Some comedies are intended to be efficient and smooth, while others are designed to be intentionally abrasive and off-putting – there is virtue in both processes, and every great comedy (as well as those that are dismal failures, but still had some semblance of logic attached to them) can be attached to one of these two extremes to a certain degree. However, there are occasionally films that intend to be one, but somehow accidentally end up impeding on the opposing category, which can be an odd experience, since we aren’t even sure what we are supposed to think when presented with these stories. Meatballs is one of the more prominent examples of this inexplicable phenomenon – by all accounts, the film should be a resounding success, since it was written and directed by Ivan Reitman, and had Bill Murray (who would find his biggest breakthrough as a performer under his direction) in the central role, which should immediately be a recipe for success, if not at least indicating a lot of promise. However, few films have demonstrated the teething problems that come with early films more than this, with Reitman making the first film that garnered him a significant amount of attention, and Murray appearing in his first leading role in a film. The film follows the continued misadventures of a group of young people training to be counsellors at a summer camp, which occurs concurrently with the arrival of a few busloads of children, who are soon bringing their distinct brand of youthful mischief to this camp, leading to a summer of off-the-wall antics that seem so distinct to the American experience (to the point where there are active efforts in other countries to evoke this sense of reckless, youthful fun, albeit to a much less impactful experience), and become the foundation for this very funny film. It has some inconsistencies, and it can sometimes feel as if it needed either a stronger director to help cultivate this very broad screenplay or slightly more efficient writing that wasn’t dependent on multiple perspectives. Overall, Meatballs is a fine film, but one that has been severely overpraised as some comedic classic, since it lacks many fundamental qualities that make for a strong film.

Meatballs is an excellent film when it comes to individual vignettes – if you pluck out any given ten minutes of the film, you’ll likely find a very funny and insightful segment that is entertaining all on its own. The issue comes when we attempt to view them all together – considering that both Reitman and Murray had their start in alternative forms of humour (Murray in sketch comedy and Reitman in low-budget exploitation films like Cannibal Girls and Foxy Lady), they seemed to be ill-prepared for the process of creating a more long-form comedy, one that doesn’t rely on the immediacy of a three-minute set-up with quick punchline, which often like the general composition of this film, just placed in very quick succession and with a needlessly contrived plot sitting right at the centre, in an attempt to tie all these aspects together. Part of the blame also goes to the writing team, which was oddly composed of several different writers, which is a peculiar situation, since nothing about this film feels complex enough to warrant so many perspectives. Some leniency is required, since many of these writers were still young and relatively untested (among them is a very young Harold Ramis, another person with whom Murray would form a long-lasting friendship – and he was himself in between his first screenwriting job on National Lampoon’s Animal House, and his forthcoming directorial debut in Caddyshack, both films appreciated as masterpieces of the genre), and the film wasn’t intended to be driven by high-concept storytelling, but rather just to create some hilarious scenarios, based on clever wordplay and a contemporary style of slapstick to evoke the sense of childlike mischief that we all wish we could sometimes experience in our adult years. Meatballs has its moments of impact, they’re just hidden under an inconsistent series of moments that don’t contribute too much to the conversation as a whole, but instead, just exist as a few charming scenes in an otherwise conventional film, but one that could have been substantially improved if the writers and director had a solid idea on where they wanted to take the story, rather than throwing in every idea and hoping that some of them will land with audiences.

