Home
Archive
Columnists
Video
Blogs
Discuss
About
Search
Donate
Advertise
Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement
Register to Vote: Rock the Vote, powered by Working Assets Wireless
Advertisement
  • AlterNetYour turn

Support AlterNet
Do you value the information you're getting from AlterNet? Please show your support with a tax-deductible donation.


Feedback
Tell us how we're doing.

Movie Mix

Gitmo Injustices Get Satirical Treatment From Harold & Kumar

By Eileen Jones, AlterNet. Posted April 26, 2008.


The iconic teens come face to face with the injustices at Gitmo -- and young audiences are going to eat it up.
Advertisement

Ask anybody under twenty-five what he/she thought of the 2004 stoner comedy Harold & Kumar Go to White Castle, and he/she will almost certainly say, with intense feeling, "It was huh-LARE-ious." There's going to be a similar reaction to the sequel, Harold & Kumar Escape From Guantanamo Bay. Everybody who liked the first one, or heard that the first one was huh-LARE-ious, is going to see the second one, and will likely find it to be funny as hell too.

Still, since we're here, let's review the thing.

Directed by the screenwriters who also wrote White Castle, Jon Hurwitz and Hayden Schlossberg, Harold & Kumar Escape From Guantanamo Bay picks up right where the first film left off, with our heroes still feeling the effects of their epic adventures scoring White Castle burgers to assuage the pangs of pot-induced munchies. Their hair-raising trek through the wilds of New Jersey has marked these young men in very different ways. Harold (John Cho), an uptight investment banking drone, is taking a blissful shower and daydreaming of his inamorata Maria (Paula Garces), whom he'd finally kissed at the end of that first traumatic odyssey. His friend Kumar (Kal Penn), a hedonistic pre-med student, is dealing with a savage case of indigestion from eating all those White Castle "sliders." And there you have the two poles of the franchise coming together in the very first scene. Sweet clichd young love and explosive diarrhea. Presumably we've all been there.

This dynamic duo is about to fly to Amsterdam in romantic pursuit of Maria and the legendary legal weed available there. But as you can tell by that wonderful title that can't be repeated too often, Harold & Kumar Escape From Guantanamo Bay, something goes wrong. A series of air travel disasters that seem like the stuff of our culture's collective post-9/11 nightmares put the boys at serious odds with America's beefed-up Homeland Security forces, and off they go to Gitmo where a macho pinhead Fed (Rob Corddry, former Daily Show fave) is determined to nail them as terrorists.

I viewed these early scenes in a spirit of gentle approval. All the kids love Harold and Kumar, and I like to see the young folks happy. I also like to see the young folks embracing proper, traditional young folk values like the commitment to recreational drug use and new experiences and raw language and irreverence toward authority. I worry sometimes about how many young Americans seem to be moving away from these wholesome pursuits. They get religion, they stay at home with their parents, they take abstinence pledges, they don't do drugs, they don't drink, they don't rebel or express their fledging individuality -- they purse their lips and Just Say No a lot. They're like stereotypical middle-aged people used to be: weird, repressed, judgmental, xenophobic. No fun at all.

These Harold & Kumar movies seem to be offered up as an antidote to that trend. There's so much about them that's in the right camp. Hordes of film reviewers have already marveled at the H & K films' nonchalance in dealing with race and ethnicity. Our heroes just happen to be a Korean-American and an Indian-American, and they deal with the obnoxious stereotyping they encounter all over the place in refreshing ways, including paying no attention to it at all -- they've got more important things on their minds, like trying to score pot -- and exhibiting a kind of impatience with it that's actually sort of urbane. Overcoming stupid prejudices through shared enjoyment of the basic pleasures of life, which seems to be the H & K philosophy -- that seems like a good thing. Mocking the dire craziness of the current administration and its policies, that seems like an excellent thing. In short, I'd like to like this film a lot better than I do. So why don't I, in spite of my basic approval of good clean fun for the young folks?

Well, Harold & Kumar Escape From Guantanamo Bay isn't an accomplished film by any aesthetic standards, but then nobody goes to see a Harold & Kumar film for beautiful shot compositions. (Re-screen the sublime Napoleon Dynamite for that kind of ambition.) The sequel's slicker than the first one, but again, it doesn't really matter. Episodic rambling, meat-cleaver editing, terrible special effects, they're all part of the experience of stoner comedies that work best when the audience is also stoned. There are going to be parts that are funny-like the encounters with Neil Patrick Harris playing a deranged druggy horndog version of "Neil Patrick Harris" -- and parts that are filler. The gross-out parts are very gross, and keep getting grosser as the "creative team" tries to top itself. But it isn't that.


Digg!

See more stories tagged with: harold and kumar, guantanamo, gitmo, harold & kumar escape fro



Advertisement

 

Comments Turn comments off sitewide Give us feedback »
Comments closed.
The comments for this story have been closed. Thank you to everyone who participated.
View:
Great review... different from what I've read elswhere
Posted by: Ghoulman on Apr 26, 2008 9:00 AM   
Current rating: 1    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
... as elsewhere the MSM seem to think this film is too political. I know how funny that sounds, but some of the reviews I've read around the MSM seem to fear the this comedy, no doubt because of the title.

