Dumb And Dumberer: When Harry Met Lloyd Movie
Storyline
TAGLINES
Before the first movie, there was high school. They missed the bus.
The evolution of dumb...
Set in 1986 when best friends Harry (Olsen) and Lloyd (Richardson) were teenagers, this is the madcap comic tale of their attempt to get out of the "special needs" department and into regular high school life.
| Cheri Oteri | Ms. Heller |
| Eric Christian Olsen | Lloyd Christmas |
| Derek Richardson | Harry Dunne |
| Rachel Nichols | Jessica |
| Luis Guzmán | Ray |
| Elden Henson | Turk |
| Timothy Stack | Doctor |
| Mimi Rogers | Mrs. Dunne |
| Wayne Federman | Officer Dave |
| Lucas Gregory | 8-year-old Harry |
| Eugene Levy | Principal Collins |
| Holly Towne | Preppy Student |
| Josh Braaten | Toby |
| Vahe Manoukian | Security Guard |
| William Lee Scott | Carl |
| Troy Miller |
3.20 out of 10 (7803 votes)
Visitor Reviews
When Harry Met Bad Reviews
posted on 24 Aug 2009Few films live up to their title the way "Dumb and Dumberer" has. Consider this movie to be the god-father of the seven Police Academy movies, four Lepracaun movies, and every other nostalgic movie that had a s***ty sequel. With problems like the original cast being gone, the 1986 setting in the movie being non-existant, and jokes that lead no place you'd swear that most scenes were comprised of auto-biographies about the Director, Troy Miller's real life. Troy, we understand that it takes a special kind of person to make a movie this bad, I'm just guessing that your Dad got you the Director job or there was some sort of affirmative action scheme in Hollywood involved.After seeing this movie, you'll hate the original even, which makes one wonder why the film ever got past the cutting room floor in the first place. The reason: money. The plot is simple, Harry and Lloyd are in high school and their prinicple has staged a special education class in a scheme to make easy money. From here you're treated to 80 minute of toture that contains more bad jokes than a late night marathon of America's Funniest Home Videos.Not surprisingly, Bob Saget's in the movie. Ironically, Bob says the only funny joke in the movie, comprising of him repeatedly screaming a four letter word that could easily sum up the movie. I'll give you a hint, it rhymes with "hit". Beyond that, every one-liner and gag you see in the movie comes across like a bad "yo-mama" joke. I'm surprised they didn't use the "yo mama so stupid, she returned a donut to the shop cuz it had a hole in it" line.Nothing from the original is incorporated into the prequel, except for a few jokes that Jim Carrey did that his inferior counterpart attempts to redo. As stated earlier, the film takes place in 1986, yet the settings are more bland than a packet of 3 year-old Tang. Worse still, unlike the original movie, the ending is incredibly predictable. Even more odd, why the hell does the school only have about 7 students that are continually shown throughout the film.Watching the movie will sap creative ideas out of you, as we're starting to notice while writing this review. To put it plain and simple, this movie just sucks. We didn't even watch all of the ending.
why did this piece of crap cost 30 million to make?
posted on 22 Aug 2009this has to be the worse movie of 2003 so far. i thought that sandler's billy madison was iratating. this movie beats that by a long shot.and why did this movie cost 30 million with no big name stars in it? this is what i call wasting money. heck, they might as well have just burnt 30 million.
i might get jumped for saying this....
