howa25

To compare this film unfavorably to the high standards we hold for today's films would be unjust. This film has to be judged by the era that made it. Great films like "Jason and the Argonauts", "Hercules Unchained" and others of that ilk were popular and had an audience albeit a limited one. I remember seeing this film at the ripe age of six and being awestruck and terrified. Basil Rathbone was sinister as the evil wizard. The dragon seemed an insurmountable obstacle to the hero. There were little people inside a large bird cage crying for help,an evil temptress witch with green glowing eyes that lured one of the good guys to his doom and a horrible bubbling swamp that ate the flesh off of one of the good knights when his horse stumbled and he fell in. I'm glad I was six when I saw this film. I've remembered it for years and just thought to pay it a visit again on this site.

Why don't they make producers put disclaimers on movie posters like they do with cigarettes and prescription drugs that could have potentially negative side effects? Something like "Based very loosely on the book of the same title but don't get your hopes up" would have been appreciated. Then at least I could have waited for the DVD rental and not been duped out of the full price of a movie ticket. I felt really cheated after having seen this Disneyfied crapfest that relied heavily on special effects to give it the momentum it otherwise lacked. People who love literature just need to get used to the fact that American filmakers will never trust the American public enough to make a film that is true to the literature that inspired the film. If you don't have a problem with not being true to the original creation then this ranks up there with any other special effects extravaganza. This film lacked the passion and the nobility of the book. The characters said and did things that were not in the book and that went completely against the grain of the book. On a positive note, I'm glad Tolkein himself didn't have to see this parody. He would have been insulted.

Until I saw Dumb and Dumber I thought of Jim Carrey as blatantly obnoxious. Cable Guy,Ace Ventura,Truman Show-Yuck! I watched this movie with my kids as a favor to them long after the film had left the theatres. I think I've seen it around seven times now and have to say that Carrey has joined the ranks of the great comedians. Charlie Chaplin, Laurel and Hardy,Peter Sellers,Jerry Lewis,Don Knotts,Cary Grant these and many more knew the secret of making us laugh. They each had a niche in the broad genre we call comedy.Hi-brow,low-brow,ineptitude,slapstick, farce,black humor, we like it all for one reason. It makes us laugh. I can remember tears coming down my cheeks when I watched Charlie Chaplin in The Gold Rush. That same thing has happened in not nearly enough other comedies I've seen over the years. It's happened every time I've watched Dumb and Dumber. What a great way to end the first century of film-making. D and D will endure like all the great comedies before. Dumb and Dumber is well written and well acted. I can't say that I condone the spirit of crassness that defines so much of our present culture. I think we've suffered as a culture for giving in to cheap laughs too often. There are definitely elements of that in Dumb and Dumber but it transcends even those. There are moments of sheer brilliance both in writing and performance. The timing of many of the gags was also a major driving force. What you end up with is a film that at some point or another has to make even the most jaded film-goer laugh out loud at least once. 6.2 is an insult to this film. Look deeper. Give it the ten it deserves.