Wife found it, and took me. I knew NOTHING about it going into the theater. Told her to surprise me. I laughed before the first line was uttered. Took the film till the second line before I laughed again. Laughed many times after that. Wouldn't say it's the best film ever and must be seen at the theater for full enjoyment. But, it was a damn fine film. Won some Sundance award or something. I dunno. Don't follow that stuff. But, you could tell it wasn't your run of the mill normal hollywood film. But it was by no means artsie (artsy?) either. Kind of reminds me of Clerks. Not in story, funnyness, or anything like that. Just because of the way it was made, layed out, filmed, etc. Amatureish, but not. Ok, now I'm getting too deep and sounding like Leisher. As if anyone watches a movie because of, or cares about those qualities.
Over all, I give it a thumbs up. Definately has some replay value, so I'll own the DVD. Go see it even though it's a Sundance film, or maybe because it is, or something. Bah, forget I mentioned the whole Sundance thing. It's a good movie. Go see it.
OH. . . and sit through all the credits. Don't know why we did, cause we usually don't. But do it. There's stuff after the credits.
I've heard the hype on this film as it being the funniest film of the year, but I must have seen a different version as I didn't even crack a smile once.
I'd describe the plot, but there isn't a plot. Really. Its just a few days in the life of Napoleon and his family/friends.
Thus, I'll run through the characters:
Napoleon Dynamite - Its supposed to be funny because his name is odd. Oh, and because he's tall, ugly, says "sweet" and acts weird. Actually, its not funny at all. Also, is there a point to the kid having his eyes closed the whole film?
Kip - Napoleon's big brother. Its supposed to be funny because he's at least 20 years older, a 90 pound weakling, and training to be a cage fighter (but not really). This character has one storyline and you'll see it coming a mile away.
The mom - She's in the film, but MIA. I believe they're trying to imply that she's trying to life her life and escape from the children she's raised yet are still around.
Uncle Rico - See, he's funny because he was a high school football star, but now he's a loser trying to relieve those glory days. He thinks he'd make a great pro QB. Plus he's got all of these get rich quick schemes.
Pedro - Napoleon's best friend. A slow talking latino with apparent ties to LA gang bangers despite the fact that the movie takes place in rural farmland. He has a warped perception of his place in the world.
Deb - The love interest. She's supposed to be funny because she, like Napoleon and Pedro, acts weird and talks slow if at all.
I do want to note that all the actors did a very good job. I don't blame them for this piece of crap.
Watching this movie I couldn't help but think of About Schmidt because Jack Nicholson was asked how he felt making a popular comedy and he replied by saying that he thought it was a drama. I feel that the opposite could be true here.
There just isn't anything funny here. The writing is sub-par and juvenile at best. In fact, I believe the writers were probably the bully types in high school since all the characters we're supposed to laugh at are exaggerated to a bully's viewpoint. (You'll get that statement more once you see the film.) To take it a step further, I'm betting the writers were bullies due to their fat aggression since fat jokes were the only cliche humor not touched in the film.
Each character is an idiot. They are all flawed and none of them could have an ego over 100, if that. Each also has delusions of grandeur. None have romantic abilities.
You, the viewer, are expected to look down upon them as inferiors and mock their backwards lifestyle and views. That's where the film tries to get all of its laughs and its just not funny.
Dumb and Dumber was funny because it went over the top with their characters stupidity. This is just ignorant.
I know two people who liked this film, one of them is an adult and will probably post a counter opinion to this review. Other than that, everyone else hated it. Does that mean you will? Honestly, this is a toss up. Its a film you'll hate or you'll love.
I will say that if you enjoy Viva La Bam and/or think The Real World is the pinnacle of intelligent TV, then I'm betting you'll be more likely to enjoy this film.
People that are high or drunk will also probably enjoy it more than those who are sober.
Overhyped, poorly written, and utterly pointless. A waste of time.
2 out of 10.
The only humor I find in the film is the fact that the majority of people who liked it suffer from the same delusions of grandeur that the characters in this film suffer from. Thus, they are laughing at themselves unintentionally and not in a good way. This pleases me.
“Every record been destroyed or falsified, books rewritten, pictures repainted, statues, street building renamed, every date altered. The process is continuing day by day. History stops. Nothing exists except endless present in which the Party is right.”
I can only assume that you didn't watch the movie. And if you did, you weren't paying attention.
There was no mom. Their grandma was raising them and she broke her 'cocyx' in a four wheeling accident. Thus, a hospital stay.
Uncle Rico was far from a football star. His dream was 'if the coach had put him in during the 4th quarter, they would have taken state champs'. Meaning, he didn't even play. Implying that he wasn't a 'superstar'.
Pedro was from Mexico "In Mexico, we do it all the time." Why his brothers had a lowrider convertable with hydrolic shocks and sparkly paint, I don't know. Don't know enough about Mexican culture. I just figured they drove those kinds of cars in Mexico too. Didn't dwell on the cultural realities or anything enough. I just figured Pedro had older, bigger realatives that looked out for him and drove a 'Mexican' car. The only mention of gangs was when Napoleon talked about how different gangs were interested in him because of his bowstaff skills.
