Dumb and Dumber To

The year 1994 was a big, BIG year for movies. Tom Hanks won his second Oscar for his performance in “Forest Gump,” Kevin Smith got recognition for “Clerks,” Keanu Reeves made himself an action star sensation with “Speed,” Disney gave us the triumphant epic that was “The Lion King,” and Quentin Tarantino delivered us “Pulp Fiction.” But there was one actor who managed to define 1994, by being one of the biggest stars to get so much recognition that year...and that actor is Jim Carrey.

While Carrey may have still been recognizable with “In Living Color” and a few films here and there, it wasn't until 1994 that his career really took off into stardom. “Ace Ventura: Pet Detective” was a goofy and likable comedy that had Carrey take things up to his highest level, “The Mask” had him blend both his craziness and dramatic sides together in one film, and then we have “Dumb and Dumber,” being the definition of stupid comedy.

To describe the plot of “Dumb and Dumber” would go like this: two idiots try to bring a woman back a suitcase that was supposed to go to mobsters. The result is shenanigans after shenanigans, with stupid moment after stupid moment...but that's pretty much the point of the film. Saying that film like this is stupid is pretty much giving it a compliment. It's a film that's about a couple of man-children, doing what you'd expect a couple of children to do, and there are some memorable lines and moments from it. Is it perfect? No, far from it. But for what it is, it's enjoyable.

Afterwards, the film was subjected to what I call, the “Carrey-wipe.” What's the “Carrey-wipe” you ask? Well, it's when a studio decides to make another film to a popular Jim Carrey movie, only without Jim Carrey involved with it. The reason for this was because after “Ace Ventura: When Nature Calls,” Jim wasn't too enthusiastic about doing the same character again and not trying something new. Because of this, we got shit like “Son of the Mask,” “Evan Almighty,” “Ace Ventura Jr,” and “Dumb and Dumberer: When Harry Met Lloyd.” They were all awful films, and they bombed HARD.

So the idea of Jim Carrey ever doing a sequel to one of his films ever again was just a dream. Then it was announced that the Farrelly Brothers were working on a TRUE sequel to “Dumb and Dumber,” and that it WOULD star Jim Carrey and Jeff Daniels again. There has been a lot of word going around and about on it, like Carrey dropping out of it, Daniels saying that it wasn't true, and it wasn't until Carrey tweeted himself with his chipped tooth that it was completely confirmed.

In this new film, “Dumb and Dumber To,” Harry and Lloyd go back to their old life after Lloyd ends his twenty year prank, and it's revealed that Harry has a bad kidney. When they find a postcard from an old girlfriend who had a kid, they decide to go meet her to get a new kidney, all the while delivering a special item she's supposed to give to executives at a convention.

Did I like the film? Surprisingly enough, I did...sort of. Jim Carrey and Jeff Daniels still have good chemistry together, and they manage to keep their material in the same spirit as the original. Kathleen Turner as Frida Feltcher, the woman that had the child, does a good enough job in the film. The only problem I had with her, was that she wasn't quite as funny as they could have made her. She is likable, don't get me wrong, but for a comedy like this I would have liked a bit more jokes with her.

Rob Riggle plays one of the antagonists of the film, and he's definitely one of the best parts about the film. His character is like the type Mike Starr played in the first film, as a guy who's trying to kill our heroes, but something always gets in the way. He also plays his character's twin brother, but that's as far as I'll go with him. But with how good Riggle was in the film, it's the exact opposite with Laurie Holden as the main villain. She's...just not interesting in the slightest, and I felt like Holden didn't do much to make her that memorable. Sure, the villain from the first film was like that, but that's beside the point. I also didn't care that much for the daughter, played by Rachel Melvin. She tries her best, bless her heart, but she didn't seem to take it to her fullest advantage. Not that it was Melvin's fault, I mean she's a good actress, it's just that the character wasn't written as good.

Overall, is “Dumb and Dumber To” worth it? On a certain level, it is. While I do have problems with the villain, and a few jokes here and there being too juvenile, it's still a good time because of Daniels and Carrey's comedic timing together. If you're looking for a film that brings out some nostalgia in you, I'd recommend seeing it. It's stupid, but in an enjoyable way.

Rating: 6/10