Go ahead, read other reviews. It shows the fearfulness of mere film "critics" in the MSM who are suddenly faced with a successful film that openly makes fun of the worst crime just off US shores, Gitmo. How many film reviews feared for their jobs as they wrote? All of them baby. All of them.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

I can't wait.
Posted by: stuarts on Apr 26, 2008 10:40 AM   
Current rating: 3    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
If the second one deals with Gitmo and DHS with the same ability as the first one dealt with race not only will I laugh ( and occasionally be horrified) but I'll also take solace in the fact that the message will be getting out to a younger audience that might not be aware of or exposed to such lofty and cultured news outlets as Alternet. As such, perhaps a few of them, overly prone to youthful jingoism, might be swayed.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: I can't wait. Posted by: joe2171
Raising Public Awareness of Human Rights Abuses at Guantanamo
Posted by: sofla100 on Apr 26, 2008 10:59 AM   
Current rating: 3    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
This film will certainly have been worth it if public awareness and consciusness of Guantanamo and the human rights abuses occuring there is heightened. Frankly, I wish the author of this article had focused more on that versus complaining about how the film is flawed because it's not also a polemic about women's rights or something. The fact is, we have nothing in the public arena that focuses just on Guantanamo. Our news outlets just spew propaganda and rarely is the torture and the history of how the people there (Guantanomo) were "rounded up" (many guilty of nothing) and imprisoned without charges. Now, the USA is looking to "try" many at Guantanamo. For crimes allegedly committed over 5 years ago, in most cases. No doubt, after the waterboarding and CIA interrogations many have "confessed" to something. This film, if it can only bring about some recognition of the truth and the human rights travesty of Guantanamo, however it accomplishes this, will make it a real contribution to an otherwise "dismal" collection of films for this year.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Ebert's guest replacement & Roper gave it two thumbs down.
Posted by: HughScott on Apr 26, 2008 7:51 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
That's enough for me.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Terrorist
Posted by: HeKnew on Apr 27, 2008 1:28 AM   
Current rating: 1    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
There's nothing funny about the suspension of the Constitution, or about torture, or rendition, or having an offshore prison system.

Nothing what so fucking ever.


Direct Democracy

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: Terrorist Posted by: Incertus (Bradley)
Penny
Posted by: ppcoleman on Apr 27, 2008 5:17 AM   
Current rating: 1    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Not only does the reviewer ignore the fact that many might find this a NOT FUNNY subject, but AlterNet's lead has NOTHING to do with the article. Just stupid.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

I saw the terrorist and the terroist is us.
Posted by: Missing Piece on Apr 27, 2008 8:35 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
My fellow Americans,

I come to you in a time of great peril, in which our most basic rites have been taken from us and we do nothing. What good is the constitution without Habeous Corpus? If the government never has to charge you with a crime and can hold you indefinitely simply because they label you an enemy combatant then what good is the Constitution? If we vote on electronic machines that don't print a paper receipt and therefore are impossible to validate then what good is our vote?

If we don't fix these two most basic rites then we will never have what our founders fought for and created for us, EQUALITY AND FREEDOM.

The terrorists are winning, but who are the terrorists?

Call your representative and demand your vote be validated.


http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0408/9841.html

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Another Detainee Driven To Insanity. Shame on us
Posted by: aamer923 on Apr 27, 2008 1:19 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Salim Hamdan, A Yemeni detainee accused of being Ben Laden Driver at some point, can not stand trial, according to his lawyers because of years of solitary confinement. This also happened to Jose Padilla, and soon, I think , will to Zakaria Moussawi.
Shame on us, for letting it happen ..
And this was published in the Newspaper "Herald Tribune" a British newspaper.
And I wonder why it is published not an American News Paper?? Who is keeping the public in the dark about these atrocoties??

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

give humor a chance!
Posted by: sirios on Apr 27, 2008 4:19 PM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Wow, amazing how opinionated and informed the commentors seem to be ,considering not one of them has seen the movie. true it is a serious subject and has been dealt with in the past with grave concern, with little or no results. lets try all approaches including humor which on occasion has produced some tantalizing insights about life.I dont know if this film will reveal any such revelations, but lets wait and see. Don't forget film critics are heavily laden with subjective baggage.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Correction
Posted by: chirho33 on Apr 28, 2008 8:04 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
You show your H&K ignorance by referring to them as "teens". Harold and Kumar are twenty-something adults and college graduates, living on their own somewhere in New Jersey (probably Hoboken).

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Horrible Movie
Posted by: vivachavez on Apr 28, 2008 2:48 PM   
Current rating: 1    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I can't believe I spent $9 to see this garbage-fest.

It wasn't even very funny. Sure, there were some zingers about stereotypes and the government's truthful hatred of the Bill of Rights but so much of the film was cliche boy-chase-girl that I cringed as much as I laughed.

The best part of the film was when Harold and Kumar crashed into Bush's ranch in Crawford, Texas, where a comically hip and pot-smoking version of Bush said that what is important is loving your country, not your government. Amen to that.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]