Watch Dumb and Dumberer: When Harry Met Lloyd For Free

hyped garbage

good back-story, and good acting

Expected more

Good films always raise compelling questions, whether the format is fiction or documentary fact.

Jim carry and jeff daniels are not in this and i am glad they weren't in it because this would have ruined there career 's which brings me to the original actor's aren't in it those two had personality these guys who replaced them are horrible the acting is terrible the directing is bland and boring this movie is also very ugly but the biggest flaw is the humor since this was the two thousands comedy's were just nothing but gross out humor and this is a prime example

Now this.. this is a load of garbage. The first Dumb and Dumber had me laughing so much, but this, I only got a few laughs out of this. I have to admit it was a pretty funny movie, at parts, but compared to the first movie, this was nothing. I'm surprised they decided to go and make this movie with out Jim Carrey and Jeff Daniels. I never even heard of the actors who played Harry and Lloyd! The thing that irritated me the most was Euguene Levy. The whole movie turned into a drama after he was in it and took away from the whole point of the cartoonish comedy in the movie. He ruined the movie. This movie was nothing compared to the first. They should have not made this movie. And Dumb and Dumber To is coming out this year, and they aren't even counting this movie as the second! That's how bad it was. At least Dumb and Dumber To has the old actors in it and the same characters. Plus it is going to be a cross-country road trip. There is really no point in this movie. 3/10 because of how horrible this was compared to the first.

Just as hilarious as the original Dumb & Dumber. This movie sticks to comedy, not drama. It gets to the point, moves along well. A well-thought out movie that is not stupid. I give it a 10 out of 10 because I thoroughly enjoyed it. Good acting, good characters, good performances, good story. The movie is actually quite sincere. It's not pretentious.Why the low ratings and bad reviews by others? I came to this movie with no expectations or preconceived notions about anything or anyone. If they made this movie any better it would simply have been different, not better. Highly recommended. I also recommend "The 'Burbs" (1989) starring Tom Hanks.

It is very strange that when I read the user reviews of this site, so few actually talk about why the movie is so bad. Well, I'd like to take a moment to say why I didn't, and in better detail than most, hopefully, enjoy the movie.Dumb and Dumberer is a prequel, which if the word "sequel" is of any indication, means it is a continuation from the first. Well, "Prequel" implies it as a "beginning of" story, sort of what happened in the childhoods of Harry and Lloyd, who were originally played by Jeff Daniels and Jim Carrey, respectively.The characters in the story are Harry and Lloyd, two simple minded teenagers, who lack any real charm or clever idiocy that was played so well in the original. The idea in this movie is that the principal, played by the legendary Eugene Levy (Jim's Dad in American Pie and most of its sequels) is trying to find a get rich quick scheme, so he develops a special needs class to make the money, but he needs students.If that part of the plot doesn't offend you, don't worry, the rest will.Harry and Lloyd go on a search to find kids who are just like them, (although its so insulting to think special needs kids can't tell an Asian girl from a mentally handicapped child) and needless to say, a class is formed.Jessica, a very smart teenage girl (which only implies the entire school isn't smart enough to recognize this plot) sees the ruse, and uses our heroes to dig up the dirt on the principal.To be honest, if the movie didn't have the "Dumb and Dumber" moniker or even a mentioning of Harry and Lloyd, this movie probably would have faded into obscurity, nary, even been made, and if it did, it might have been a cult classic if it had been better written and not as relying on the first movie's jokes.The movie has some references to the original picture, but the problem is that references aren't usually funny. So when this movie references the laxative from the original as a large truck carrying said product, it doesn't make it funny, you are just implying that you watched the movie enough to notice it.The problem with this movie is just lazy writing. The creators probably thought watching enough of the original was a good idea to create a sequel, but what it does is insult anyone who tries really hard to write good comedy with insulting retreads from classic movies.Harry and Lloyd aren't some kind of smart, they are all kinds of moron. In the original, it is implied they aren't smart, but in reality, it's that their ideas of intelligence is slightly askew from most people, but it was mostly honest mistakes. Lloyd hearing the country Austria and playing it off as Australia is believable, and more than likely a mistake a person has made before, as opposed to say, talking about who Benjamin Franklin is (Where Lloyd explains that Ben Franklin was the "Pilgrim who invented Penicillin and defeated Godzilla").Critics and most writers will tell you that was is usually funny isn't funny, it's what you play off as serious that's funny. The characters aren't serious people doing funny things, they are played off as funny people doing funny things, and that doesn't always equal funny.The actors seem rather detached from the project, as if they all simultaneously had a large bill to pay, so they played their appropriate roles just to pay it off to do better movies. It was strange that from the years 2003 and 2005, people thought that making sequels to previous Jim Carrey movies was to be cinematic gold, was actually just copper painted up and advertised as gold.It is always going to be argued that sequels are never better than their original counterparts, and that's understandable, only so many movies have that bragging right. That doesn't mean if you have an idea for a sequel and you feel strongly in making a sequel that you have to do it poorly in every means possible: in writing, in acting, in character development, music, staffing, ETC. It should be room to improve. A sequel, in particular, a prequel should challenge the audience to see how the characters became who they are when we remember them, not putting them in a less than original story.This concludes my review, I give it a 2/10.