In my opinion, they just took highschool life, and took the 'geek' crowd to the extreme. Yes, their characters were over the top. But hell, look at ANY action flick.
I dunno. I think you were a victim of 'over expectation syndrome'. Not sure what you were looking for in the film. But, in my opinion, you got something crossed somewhere.
The guy draws 'ligers' and plays tetherball and thinks a delisious bass makes a good gift for a girl. I dunno. I think that's funny. An over the top character that looks as over the top as his lines are.
"Do you think people think I'm a loser cause I get to go home to Star every night?!"
(Star looks like one of the chick 'American Gladiators' after a sex change operation gone bad)
Over the top stuff. Not reality. But a cute story goes on too.
I think you are WAY off base on this one!
Or, maybe I like 'Real World' more than I thought I did.
Remember the movie when Giovanni whatever and Juliette Lewis played mentally challenged persons?
Picture if they played that up so you were supposed to laugh at their inability to function normally. That's Napoleon Dynamite in a nutshell.
I'll go into more later. I'm off to have a kid.
“Every record been destroyed or falsified, books rewritten, pictures repainted, statues, street building renamed, every date altered. The process is continuing day by day. History stops. Nothing exists except endless present in which the Party is right.”
Are you implying that laughing at geek/nerd/nonpopular people is the same as laughing at mentally retarded people? Unfortunately, I didn't see, or don't remember the Giovanni/Lewis film you're talking about. But tell me this, did you not laugh when Matt Dillon called retarded people "goofy bastards" in Something About Mary? "FRANK AND BEANS! FRANK AND BEANS!" "HE WAS MASTURBATING!" His part in the movie, for the most part, was meant to make you laugh.
I know people that rate Super Troopers 2/3 out of 10. The humor is 'beneath them'. I can only figure that's what's going on with ND getting a bad review.
I can only assume that you didn't watch the movie. And if you did, you weren't paying attention.
Never assume. I actually was paying full attention. I didn't have another TV going and I watched it on the PC. It had my full attention.
There was no mom. Their grandma was raising them
Nitpicking. So I called the grandma a mom, sue me. Actually, sue the casting agent for the film. The oldest son is played by an actor who can barely pull off 35, and the grandma is played by a lady in her 50s, maybe early 60s.
Uncle Rico was far from a football star.
Also nitpicking. You're right about his dreams, but its still so cliche.
As for Pedro, I know he's from Mexico...what's your point? The fact that his brothers or whatever they were drove a lowrider, wore bandanas, and acted like bangers was either a racist stereotype or a bad joke. Its farmland in Idaho so L.A. Mexicans living there is hilarious?
In my opinion, they just took highschool life, and took the 'geek' crowd to the extreme. Yes, their characters were over the top.
Actually, I think the characters were far from over-the-top and that might have contributed to my being bored by the film. All the characters exist in real life, I've met them.
I know dumb as rocks former high school jocks with nothing going on in their life.
I know older women trying to escape from their families and still trying to live young.
I know nerds that have delusions of grandeur about their status or abilities.
I'm being serious when I say that probably is why I didn't laugh once.
Hell, I even know a Napoleon Dynamite. Seriously.
There was nothing new in the film. It wasn't original to me. It was just normal people with their problems exaggerated a bit, but not to the over-the-top levels found in movies like Dumb and Dumber. I didn't see one joke that I haven't seen a million times before in better movies.
But tell me this, did you not laugh when Matt Dillon called retarded people "goofy bastards" in Something About Mary?
Chuckled, yes because the whole situation was so ridiculous. However, even in the movie they make a HUGE point about how its wrong to mock mentally handicapped people. People who do that don't get to sleep with Cameron Diaz.
I know people that rate Super Troopers 2/3 out of 10. The humor is 'beneath them'. I can only figure that's what's going on with ND getting a bad review.
I'd rate Super Troopers as ignorant fun about on the same level as Dodgeball and I gave that 6 out of 10.
I know people that would giggle their asses off watching you get hit by a truck in the latest "Faces of Death" movie. Does that make it funny? Its probably not funny to you.
Now, should I point out what I think is going on with people who get super defensive and insult others because a movie review doesn't match their opinion? Or can you put your claws away long enough to realize that its a simple matter of personal tastes. I hated the film, you loved it. Some people will agree with me, others will agree with you. Whoopie. They're opinions, not facts.
“Every record been destroyed or falsified, books rewritten, pictures repainted, statues, street building renamed, every date altered. The process is continuing day by day. History stops. Nothing exists except endless present in which the Party is right.”
Claws? Just sharing my opinion on something. Sorry it's the opposite of what you feel. Just because someone has a differing opinion, doesn't always mean they are attacking you.