posted on 22 Aug 2009i thought dumb and dumberer was a good movie. not as good as the first but descent enough not to be on the bottom 100 list. how can no one like a movie with cheri o teri in it? this was a good movie and i am glad to own it. whoever hasent seen it , watch it , don't listen to what other people say and watch it
Harry and Lloyd weren't as funny back in high school
posted on 18 Aug 2009The Farrelly brothers' first movie, "Dumb & Dumber", turned out to be a hit, and has been enjoyed by many people with a sick sense of humour over the years, including me. This prequel, on the other hand, released nine years later, which the Farrelly brothers did not write or direct, turned out to be a flop. While it seems that "Dumb and Dumberer: When Harry Met Lloyd" is generally considered terrible, I don't think it is, but it's certainly no match for its predecessor.Harry Dunne is born in 1969, and as he grows up, he is home-schooled by his mother until one year in high school, in the 1980s. This is when his mother finally sends him to regular school. After this happens, he soon meets one of his peers, Lloyd Christmas, and they soon become two very dimwitted friends. Ms. Heller, the school lunch lady, gets Harry and Lloyd to gather some students for a "special needs" class, which they will also be in. However, the two pals have no clue that this is all a scam hatched by Ms. Heller and Principal Collins to cheat the school out of enough money to buy a condo in Waikiki! Jessica, a girl that Harry and Lloyd know, however, is suspicious! You might think I'm crazy for saying this, but watching "Dumb and Dumberer: When Harry Met Lloyd" wasn't a completely laugh-free experience for me. I didn't laugh very much, but did at times, such as when Harry is at Jessica's house and gets chocolate all over the bathroom, causing her dad to throw a fit when he sees it, thinking it's feces (yes, that is very immature, it still made me laugh, I can't deny that)! There were also times when I just smiled. However, for the most part, I didn't think it was funny. The last time I watched "Dumb & Dumber", I think I had a smile on my face as I started watching, knowing what I was in for, but that wasn't the case with this sequel. Also, the two famous main characters are just not the same.When a movie is as poorly received as this one turned out to be, I usually understand. I wouldn't say I like "Dumb and Dumberer: When Harry Met Lloyd" too much, my 5/10 rating makes that clear, but the fact that it has gotten more 1/10 votes than any others still makes me feel that I mustn't have seen the same movie. I might even be able to give this movie a 6/10. I guess I'm in the minority of viewers who weren't absolutely disgusted by this 2003 flop, but I still don't think it's really that good overall. I wouldn't say it should be avoided like the plague, but since many others would, you might want to do so, I just don't know.
Wonderful Casting
posted on 16 Aug 2009Compared to the first movie this movie is NOT a disappointing sequel, (err, rather, prequel?). The casting was right on target, nobody else could have pulled off Harry and Lloyd as teenagers and done it such a brilliant manner.Everything about Dumb and Dumberer fits right along with the second movie, which seems to be a major feat in Hollywood. Never once was I left thinking "Oh Harry (or Lloyd) would never have said or done THAT!".Not quite as humorous as first movie, but still pretty darn hilarious and wacky.If you liked Dumb and Dumber, you'll definitely love this movie.
Badly Made: Poorly Conceived: Has 1 funny scene!
posted on 06 Aug 2009One of those films that will astound you in that it actually got made. The script and direction here are poor and some of the 'comedic' performances are non-existent. But then again dialogue wise nobody has really anything to work with. The first film was made on the basis of a strong script. This sorry mess is made simply on the basis of a 'good' idea (that being lets cash in on the first one).The studio probably commissioned this after seeing only a treatment or maybe even just a pitch which probably went something like "Dumb and Dumber made a lot of money. Lets make another one". If that's the case then they should have got some performers who are good at improvisation but alas.To the film itself.....the leads do a good impersonation of Carey and Daniels but lack the comedic flair and material. It must have been a tough job I admit but the Loyd Christmas character struggles to get any laughs at all. The Harry take-off fairs better though. The one scene in the film which had me laughing was set in the school babe's house when she invites Harry round for dinner. But