I couldn’t have said it better. I like ND. I didn’t expect it to cure cancer or get my whites whiter. About the only thing I disliked was Napoleon’s seeming inability to make eye contact. Still in the end he put himself on the line for a friend and he got to at least play volleyball with the girl.
The first I heard of this movie was when I went shopping for my sister’s birthday present. I stepped into a shop (can’t remember the name) that sold a lot of rock band t-shirts. The place seemed to cater to the Gothic set – practically every garment on display was black. Over in one corner they had an entire section devoted to Napoleon Dynamite merchandise, lavished with the sort of loving attention one might expend to find devoted to an unrepentant hippie’s 1967 VW Microbus. Napoleon Dynamite t-shirts, posters, keychains, bumper stickers, etc., adorned the racks, right next to the t-shirts emblazoned with pot leaves, Charles Manson, Che Guevarra, and Tupac. It seemed to my eyes a clear endorsement from a deity I have never had much to do with – The One Who Whispers “You Will Buy Into This” Into The Ears Of Coolness-Conscious Adolescents.
Having just subscribed to Netflix, I finally took the opportunity to see the movie and find out what the fuss was all about. And, having watched it last night, I must say, as with most of my half-hearted attempts to “check out something hip”, I was baffled.
I don’t think I’ve ever seen a less sympathetic central character. After watching this guy for 90 minutes I still couldn’t figure out why I was supposed to care about him one way or the other. I could deal with him being devoid of charisma, socially inept, clueless about the opposite sex, submerged in his own fantasy world, miserable with his home life, and completely deluded about his talents. But these same characteristics that might have made another character awkwardly charming, combine with a loud, rude, oafish, and self-absorbed manner of behavior that left me completely cold. Does ND triumph over the shallowness and insipidity of his classmates? By the time the movie reached its moment of truth, I found that I really didn’t care. He didn’t seem any more worth rooting for than the vapid popular girls or the bullies he was up against.
Do you have to “like” the character in order for it to be a good movie?
If people didn’t have expectations prior to viewing then I think most people would have somewhat of a different opinion. If no one knew anything about it, I think more people would be pleasantly surprised at how much they liked it.
How many movies can get away with no cussing, no sex (not even ‘inuendo’ that people snicker over) and a largely bland cast?
There aren’t enough movies LIKE this one, and although it’s nothing close to what I would consider my favorite movie, I’m absolutely fascinated by people who “HATE” this movie. I just don’t get it.
I smile every time I envision Kipp shouting, “your MOM went to college!” while sitting on the couch like he is the coolest thing ever to exist… good stuff.
No. But for a movie to be engaging – for me to regard watching it as an acceptable way to spend 90 minutes of my life – I think I should at least care about what happens to the main character. Call me picky that way.
Well comedy is a very personal subject. Why anyone thinks that a movie that did not
involve me into a laughing situation is a great comedy has me confused.
Why movie sites rate Napoleon D. better than ANY Mel Brooks or Woody Allen movie is absolutely ridiculous! Most of humanity is not above a 104 IQ level ergo the intellect level of humanity causes most to laugh at idiotic movies.
Is this the correct answer? :smack:
It’s about an ordinary guy who achieves success (but a believable, ordinary kind of success). Ordinary people watch it and think “Hey, if he could do it, so could I”. People like thinking that.
My wife and I saw this in the theater as a sneak preview.
We laughed once. At the scene where Pedro’s brothers pulled up in a East LA low-rider. That was it. We were talking about it as we headed home, wondering what the hell all those other people were laughing at. As I said about the dreadful Eagle Vs. Shark, it is a film about outcasts made by the in-crowd. Both films are laughing at the social rejects rather than with them.
I like the zombies in it.
I don’t know. The question was asked 8 years ago…
My theory is that snobs, bullies, and zombies will not like Napoleon Dynamite.
I love Napoleon Dynamite: it’s not hard-sell; it’s not mean-spirited; it’s not formulaic. The psychology is good. (The self-importance of Napoleon and several other characters is what makes them funny, yet touching.) It’s not a laugh-riot, but to me it’s consistently amusing.
It reminds me of two Bill Forsyth movies that I also love: Local Hero and Gregory’s Girl. There’s the same low-key observation of human foibles at work in all three movies.
Because I’m insecure, I point out that I know that this is a zombie.
I think that if you ever were very forgiving of social eccentricities because you yourself struggled with how to be normal, you like Napoleon Dynamite. It’s just the misfits trying to get along.
The dude threw a steak at an unsuspecting teenage kid, which hit him in the face and knocked him off his bicycle. Just so he could prove he could have won that high school football game 20 years ago.
That scene is an amazing blend of sad, funny, and infuriating. The whole movie was like that, in fact. I loved it.
I like quirky foreign films [and silents, black and whites, 1930s light romantic comedies] and I made it through 20 minutes before I changed channels. Pointless, boring, stupid. Very glad I hadn’t paid to see it.
What I found funny in the movie is how small these people are - small people in a small town with small lives playing for small stakes that they treat as if they are of world-shattering import. Viewed from the outside these people and their lives and their ambitions are ridiculous, but they’re the only ones they have and they take them seriously.
And who’s to say that others, looking at our lives from outside, wouldn’t say the same about us?
The zombie-ness of this thread actually gives an interesting benefit of time. I rewatched Napoleon Dynamite semi-recently and it held up better than I expected.
The anachronistic quasi-80s/90s aesthetic is still kinda fascinating, and the jokes still mostly land.
It mixed equal parts mundane and surreal into a movie that worked much better than it seems like it should.
Well, I’m *part-*zombie and I liked it.
BAM! Nailed it in one, Mosier.
I’ve never understood the appeal myself. The characters are unlikable (a problem for me), what plot there is doesn’t do much, and the dialogue is nowhere near as funny as so many so bewilderingly think it is. I thought this movie was tedious and lacking in entertainment value.
My definition of “good movie” is one that I find interesting or enjoyable to watch. Since I’m not the type to refer to movies as “film” or “cinema”, and couldn’t care less about the insider artiste analysis stuff, this works for Ms. Audience. 
I do not enjoy a movie that has NO likable characters at all. I have to at least find someone reasonably tolerable to want to spend the length of their movie with them. Otherwise, I do have better things to do with my time than spend it with fictional people I dislike. 