Watch Van Wilder: Freshman Year For Free

Slow pace in the most part of the movie.

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

This movie tries so hard to be funny, yet it falls flat every time. Just another example of recycled ideas repackaged with women in an attempt to appeal to a certain audience.

what a terribly boring film. I'm sorry but this is absolutely not deserving of best picture and will be forgotten quickly. Entertaining and engaging cinema? No. Nothing performances with flat faces and mistaking silence for subtlety.

It is kind of difficult to imagine why this movie came into being, and even more so to pretend that it is supposed to be a prequel to the original 2002 "Van Wilder" movie.It is one of those types of movies where you just know that it is not going to be a grand experience, but you still sit down to watch it, hoping that there might be just a speck of entertainment to be had here."Van Wilder: Freshman Years" turned out to be a less than mediocre movie, and not an overly entertaining one either. And I will actually go as far as to say that you should definitely not view this as a prequel to the 2002 movie. Instead, view it as a stand-alone movie that has no ties to the 2002 movie.This movie relies on cheap laughs, which are brought about mostly by humor well below the belt. But many times this humor just doesn't really come through properly. So it seems that it is the result of some half-hearted script writing.The storyline in "Van Wilder: Freshman Years" is just not a very interesting or original one. It is all something that essentially has been seen before in similar late teen comedies. So don't count on originality being the key ingredient in this movie.For a comedy of this type, then "Van Wilder: Freshman Years" was less than mediocre. And once you have seen it the first time, chances that you will return to watch it a second time are slim to none.

In 2012 I was searching for a good comedy movie to purchase that starred a hot woman, and I have to admit this was slightly below my standards. However I was happy with the female lead 'Kristin Cavelleri' But in comparison to Ryan Reynold's original, it was better. I could not understand what was was so novel about the 2002 movie that people made a big deal out of it. There was hardly any adult humour and it just focused on a love story. 'Freshman year' the third in the series ventures more in slapstick and sex comedy. his I have no issues with but throughout the movie I couldn't help but notice there was a 'police academy' feeling present. Even the first scene was very reminiscent of Mahoney's classic bj scene. If you're expecting a plot, you will be disappointed. There is a love story and it enters half the way in to the movie. Prior to that we are entertained by Jonathan 'big eyebrows' Bennett who entertains us with his crude and dirty gimmicks. There isn't much to explain this movie's relevance as a prequel because I don't think anybody would care. Kristin Cavelleri is nice eye candy. She gives good support and I fail to understand why she couldn't bag more film roles, because she has clearly displays acting ability apart from good looks. Ken Fuller is again as his usual best. Supporting cast are okay. In general worth seeing if you enjoy mindless comedy gags.

First, if anyone is watching a National Lampoon movie for Oscar nominations is a fool.Second, its actually fairly funny. They just followed the basics.... lots of t&a, a douche bag, a hero, and some chick between the douche bag and the hero.... plus a lot of t&a third, the only thing I didn't like is the lack of creativity of the jokes. They basically took a page out of Ace Ventura, and Adam Sandler.I think Ryan Reynolds really made the first one good because, well it was Ryan Reynolds. And even though there have been a lot of N. Lapmoon movies, most of them were pretty... lame compared to this.

Such an awful movie, what more is there to say?To start with, I'd like to say that I watched the first (original) Van Wilder and liked it quite much. Then I watched the sequel (The Rise of Taj) and didn't find it as good, actually it wasn't good at all. But this third part, it was truly one of the worst movies I have seen in a while.First of all, the cast. Jonathan Bennett has got zero charisma, and he fails miserably in the way he tries to mimic Ryan Reynolds' version of Van Wilder. Kristin Cavallari, well, what can you expect from a reality-TV star. She, unfortunately, can't act. The Jamaican and the Chinese room mates were embarrassing rather than funny.The plot. Wilder goes to Coolidge as a "gigolo" who wants to get laid and party, but then he bumps into a girl who he truly loves. Unfortunately the girl has a boyfriend who turns out to be a real douche bag. (Wait, wasn't there something like this in the parts 1 & 2?..) This and the rest of the plot seem to be a bad edition of the same storyline used in the original version. Way too obvious, too.I could go on and on about how bad this movie is, but it would just make me angrier. Don't waste your time on this.