this was about the only one which had the whole audience, or indeed even part of it, going. It involved some pretty base toilet humour but in this movie you take the chuckles where you can. As for the plot. What can I say?! Its a prequel to the aforementioned original set during the terrible twosome's school years. And really that's about as much info as you need in terms of the character's motivations.In regards to the other more notable cast members present here Eugene Levy stole the show in 'American Pie' but most of his scenes here stink of being painfully under-written. He almost looks embarrassed to be in it. Also the rest of the kids in the special needs class just ain't funny. For a start they don't actually do anything and when they do get screen time they are about as charismatic as a career stoner. And when we find out that the Asian foreign exchange student is actually American the general reaction is not laughter but more wondering 'Who is she again?' I don't know why Mimi Rogers and Luis Guzman are in this. Their roles are small and uninteresting. I think that's meant to be the joke. Ha, Ha. Also that Loyd's dad(Guzman) is an Hispanic for some unexplained reason. Wacky! The role that must get the most criticism though is that of the store clerk. This guy's timing and general acting, if you could call it that, are just terrible. He stinks the house out . I can only imagine that they found him on the street and were unlucky to uncover America's worst performer. I mean what kind of audition , if any, did he go through for this? He has a gratingly monotone voice and a face you would like to hit.In summary: you can see 90% of the laughs coming and when they do come they ain't funny; the ending has huge plot holes in it that are never explained(I know. I may have taken it a bit too seriously) and even the out-takes struggle to raise a snigger. The film has the same poor pacing and direction of 'Dude.Where's my car?' but is even less funny than that piece of $h!t. 3/10
Embarrassing
posted on 31 Jul 2009I could not even finish even watching this so called movie just for the mere embarrassment I felt for watching it. The only laughter experienced was the laughter of my own disbelief that this tripe was actually accepted by Hollywood and transformed into a prequel of arguably one of the greatest comedies of the 90's. No original comedy, no plot, no character development, nothing that could even be considered comedy. All of the members who participated in this movie should be ashamed, for they tainted a classic. Do not watch. Watch the original again if you have to. Just avoid at all costs.0/10
Never had a chance.
posted on 23 Jul 2009Warning: Potential Spoilers !!New Line had a pretty smart add campaign to make people think that Jim Carrey and Jeff Daniels were starring in this. They weren't. With them, there was a potential for laughs. The original Dumb & Dumber is dumb but absolutely hilarious. This prequel is just dumb. Very dumb.Set in that decade known as the 80's, we see when Harry (Eric Christian Olsen) and Harry (Derek Richardson) first meet. The principal of the School, Collins (Eugene Levy, a great comedic talent wasted here) has an evil scheme to get away with lots of moolah by creating a special needs class. All this is an excuse for numerous attempts at comedy. Each succeeding attempt is worse than the last. The whole chocolate bar scene is really something. This is the kind of junk that even Garbage Dumps won't take.Rating: 1/2 (out of ****)
Funny...but very³ stupid.
posted on 05 Jul 2009This movie is everything I expected. I saw it yesterday and I just knew it would turn out to be a "funny, but stupid" movie. Also, I think Dumb and Dumber is funnier than the prequel (considering the fact that Carrey and Daniels are in it, who are funnier). But if you like what I like to call "immature comedy" then you'll love it! Overall, I'd say it's OK on a borderline level....if that makes any sense...
Very BAD Movie and nothing like the first one!!!
posted on 03 Jul 2009This movie is so bad that the only thing good about it is that you can use it as a Frisbee! NOTHING like the first one, the actors are TERRIBLE (and resemble something totally different from the first) and everything about the movie was bad. Who made this movie 10 year olds? The plot is all over the place once Harry and Lloyd are doing something one minute and another minute they are doing something totally different. And when I was watching the movie I did not conceive what the conflict was about throughout the whole film! This whole movie was a total waste of electricity watching it! Once you have made a very funny and original movie, don't make another one.
