USER REVIEWS:
beelerspace 5There are three things that shouldn't have happened for me to have enjoyed the free screening of Napoleon Dynamite more. I should warn you: by reading this review, I'm quite possibly subjecting you to the same three things that made the movie less enjoyable for me. You've been warned.
First, I wish I hadn't had seen the trailer. It's a great trailer, and I suppose in this what-if universe where I hadn't seen the trailer I also wouldn't have driven all the way to Castleton Arts on the north side of Indy to see it. Still, I despise it when trailer creators, whomever that may be, rape the movie of its best moments and use them in the trailer instead of the movie. Good movies never let this happen, and the better movies, like Signs, use the trailer to the movie's advantage. The trailer for Napoleon Dynamite is a capsule of really everything that's great about the movie. That's not to say that I never laughed watching the movie. It's just that it makes that much more disappointing. In fact, one laughable part in the trailer is edited better than the movie, and therefore funnier.
Secondly, I wish I hadn't been given the card imaged above. It's a frequent viewer card, for the numerous free screenings that they've planned until, I guess, they decide to start charging for the movie. When you've been to three screeners of ND, you can send it off for "a prize pack, that I'm sure is good" according to the event promoter. It's a "sweet" package, if we're to believe the back of the card. Oh, and you have to be wearing a Napoleon Dynamite t-shirt to your multiplied screening, if you're to receive a stamp on your card. Naturally, they provided us with no less than two t-shirts to choose from. I think if I'd asked, I could've had more. But who wears a band t-shirt to a concert for the same band?
I felt pressured to like the movie. It wasn't so much that they expected me to go to the free screener no less than three times, it was as if they knew I'd need an incentive, this "sweet" prize package. The movie, they anticipated correctly, isn't good enough to hold it's own for three viewings in two weeks. But in order to be a mainstream cult hit (if that's possible), they needed me. They needed me to be a component in their viral marketing campaign. As I was voluntarily for Bottle Rocket and Office Space and Donnie Darko, I needed to be recruited to do the same for Napoleon Dynamite.
Thirdly, I wish I hadn't read the review that called ND "the cinematic equivalent of a Wes Anderson cover band." I tried to put it out of my mind pre-movie, but when the film began with its prop-driven credits, names written with sauce on a variety of standard American dinner staples, I wasn't seeing cute corndogs, or barely cooked steak dishes. I was seeing red curtains or a dust-jacketed book. It felt like Wes himself was placing the dish, filming it looking down with the camera, and then pulling the dish away. Then, he had left that sequence on the cutting room floor and done something more creative.
The worst thing going for Napoleon Dynamite is that it exists in what is a very post-Anderson film landscape. Anderson is coming out with a forth movie, and in the three he's already filmed, he's managed to create a very distinctive film production style. There is an Anderson cinematic style. Napoleon Dynamite proves that it's now officially a school. I'm not cruel enough to say that the first time writer/directors Hess brothers are a cover band, but the similarities unarguably exist. Like Anderson, the Hess's have created a slightly surrealistic, hyperbole world. The characters could never exist in the real world, but the film-world around the characters is off proportionately enough that they feel like they could exist. There's an attention to details in the Hess and Anderson worlds that substantiates this surreality. Napoleon’s snowboots in blistering summer or his lack of a belt for his blue jeans is akin to Max Fischer's beret, or his ever present suit. Napoleon Dynamite does well in the Future Farmers of America, and Max in his beekeeper club. Anderson's movies always end with everyone getting everything they wanted, and so too does Hess's. Both Hess and Anderson use music to convey ideas, even if Anderson does it more effectively. Both attempt a certain feeling of timelessness in its objects and setting.
Where Napoleon Dynamite ultimately fails is that it's clearly too inspired by Anderson. Wes doesn't have a patent on it, of course. And Napoleon Dynamite is funny. But where Anderson humor is strongest and most effective is its very silent character humor. In the times I've seen Anderson's films in the theater (they didn't need to give me tshirts or a sweet prize package for multiple viewings), I don't remember hearing the crowd laugh out loud. I did, many times over, in Napoleon Dynamite. Hess's Napoleon Dynamite is funny because a guy throws a steak and hits Napoleon, not so much because the character of Napoleon Dynamite is funny. Napoleon Dynamite's lines are funny because of the lines, not because of the person making them ala Anderson. Independent of the character, Anderson's lines become sterile and flaccid. Spout an Anderson line ("He's just a messed up kid Anthony!") and the only people who will "get it" are people who've seen Bottle Rocket 5 times over. Napoleon Dynamite has some of this, but it tries to hard to replicate that same character humor that it becomes obvious. The times where it is pure character humor, like Anderson's, I already saw in the trailer.
