Why isn't The Whoopee Boys a cult classic?
I think this is one of those movies that just suffers from a really bad title, among other things.
The Whoopee Boys as of 2021 is 35 years old. I did not see it in the theater back in 1986, nor could I because I literally wasn't old enough to see an R-rated movie then.
A fuzzy memory of mine tells me that in the late 1980s - which by the way is before I even went to high school - a friend of mine at the time told me to go watch this movie because it was really funny. Where did he see it? No idea. Maybe he saw it on cable television or possibly rented it himself. I do remember being in the video store with my dad, specifically seeking this movie, and remember it being tough to find because the original VHS cover (which was pretty much exactly like the image you see above) didn't exactly stick out among all the other tapes. Very bland styling, mostly white box, easy to miss. But I found it.
The VHS tape was rented, and I think I watched this movie only once.
Is this movie funny? For an '80s movie, yes. Lewd, crude, rude juvenile humor, but it works. I find it interesting that the R rating is for language alone...
...which brings me to why this movie isn't remembered all that well.
First, the title. I guarantee movie goers specifically avoided seeing this just on title alone. Were it named something else, I'm positive it would have done better.
Second, the R rating. All it would have taken to bring the movie safely into PG territory is cutting out about 2 minutes. And I can assure you it would have not affected the storyline nor the comedy at all. Were this a PG movie, again, it would have done a lot better.
This should be a cult classic and it's amazing that it isn't
This movie falls right in line with other '80s comedy movies of the day in its demeanor. It doesn't take itself too seriously, is surprisingly competent and there are genuinely good laugh-out-loud moments.
Something The Whoopee Boys does real well is give off a happy '80s vibe. While re-watching this, I was easily able to put my mind back to how things were 35 years ago and stay there through the whole movie. Well, almost. There's only one part that dates it, and it's fortunately only for a few seconds with the mention of a "car phone", which in the context of the movie is only something very wealthy people had and used regularly. In 1986, that was largely true. Aside from that very minor nitpick, it's a great '80s trip otherwise.
The phrase "they don't make movies like this anymore" totally applies here. Being it's a happy fun '80s movie should make it a cult classic, but this one slipped through the cracks. I squarely blame that on the title.
To give you an indication of how bad (as in forgettable) the title is, the only way I found this movie is that I remembered a comedian with the last name Rodriguez was in it. I then did an online search for '80s comedy movies with a lead character played by actors with the last name Rodriguez. From that search, I found Paul Rodriguez, looked up the movies he acted in during the 1980s, and from there I found The Whoopee Boys.
Yeah, it took that level of searching just to find this flick. I couldn't even remember the title; it was that forgettable. I had to go by actor name.
Again, I blame the title alone as the reason hardly anybody remembers this movie today.
Good movie? I think so. If you like mid-1980s style humor with some raunch to it, you'll like it too.
I should also note it's easy to find the VHS copy of this movie, should you want one.
And then there were the right two
Out with the old, in with the older.
The new Fender Player Stratocaster I bought late last month has been returned, replaced with a 32-year-old guitar.
Why was the '21 Stratocaster returned? I could not get the guitar feeling right no matter what I did to it, even after fixing the tight string tension issue with a $10 part.
To be clear, there was nothing wrong with the Fender guitar. It sounded fine, played fine and did everything right...
...but the magic just wasn't there. That's the feeling that was missing.
I specifically bought a Fender Stratocaster after playing my first guitar that I still have, a 1989 Squier II Stratocaster, after sitting in its case for many months.
Since the Fender didn't work out, I said screw it, I might as well try to find another '89 Squier II. I did, and bought it.
I learned a huge lesson by getting this guitar.
I finally understand why guys chase after vintage guitars now
Buying a second '89 Squier II Stratocaster breaks several personal rules of mine, such as:
- Don't buy a duplicate of a guitar you already have
- Don't buy a guitar you can't return
- Don't buy a vintage guitar
Those rules obviously got thrown out the window with this guitar purchase.
At this point in my guitar playing life, what I was trying to find is something that felt as good as my original '89. I found one, in the same color, same generation, same everything. And it plays about 98% as good as my original does, which is as good as it gets. The feel is there, the sound is there, the comfort is there. I got it.
Some words of wisdom:
DO NOT buy this guitar. You will hate it. I love it because I know every single inch of this guitar backwards and forwards. I know all its strengths and flaws.
