The Honeymooners

I have higher expectations for a movie than a bottom-of-the-barrel sitcom episode. I didn't want to go but the group voted for this one. I'll be reminding those who voted to see this movie about their poor taste when we vote for the next movies to see.

The producers, writers, director, movie executives, etc. should hang their heads in shame. They knew it wasn't funny when they released it. The test audiences, if there were any, must have been ignored.

Why does Hollywood release this kind of junk and then wonder why movie attendance is down? Why do actors sign up even after reading the script and knowing this will be a second-rate movie, at best?

With every other mildly successful TV show or movie from the past being revamped, remade, or reimagined, it's not a big surprise that "The Honeymooners" would get a 21st century update.

Now, having said that, I believe this was a huge waste of an excellent opportunity. Now, I really don't care that the four main characters were reimagined as African-Americans. Hey, if it's a good movie, James Bond could be Black for all I care. This movie, however, given the script, was not worth making.

In fact, let's all just agree to erase this film from our collective memories. The REAL "Honeymooners" movie needs to wait about five to seven years for JOSH PECK from the Nickelodeon Show "Drake & Josh" to get old enough to step into Jackie Gleason's shoes. If you have never seen Peck before, watch the show. He oozes Gleason's influence (he is even an accomplished pool player as seen in one episode).

Of course, this is all my opinion which is probably not worth the time it took you to read this, but thanks anyway.

The movie needs a new title. Thanks Hollywood you have just destroyed the concept of a TV Show that was one of my favorites. On the way of out of the theater people were bitching and asking if they could get their money back.

Idea....rename the movie it has nothing to do with the TV series.

Where is the feeling that you use to get after watching the honeymooners.

What happened to creating a movie that depicts the era that the original was filmed in.

What happened to casting? The characters in the new movie are nothing like the TV series.

This remake should be renamed or removed. Its a load of crap!

This movie has all of the charm of a 2nd grader playing around with a video camera and just as much plot. The story begins with a charming love story that has no root in reality and does not improve after that. At least the film is consistent. The movie tries hard enough to make the audience laugh but the end result is a series of jokes that are extremely predictable. I think its safe to say that just about every line in this film was a plaid out cliché. Its hard to believe that people were actually paid to create this movie. I guess it stands as proof that if the paycheck is big enough, someone will be willing to do it. I had actually never seen a film in the IMDb bottom 100 before, so at the very least I can now say that I have.

i watched this movie a few hours ago, thinking it would be good, i'm a fan of Cedric the entertainer and the old 50s show. but half way through when i realized that i nor anyone in the audience had laughed at all, not even a small chuckle, i thought "i thought this was supposed to be a comedy" it was OK to watch once, but its not a comedy as it was meant to be.

Cedric the Entertainer was not a good choice for the part of Ralph kramden, he tries to hard to duplicate Jackie Gleason, he should have just made the part his own and did what came naturally. Mike Epps wasn't as bad as Cedric in his portrayal of Ed Norton. All in all it really isn't a comedy movie, its not funny at all, just a bad imitation of a classic 50 TV series.