An undertaker who hasn't had any 'customers' in a long time is forced to pay one year's back-rent. To get money he starts to kill people, which brings absurd results.
This movie contains 2 potentially triggering events.
Painful bad singing, a yowling cat, and a scene where some statues are knocked over with a loud crash.
The first two sound remarkably similar to each other...
Not actually buried, but a character who has catalepsy and appears dead several times is interned in a crypt where he revives during the night, and escapes.
Not in a school scenario, but Trumbull acts like a bully towards his employee Gillie, usually verbally but in one scene telling him to sit down and shoving him onto the floor. All violence is slapstick and not graphic.
No. I'm not sure why there is a yes vote...a character is poisoned because the poison is mistaken for medicine, but it's just regular poison, not a drug overdose. A character gets drunk a lot, but not to alcohol poisoning levels.
Only mild swearing like damn and hell, but one line which the script gives as "he bit me! the sonuva bit me!" but sounds like "the son of a bitch!", and one moment where a character ambiguously appears to be giving a covert middle finger.
At the start of the film Amaryllis still has some feelings for her verbally abusive husband and tries to make amends with him in one scene. By the end of the film she has had enough of him and leaves him.
There are scenes of the cat being scared or startled by noises, looking alarmed by events going on around it, etc, but not sad. No harm comes to the cat, even the most evil character in the film is always affectionate towards it.
The contrast between a tall skinny character and a short fat one forms an element of the humour but there are very few jokes directly about the latter's appearance and those that are present are about him being short (showing him struggling to climb over things). He is never insulted for his looks.
An attractive woman is the subject of some my-eyes-are-up-here type stares from Trumbull, she does not object but also does not seem to return the attraction. However he is being portrayed as a dick, and she turns out to be cleverer than he assumed and outwits him, so the character is not simply a sexual object in the story.