The Squier II Stratocaster is not like a vintage Fender at all. This is a guitar with ratty sounding ceramic magnet pickups, barely any electronics shielding, a plywood body (yes, really), incorrect fretboard markers at the 12th fret that are spaced too wide apart, garbage tuners, tuner buttons made of plastic that wear out easily, noisy electronics, and so on.
If you like the ratty ceramic magnet pickup sound and want something similar for yourself, I strongly suggest you seek out a 2007-2012 Squier Bullet Strat instead. That guitar has slightly better tuners, a basswood body instead of plywood, and can easily be found. Alternatively, you can get a Bullet Strat HT (hardtail) brand new that has a similar tonal character.
I bought the guitar I did because I know it very well, and that's why I have a much better understanding of why some guys chase after vintage guitars. Certain guitars have a sound and feel to them that the new stuff just doesn't have...
...which is NOT to say Squier used to make them better in the past. Not at all. The Squier Classic Vibe '50s Stratocaster and Classic Vibe '60s Stratocaster guitars are far superior in every way. I know this. But the Squier II character is the one I prefer. That doesn't make it superior. It just means I prefer it.
I love this thing. You wouldn't for reasons I mentioned above, but I do.
Squier Sub-Sonic, the 24 fret baritone guitar from 20 years ago
This guitar definitely wins the award for Best Name Ever for a baritone electric.
On page 147 of the Fender catalog back in 2001, one photo appeared of a baritone guitar by Squier. It only came in one color, Black Metallic.
This was the Sub-Sonic Stagemaster Deluxe, even though "Stagemaster" nor "Deluxe" appears anywhere on the instrument.
Basically put, this thing looks like the Baritone Guitar of Doom. With the exception of the headstock logos, everything on this guitar is blacked out. Paint, hardware, controls, tuners, all of it. Nothing but black. Also, it has a neck-thru design. No bolt-on.
The Sub-Sonic would look totally at home at a heavy metal show, no question about that.
How much?
I've seen the Squier Sub-Sonic selling between $650 and $1,000.
This thing is somewhat rare and attainable.
The Sub-Sonic is one of the cleanest designs I've ever seen for a baritone electric, and it was also built to play. This was made at a time when Squier was trying to be "edgy" with newer modern guitar designs.
Remember, this is before the Classic Vibe Series existed, so this was the best stuff Squier was making at the time. And even though the Sub-Sonic is 20 years old, when you pick up one that's in good condition, it doesn't look nor feel old at all. The Sub-Sonic could easily be released today and would still be considered modern.
If you fancy an "evil" looking baritone electric, seek out a Squier Sub-Sonic. You won't be disappointed.
If you don't want to deal with a vintage electric guitar and would rather get something now that's new (and probably cheaper with better build quality), see the ESP LTD Viper-201B. The B is for Baritone, of course, so it's low, loud and mean. Also check out the other baritone electrics available. There are plenty to go around.
Fender actually came correct with the Jag-Stang this time
This is not a guitar I'd ever buy, but at least this one was launched right.
Nostalgia sells, which is why Fender is having another go with this guitar (the first time was in the early 2000s).
Will it sell? Yes, of course it will because of two very specific things Fender did this time around. First, launch with a lefty version, and second, have it in the same color Kurt Cobain had his Jag-Stang in, and that's exactly what happened.
Yes, there is a right handed version if you want a look at that. But the lefty in Sonic Blue is what counts.
If I recall correctly, when Fender had their first go with the Jag-Stang back in 2002-2003 (which was made in Japan), the color was there but no lefty version - and that ticked off Nirvana fans a lot. They wanted the lefty and didn't get it. This time they do with the Mexico version.
Why I would I not buy this?
Before I list my reasons why, it doesn't matter what I say here because the fact the Sonic Blue lefty version exists means it's guaranteed to sell. That's the one fans have been wanting for years, so regardless of my opinions, Fender should easily sell all of the Sonic Blue lefties with no problem at all. I don't know how well the Fiesta Red lefty or the right-handed versions will do, but that blue lefty is a guaranteed seller.
With that said, this is why I'd never own one personally:
Butt-adjusted truss rod location, like many of the Fender Vintera Stratocaster guitars have. Neck has to come off for adjustment.
It has a leaned humbucker. The rear coil pole pieces absolutely don't line up with the G, B and high-E strings at all, and the front coil pole pieces absolutely don't line up with the low-E, A and D strings at all. What I'm hoping Fender did was use a humbucker with a strong ceramic bar magnet, which would at least somewhat mitigate the strings not lining up with the pole pieces.
7.25" radius fingerboard. This guitar will fret out easily for most notes bent beyond one semitone.
Jaguar control knobs. Never liked those things.