Meatballs was clearly designed to be an ensemble effort, but one that would put Murray in the central role, solely because he was mostly quite recognizable as a member of the original cast of Saturday Night Live, which launched him to extreme popularity and allowed him to have a fruitful career for decades, which is especially impressive considering the majority of the roles he played were derivatives of the same kind of lovable slacker that he started to cultivate in this film, which seems to be the beginning of what was to become one of the more interesting ascents to stardom we’ve seen. He is quite good in Meatballs – there’s nothing explicitly brilliant about this performance, but it is a solid, well-constructed portrayal of the kind of endearing loser who positions themselves as someone who is far more interesting than he is, and demonstrates his efforts to prove himself, despite all odds. This is not a character that only Murray could play, but it is one that he defines in his own way (and had anyone else played the role, the character would have still be very interesting, he’d just be quite different in terms of demeanour and attitude, which may have fundamentally changed the film, for better or worse), and it understandably launched his career. No one else in this film benefits from the exposure, since they are all still considered reliable comedic performers, rather than major stars – part of this is because the film drew too much attention to Murray that it struggled to define the other characters, which is a shame considering Harvey Atkin and Kate Lynch were doing solid work, and deserved just as much of a breakthrough as Murray, who was billed as the sole star of the film, and as a result the focus was always on him, even though this was envisioned as an ensemble effort.

However, putting aside the shortcomings and concerns, we can still find a lot of merit in Meatballs, even if it isn’t particularly noteworthy. The perspective is the key element that makes this film worthwhile – this is a film about childhood adventure, but viewed through the perspective of the adults that surround them. Murray’s performance makes it very clear what they were going for in terms of showing that adults can be far more immature than children, and that they too can be capable of stirring up an abundance of trouble, just on a far bigger scale, and where the consequences are more severe (although the film allows them to almost entirely get away with their antics, based on the fact that this film doesn’t pay too much attention to logic), but the reward all the more satisfying. The film is very effective at emulating that feeling of a lazy summer, those seemingly endless days of our youth in which we didn’t have a single care, and could just spend our time engaging in the most eccentric and lovable misadventures without any worries about what the future holds. It does remove the feeling of nostalgia and overwrought sentimentality that we may expect to find with stories focused on recapturing the feeling of youth and the proverbial “good old days”, and instead replaces it with a more jagged tone that was the product of the generation that set the foundation of National Lampoon and its particularly brand of vaguely perverse, boundary-pushing comedy. It feels like Meatballs is an honorary addition to this canon of films (based on the fact that multiple people involved in this film got their start in and around National Lampoon productions), but it does unfortunately lack the scathing wit that defined this iconic comedic collective and it made so special. In both form and content, Meatballs had potential, it just struggled to meet it on a level that elevated it beyond merely passable, which is an unfortunate byproduct of the misguided overdose of ambition and overall lack of consistent direction that went into the film’s creation.

Meatballs occupy a strange place in the culture – there is a dedicated portion of the population that adores this film, which isn’t inexplicable since this is certainly a very easygoing, charming film that has a lot of merit in how it captures that feeling of reckless joy that came from our childhood summers. Those who appreciate this film certainly do have their reasons, and it is difficult to argue with something that tends to resonate with so many people, especially since there is nothing particularly controversial or mediocre about this film. It was also never expected to be a particularly daring comedy – intention was never to make something entirely serious, and those expecting a more layered, complex character-based story are going to be severely disappointed since this is a film that almost uniformly lacks this kind of precision, and instead just surrenders to its outrageous humour. The problem is that Meatballs wasn’t sure who to market itself to, and the tone the film eventually takes is what is most inconsistent. It wasn’t sure if it wanted to follow in the footsteps of National Lampoon and make a ribald, bawdy comedy filled with blue humour and vaguely perverse sexuality (which would not have been appropriate with a film full of children – the idea of a sex-fueled summer camp was perfected by Wet Hot American Summer), nor was it able to convincingly portray itself as a piece of family-friendly entertainment. Instead, it exists between the two and ultimately doesn’t perfectly encapsulate either. It’s a fine film with some terrific ideas, but it doesn’t endear itself to those who come to it later in life, since this is the kind of film that is best appreciated when encountered in one’s youth, and where the nostalgia acts as the fuel for the admiration it continues to receive. It’s a decent effort, but the most significant cultural cache is being the start of a very promising lifetime of collaboration between Murray, Reitman and Ramis, all of whom would follow Meatballs which much better production, this serving as the start of a fruitful friendship that would yield far superior films in the future.