pastor's sense of humor), we really don't talk about whether comedy affects our faith experience (and if so, how).

As far as I know, the Bible doesn't provide much guidance. Flipping through my limited concordance, I see a scarce three references to laughter, two of them connected with God's wrath: "...a time to weep and a time to laugh..." (Ecc 3:4a), "The One enthroned in heaven laughs; the Lord scoffs at them" (Ps 2:4), and "...but the Lord laughs at the wicked, for he knows their day is coming" (Ps 37:13). It is unclear whether God even has sense of humor; the closest one can come to such a claim is to say that (1) we have a sense of humor, (2) we are made in God's image, ergo....

These are questions beyond the scope of this review. However, as comedy is usually not given its due come Oscar time, humor is also a neglected aspect of the human condition when it comes to theological reflection — I challenge us to rectify this gap in our faith lives. It's just too bad that Airplane!, while superficially and temporarily funny, doesn't provide us much help.