I won't own one, but again, the Sonic Blue lefty will sell. It's as sure of a thing as any.
$10 fix for Fender Stratocaster tight string tension problem
I almost returned the Fender Stratocaster I just bought because of this. Fortunately, the fix was easy and cheap.
I just bought my new Fender Player Stratocaster. I haven't even owned it a month. But I noticed a problem.
The strings felt too tight when compared to my '89 Squier II Stratocaster. That guitar feels just right where the strings are nice and "slinky", but the Fender absolutely did not.
At that point I did what most Strat players do. Adjusted the string saddles, took out a tremolo spring from the back (you only need two, especially if you don't use the tremolo system), adjusted neck relief, and so on.
None of this worked.
After that, I tried a different string brand.
That didn't work either.
What I was attempting to do was get the same slinky feel that my Squier has. I thought I covered everything.
I didn't. There was one thing I missed. The string guide (a.k.a. string tree).
As it turns out, the Fender Player Stratocaster uses a string guide for the B and high-E strings that does not use a spacer.
When I compared this to my old Squier, I then knew the Squier had a spacer and the Fender did not. Yes, my Squier has two string guides instead of just one, but even so, both have spacers.
After discovering this, I detuned the B and high-E strings on the Fender, removed them from the string guide, then tuned back up to pitch to see if the guitar felt any better.
It did. Now I had that nice slinky feel I was looking for.
At this point I needed a spacer. I drove to Guitar Center and bought a Fender Stratoacster string guide set. Nobody sells the spacers individually. You have to buy the whole string tree set. This means you spend 10 bucks for something that's literally worth about 25 cents. Yes, I could have bought just the spacer for cheap at a hardware store, but I didn't want to deal with the issue of having a spacer set too high or too low. The one Fender makes is exactly correct for their headstock and nut, so I paid the ridiculous 10 bucks just to get that stupid thing.
After installation, the string guide is now raised, resulting in less string tension. Problem solved.
Why does a string guide spacer affect string tension so much?
Let's find out.
The 101 on break angle for Stratocaster and Les Paul guitars
Break angle affects string tension. A lot.
In order to have the least amount of string tension when tuned to pitch, the strings have to be as straight as possible from end to end when installed on the guitar.
Installed strings on electric guitars do not travel exactly straight from end to end because of break angles. Decrease the break angle (where possible) wherever one is found, and the overall string tension is decreased.
On the Stratocaster guitar:
From back to front, break angle 1 is tremolo block to string saddle, break angle 2 is saddle to nut, break angle 3 is nut to string guide, break angle 4 is guide to tuning post.
Break angle 1 can be lessened slightly by only using 2 tremolo springs instead of 3, and allowing the bridge to float.
Break angle 2 can be lessened slightly by saddle height and neck relief adjustment.
Break angle 3 and 4 can be lessened significantly by raising the string guide with a spacer for strings that use them.
On the Les Paul guitar:
From back to front, break angle 1 is tailpiece to bridge, break angle 2 is bridge to nut, break angle 3 is nut to tuner post.
Break angle 1 can be lessened significantly by raising the tailpiece.
Break angle 2 can be lessened by adjusting bridge height and neck relief.
Break angle 3 can only be adjusted very slightly by using locking tuners since there are no string guides.
It's ordinarily the tailpiece more than anything else that makes a big difference with Les Paul string tension.
This is, by the way, why some players will wrap the plain strings (G, B and high-E) around the tailpiece. By doing this, the height of the string when leaving the tailpiece is closer to that of the string saddle itself. Some Les Paul players swear by this method and say it makes a big difference. Bear in mind that over time that strings will leave marks on the tailpiece. Also know that the break angle will be different from plain to wound strings. String buzzing may happen, and you may need to reintonate and adjust neck relief. You also have the option of top wrapping all the strings, but again, know that those strings will mar the tailpiece. You may want to buy a separate tailpiece (very affordable) to top-wrap with if you want to keep your original in good condition.
Where does less string tension matter most?
Answer: "Full" chords and bending notes.
If you like where your string height is but just wish you could hold chords easier and/or bend strings a little easier, that's where less tension is the answer - especially if you've tried lighter gauge string but that didn't work out.
There are thin core guitar strings by GHS (for both electric and acoustic) which absolutely do help for easier chording, but not for note bending.
Where the note bends are concerned, examine every break angle and adjust the ones you can. If your nut slots are cut correctly and everything else checks out, do your best to decrease break angles where possible, and this may make your guitar much easier to play. It certainly worked for my Fender.