User Score
3.4

Generally unfavorable reviews- based on 77 Ratings

User score distribution:
  1. Positive: 24 out of 77
  2. Negative: 44 out of 77

Review this movie

  1. Your Score
    0 out of 10
    Rate this:
    • 10
    • 9
    • 8
    • 7
    • 6
    • 5
    • 4
    • 3
    • 2
    • 1
    • 0
    • 0
  1. Submit
  2. Check Spelling
  1. Aug 28, 2010
    2
    with out carey and with out danials there is no movie . apparently hollywood didnt care and slaped together a half assed prequel that does no justice to the original. there where a moment or 2 where i laughed thats the only reason ill give this 2 points the rest was unbarable crap.
  2. Oct 14, 2011
    0
    This movie was so bad I stopped watching after 45minutes hoping it would get better. The story sucked, there was nothing funny, and the actors couldn't keep my attention. The first attempt at watching it made me fall asleep ... waste of time!
  3. Sep 2, 2011
    0
    There's a fine line between dumb enough to make a hilarious movie, and so ridiculously dumb that it's hard to even let out a nervous laugh here and there. Though the original DUMB AND DUMBER was a good example of a former, this prequel is the perfect example of the latter. DUMB AND DUMBERER: WHEN HARRY MET LLOYD is more of an homage to DUMB AND DUMBER than anything. The form of "dumbness" isn't even similar to the original, there is no similar plot, and it looks like two truly-smart teenagers imitating the believable stupidity of Jim Carrey and Jeff Daniels. All in all? This isn't worth watching. For fans of the original DUMB AND DUMBER, you'll begin to miss the real Jim Carrey because of the awful impersonations you'll find here. Expand
  4. Nov 19, 2011
    8
    If you are like me then you will like this kind of humor. I don't see how some people didn't laugh in certain parts. This prequel has some funny moments.
  5. Feb 24, 2013
    6
    The Farrelly's didn't want to do this movie for fear it would diminish the quality of the original. It wasn't quite that bad thou. It had some really hysterical moments, and Hollywood chipped in with cameos (by Saget, Shia LaBouf, Cheri Oteri, Mimi Rogers, and Eugene Levy to name a few.) It most defiantly doesn't live up to the original, but surprisingly it wasn't terrible. Eric Christian Olson does a terrific job as Lloyd, the story of how they met, as well as references to the original, and the cameos make this film worth seeing. It really isn't as bad as you might think it would be. Expand
  6. May 11, 2013
    1
    A toilet could write a better movie than this. First off, I usually like goofy comedies. I liked the original Dumb & Dumber. This one was just plain... Sorry that I have to use this word, but it was Retarded! Perhaps the worst comedy ever made. I think the guy who made this was just trying to see if something could be so stupid that it would break the laws of physics. It just may have done that. Collapse
  7. May 12, 2013
    4
    As a prequel, Dumb and Dumberer is the equal to a natural disaster. As your average teenage film (not to be taken seriously) I'd give it a nod. If you compare it to the first, I'll admit that this movie deserves hate. We all expected Carrey and Daniels to return with comical results. Olsen did a great job at playing Lloyd if that's any concillation while Richardson did a decent job as Harry. The rest of the cast should have been replaced for their sleepy performances and while I admire Eugene Levy, he should stick to playing Jim's Dad. If you love crude jokes and short laughs, then dumb and dumberer should garner your vote. In other words, this film is a pretty harmless, pretty reckless tale with a few gags but very poor performances from much of the cast. Expand
  8. Apr 16, 2014
    6
    when they writers made a script they turned it into the three stooges basically . Its funny, retarted , . without Jim Carey in this comedy the movie is still an even bigger JACKASS . Grade C- maybe a D
Metascore
19

Overwhelming dislike - based on 28 Critics

Critic score distribution:
  1. Positive: 1 out of 28
  2. Negative: 24 out of 28
  1. 10
    To call it sophomoric would libel even the most pathetic, pimply underclassman.
  2. 20
    Levy, Luis Guzman, Cheri Oteri -- utterly wasted. At 82 minutes it feels longer than “Lawrence of Arabia” -- and a lot less funny.
  3. Long, lumbering and endlessly unfunny.