Anderson's characters, nearly all of them save perhaps Futureman, are inherently tragic. There's an underlying, driving sadness beneath all of them. Napoleon himself isn't. Or if he is, neither Hess convinced me of such. Napoleon’s uncle is painted as tragic, but it feels coerced and staged. The only character that I felt really stood out, that very well could have been in an Anderson film, is Pedro.
Napoleon Dynamite is funny. It's a good movie. But it's not good enough to see three times over in two weeks, even for free. Watching it is like seeing a good friend in a crowd, noticing that it's not them, and then later thinking that it might have been. It's too close to Wes Anderson. Maybe Anderson is like the John Woo for indie eccentric character movies. Maybe Napoleon Dynamite fails because it's a first adopter, the Adam in what is an eccentric surreal genre initially charted by Anderson. Maybe there's room for Napoleon Dynamites. But for now, Anderson's movies outweigh Hess's 3 to 1, and it beat them by nearly 8 years. However, until you can check "Eccentric Character Humor Movie" on surveys, nestled between Sci-Fi and Mystery, I think Napoleon Dynamite will be forgotten by most save the ones who get that "sweet prize package."
ido 7It's Rushmore for people who didn't 'get it'. Funny, nontheless.
vandycutie 0Aweful 2 hours that I will never be able to get back in my life
stevilbot 7there are a lot of brilliantly painful moments in this movie. it's tough to stomach the first half of this movie as you look back at similar moments in your life of the lives of others that you knew when you were in that period in your life.
the best moments hit hard and the weak moments make you scratch your head, but it's well worth spending the time on. i have yet to meet someone that didn't really like the movie.
chipbray 8Absurd, off-the-wall, Coen Brothers style humor- as in "Raising Arizona". Consistantly entertaining and laugh-out-loud funny.
etchasketch 7You'll either love it or hate it.
rekab451 7if you go into this movie expecting an oscar performance, or even a real plot for that matter, you may be dissapointed, but if you go in expecting a fun, random, silly comedy, it delivers on all levels!
WFJohnRage 9Quite the entertaining flick, might have to be high to truely enjoy it.
demongopher04 7If you don't have this certain sense of humor, the movie is sure to come out bland and pointless. I found myself laughing at the oddest, and most stupid things, but that's what made the movie what it is.
delorean 8never liked a bad film more than this one. and let's face it, Nap Dyn is NOT a good movie. and yet i still loved/love it.
for those who didn't dig i the 1st time, the good news is that is gets better on subsequent viewings.
dack 8I had low expectations for this one based on some of the critic reviews. (Note to self: never, ever listen to what Roger Ebert thinks.) There may be a little of "Wes Anderson cover band" going on here but it only feels close in style to "Rushmore" (as Beelerspace pointed out), and it's a hell of a lot better than "Royal Tennenbaums." The Coen brothers comparison is apt, too, but ND kicks ass on "Intolerable Cruelty" and "Ladykillers." It's a wacky, fun comedy that was one of the best of '04.
lalligood 8Wacky, offbeat, and almost surreal. Had that short indie film vibe yet fleshed out for almost 90 minutes that managed to keep me interested & laugh out loud several times. I kept waiting for one (any) of the characters to suddenly burst into laughter and say "No, I'm not really that crazy!" ND isn't for anyone who wants their entertainment spoonfed to them and can't handle the extreme weirdness...
Wynns 5Maybe I wasn't the intended audience. There's plenty to guffaw at, but it wasn't worth staying in to watch.
madmitch 8Quirky, deadpan, filled with little gags and jokes along the way. Fun for some but horrid for others. I liked it, worth a view, maybe two.
daglo 2Like watching a movie that makes fun of the mentaly handicapped.
Oracle 8A bit eccentric and weird but it is definably worth the trip. Very quirky & idiosyncratic though.
This movie is available on DVD/Video