don't knock it till you tried it
posted on 27 Jun 2009Lets make no pretense. This is infantile stuff, a cartoon style plot with heaps of visual gags. The jokes are relentless, crude and altogether just not artworthy This film is no work of art but like a good cartoon you just watch it for the fun of it. I was simply crying with laughter at the toilet scene when the guy starts screaming about sh*t being all over his house. Its perfect The Jim Carrey playing guy was suitably deranged and the stroke of genius about this film is he played it realistically. He didn't do that 'I'm acting stupid in a stupid film' thing. Neither did the other half of this duo ... and his character was even dumber The rest of the characters were stereotypes (who cares, the whole point of them is that they are one dimensional and hence easy to laugh at) in what is basically a cartoon made into a film, I'm nearly 30 and I still make time to watch them No, the makers of D&D committed the cardinal sin of making a genuinely funny film with no pretense, hence the low marks It is worthy
Oh my God there's s*** on the screen!
posted on 21 Jun 2009This movie was horrible. I can't believe it actually got made. Well, I can, considering the garbage they make these days. But yeah, the soundtrack was terrible, the actors were crappy, the girls were mediocre and the jokes were just horrible.Half of the crap that wasn't funny on here were just recycled references to the original, which this was absolutely nothing like. The plot is poorly developed and tons of stuff doesn't even make sense. Like them playing the Vanilla ICe song and talking about it when the thing's set in 1986. Must have a time machine or something. Lloyd's filled in tooth is so fake it's like they were trying to make it more visible than not.If you're a fan of the original, stay the hell away from this. The Farrelly brothers probably lit each other on fire after seeing this masterpiece, and that's all I have to say about that.
This movie is awesome
posted on 21 Jun 2009I thought this movie was great and Eric and Derek did great jobs playing the characters. They are both very good looking as well. I hope everyone that sees this enjoys it because its good. And if you dont like it, then you can go away and not say bad things about it. Great job to all of the people who worked on this movie. its my favorite movie at the moment. :-D
WORST MOVIE
posted on 09 Jun 2009This is the worst movie I have ever seen, besides 'Sugar and Spice'.This was a complete waste of time, two hours of my life wasted. (It's okay though because I snuck into 'Dumb and Dumberer'. I can't believe people actually paid for this movie!)Some guy feel asleep in the theatre I was watching it and and began to snore. I, and the other people in the theatre thought that he was funnier than the movie! It was horrible-- the WORST experience I've ever had in theatres! This movie does not even come close to 'Dumb and Dumber'.It seems that 'Dumb and Dumber' is a masterpiece compared to 'Dumberer'. I hated it and did not even laugh more than two times-- no exageration!No one see this movie.I give it F.
A major let down - awful script and thoughtless directing
posted on 22 May 2009I was a big fan of the original. I think I laughed more at it's mindless humour than I did at any other movie I can recall. Admittedly, I was 12 at the time, but have seen it more recently in my adult years and was still highly entertained.So I was looking forward to this. The trailer promised more of the mindless action provided by the first film and the characters Harry and Lloyd looked well cast.That was where the positives ended really. As well cast as Harry and Lloyd were - Eric Christian Olsen was excellent and true to Jim Carrey's original portrayl of Lloyd - there is nothing they could do to rescue a diabolical script and storyline.Part of the humour of the first was that only Harry and Lloyd were that ridiculously idiotic. They were misunderstood by a believable world. This was part of the strength of the first, which allowed for an excellent story line and some near-water inducing situations. But such clever circumstances are left well behind in this prequel.Everybody is an idiot in this movie and that immediately impacts on the humour potential. If anything, the poor and corny quips from the supporting cast detract from the movie. Ms. Heller (Cheri Oteri) comes across as even more stupid than the two main characters. Such ridiculous but plot-centric concepts as Principal Collins (Eugene Levy) keeping all the evidence of his crimes, needed to bury him in jail for life, baffle the mind for their awful stupidity. Even the funnier moments wear out quickly - somebody can only think chocolate is poo for so long.Perhaps I'm doing this movie a disservice, but I'm not. There are a few laughs, however they are few and far between. The plot is substandard. There are none of the classic settings, for Lloyd and Harry to create carnage in, that were in abundance in the first movie. The directing is poor and misses many things (like the 90s cars and songs in a movie set in 1986).This calamity of a prequel is no fault of the actors. Most of the major characters do as well as could be expected with what is just a lame script. Even the end of movie 'girls in need' part is pathetic.This movie was abysmal. The only reason it gets above a 0 is because Harry and Lloyd were well portrayed and managed to provide an occasional laugh despite the script/director's best attempts. You'd have to be seriously devoid of comedy in your life to find this movie funny.It just doesn't belong in the same video store as the original. 1/5.
