A review by
How can you call a movie "the lowest of the low, if not lower" when it doesn't even rate that? In fact, how can you critique a film that doesn't even really exist?
Sure, there was something on the screen I saw. Yes, it had
moving pictures and sound. It even had something resembling “acting” out of the
two leads. But a film is much more than that. Plot? Only used as an excuse for
some unfunny jokes. Characters? The butt of said "jokes" with no
development whatsoever. Scenery? Well, it did have scenery (it takes place in
Rhode Island, but filmed in the Atlanta area). Music? It was there, but I
really didn’t notice any. Anything
else?. Let’s face facts: this film
advertises its premise in the title. We
can not sue New Line Cinema for misleading advertising.
I never saw Dumb and Dumber. It was released during my “I really don’t care for the work of Jim Carrey” period of my life. But I had heard through the grapevine that it was "two hours of fart jokes". Well, this film runs for 82 minutes, and I only remembered three. We also get to see the requisite excrement joke, courtesy a chocolate bar; the obligatory "wedgie" joke, courtesy a flagpole; the fateful meeting between our heroes and the “love interest”, this time being an intrepid school reporter; the "writing a note to your father, the school custodian, using ketchup on the gym floor" joke (okay, that make me laugh) and the "set up to bring the downfall of the bad guy" on a parade float joke. And that's all the film did.
There was zero character development. No motivation besides making a fool out of yourself for a “laugh”. And there was certainly no reason why this was even regulated to celluloid. This film was most likely made as a prequel because Jim Carrey had moved on and Jeff Daniels had something else to do. Did I learn anything about these characters? Well, I did learn that Harry has an imaginary friend and that Lloyd gets his clothes from the school lost and found. Still, I needed more.
Could something have been made out of this? Certainly! Would
it require giving the characters a brain, even to share? Possibly.
Would I have enjoyed it more if I saw the original? Hard to say. But a film has to be more than setup, joke. Setup, joke. We have
to have reason and motivation. And there is zero in this film.
The two leads, Eric Christian Olsen (from Not Another Teen Movie) and Derek Richardson (making his leading man debut) have skill. In fact, I'd probably pay to see them in another film. The more experienced supporting cast, however, either did it for the money or to show their kids. Mimi Rogers, playing a mother for the third time in a New Line film, looked embarrassed. Eugene Levy, most recognizable as “Jim’s Dad” in the American Pie franchise, probably made this to finance something else or to cash in on that other series popularity. Cheri Oteri is still looking for that pot of gold after leaving "SNL". And I was kind of dismayed to see Elden Henson (from The Mighty) in this. But then again, it’s about the economy, right?
The audience gets royally screwed. Sure, with a title like Dumb
and Dumber, you get what you pay for.
However, you’d at least expect to see a film. Unfortunately, this isn't a film at all. It's a string of gags
with no clear direction of where it wants to go. There's a place for things
like these. It's called variety shows. And there is no variety here.