And I still think you're going too far when you compare the humor of a guy buying a 'time machine' on ebay that shocks his nuts to a real video of a person getting hit by a truck (or a rolling car in an intersection!!). And a washed up ex-wannabe-football guy picking up a half eaten steak and hitting a kid in the head with it in an attempt to show his great skills in football is funny. A guy having his younger brother pull him into town behind a ten speed while he's wearing rollerblades is funny. If people really do that in real life, well, ok. It's still funny. I suppose there might be some guy out there that has actually done that, and might have felt bad about himself when the whole theater burst into laughter when they saw it. But lets just chalk that up as tough love! Someone should have clued him in LOOOOOONG ago.
ok, I'm trying too hard now. I guess I just don't agree with your assesment that ND is an evil film that makes fun of and degrades and potentially harms a segment of society that needs protection. Yes, I'm laughing at alot of it because I'm looking down on that type of person. But, I'm also laughing at myself because we've all done dumb things. If I saw a guy being pulled into town on rollerblades, I would laugh at him. At the same time, I'd play D&D if I could find someone to play with and the Ricos of the world would laugh at me. It's a vicious cycle. But the main thing I got from the movie is that no matter how crazy ND is, or how 'loserish' he acts, or how wacked out he dresses, he's happy with himself and could care less what other people think of him and surrounds himself with people that care for him. And I think that's just beautiful. Because in the end, ND is the big winner.
Claws? Just sharing my opinion on something. Sorry it's the opposite of what you feel. Just because someone has a differing opinion, doesn't always mean they are attacking you.
No, no, I said that because of Gordon's "meow". I wasn't implying we were arguing or anything. How stupid would it be for two IT guys to get into an argument about how we shouldn't look down on people and laugh at them for their stupidity?
(For those of you in the dark about that last sentence, IT people mock your lack of technical skills when you're not looking. We apologize, but we can't help it. You annoy us.)
Actually, I thought about this topic today as I watched the inside of my eyelids while at the hospital.
The one fact I can honestly stick with is that the film has no real plot. The best way to describe it is that its more of a "skit". Now that's not necessarily a bad thing, so keep reading.
Combine that with the fact that the acting was decent enough to keep the audience immersed and I think that will grab people who aren't expecting it.
However, for people who hear the hype, this film is The Blair Witch Project, Memento, and Open Water all over again. They expect a hilarious film and get what is essentially 90 minutes of people acting weird and living out cliches. My point being, the jokes aren't really original or strong so the film's strength is the characters acting weird.
That created a big problem for me in that they didn't act weird enough to be "over-the-top". Thus, they reminded me of real life people I know and/or knew.
The film had zero chance of impressing me at that point.
Does that makes sense? As you know, I'm exhausted while typing this so I'm not sure if I'm saying things as clearly as I want to.
Let me put it this way. Remember the scene you mentioned in There's Something About Mary? If your brother or kid was mentally challenged, do you think you'd laugh at that scene?
But to end this since I'm way too tired to continue, I would urge anyone to check the film out if they're curious. I and everyone else here only put up reviews as an opinion piece if someone wants a vague idea if a movie will suit them. In reality, you may agree with 90% of a person's reviews, but you may miss a movie you'll love in that 10% where you wouldn't agree. Proof comes in the form of Cake and I differing on this film, but agreeing on a vast majority of other films.
What may wet your whistle, may turn another man off. That's what makes the world interesting.
“Every record been destroyed or falsified, books rewritten, pictures repainted, statues, street building renamed, every date altered. The process is continuing day by day. History stops. Nothing exists except endless present in which the Party is right.”
I almost described it as a long SNL skit that was good as well. No real plot. More like "A few days/weeks in the life of some wierd guy in Idaho".
As far as the Something About Mary challenge. It would depend on how far up my ass a corn cob was at the time. In other words, I personally, would have laughed. I deal with tragedy/touchy situations with humor. I guess you could say, I do into denial. Or maybe I'm just a 'look on the bright side' kind of guy. But, enough of my psycho analysis. . . I'm guessing I would laugh, just like I laugh at other things that are similar that I do have to deal with.
Exactly my point. ND is like that one joke from TSAM except its the whole movie (not "that" joke, but you get the point).
Thus, people will have varying opinions and this film is one of those that you either like it or hate it. There won't be many people thinking it was "ok".
“Every record been destroyed or falsified, books rewritten, pictures repainted, statues, street building renamed, every date altered. The process is continuing day by day. History stops. Nothing exists except endless present in which the Party is right.”
Cakedaddy wrote:I almost described it as a long SNL skit...
Hmm, this just made my list of "Films to Never Fucking Watch."
Diogenes of Sinope: "It is not that I am mad, it is only that my head is different from yours."
Arnold Judas Rimmer, BSC, SSC: "Better dead than smeg."
I didn't read most of this thread, because it was just arguing...
But overall, I liked it. The message I took was two fold:
1. Geek can be cool. Geek chic?
2. Almost every person finally found happiness when they were exposed to something from outside Nowhere, Idaho. Napoleon had Pedro from mexico, Kip had LaFawndah from Detroit.
We thought this movie took place in the 80's... until the N*Sync song appeared. Then we realized that like my observations of Nebraska... Idaho, too, is living 20 years behind the rest of the world. VHS tapes, cassette tapes, Cindy Lauper tunes abound.
"Be bold, and mighty forces will come to your aid."