It didn't kill me!
posted on 14 May 2009I was very hesitant to watch this film. From what I had heard, I would basically die if I watched it. It was going to be that bad. So I decided to try and cheat death. I watched it, gave it a chance, and I was surprised.
It wasn't all terrible. I thought most of it was in fact funny. The actors in their roles were good, and they even looked the part. Who would want Jim Carrey and Jeff Daniels to play teenagers anyway. (They are GREAT, but seriously). There are many references to the first film included also.
Fans will no doubt spot them on first viewing. don't listen to reviews of this film. Check it out for yourself. You might be surprised. I thought it was good fun.
not Dumb and Dumber but not bad
posted on 12 Apr 2009Granted the plot was not as good as Dumb and Dumber, nor were the jokes, but it was watchable. I don't think that the younger Harry and Lloyd had quite the chemistry as the older two did, but they made it work. I must say that I was impressed with the acting jobs of Eric Christian Olsen (Lloyd) and Derek Richardson (Harry), they did a heck of a job emulating Jim Carey and Jeff Daniels. There were flashes of comedic brilliance throughout the movie making it very reminiscent of its predecessor, but there were just too many weak points. I think the weakness came from the lack of a fixed goal for Harry and Lloyd. In Dumb and Dumber you knew that their purpose was to deliver a briefcase to a woman in Aspen Colorado, so no matter what happened throughout the movie you knew what they were trying to accomplish. In Dumb and Dumberer they don't have a similar fixed goal.The movie was not worth my $8 but it was good enough for an average rating, nothing less.
No one in the cinema laughed throughout the entire film.
posted on 21 Mar 2009The funniest thing that happened was that someone pretended to fart loudly when the lights went out. Once the film started there was silence as all the attempts to be funny just failed.The audience ranged from adults to 12 year olds. And once the 12 year olds started saying things like "Oh, wasn't that funny?" out loudly you knew the film was bad for all age ranges. People walked out constantly and as soon as the credits started rolling there was a sarcastic burst of applause and everyone left, ignoring the outtakes.This is possibly the worst film I have ever seen in my life. And I've sat through some bad films.
Just Dumb
posted on 03 Mar 2009This movie is just dumb. I mean the actors themselves are actually quite good, but the story line development is lame. Character development direction is virtually non-existent. The lines are poorly crafted that even people with the most juvenile sense of humor will cringe in pain as each line is delivered. I forced myself through the whole film to ensure I was not judging a book by its cover, but with the exception of a few rare moments this movie is surely one that you will want to forget. This a movie should have been left on the shelf. Don't feel like you've missed anything if you haven't seen this one.
This movie is not worth your time
posted on 26 Aug 2009Before I start with this, I would like to state that I loved the original Dumb and Dumber, I've probably watched it 100 times and know every line, but now that that's out of the way, Dumb and DumberER as if they've put Dumb and Dumber back in theaters. I'm glad the writers are capable of being original!(sarcastic) This movie was rediculous. The only thing different was worse, unknown, incapable actors. The only thing they did in this movie was exploit the jokes that they made in the first movie. They even used the exact same lines with one word changed. I can't really explain without somewhat plot-spoilers, but if you want a better version of the movie without spending so much money, just pop in the original and you'll get something much funnier with better actors. I definately don't recommend this movie.