MovieChat Forums > Dutch (1991) Discussion > Why is this film so underated?!!

Why is this film so underated?!!

posted 16 years ago by OliverGbyrne
13 replies | jump to latest

I never understood it.I am a HUGE John Hughes fan,I have all the films he wrote and directed on dvd."Dutch" happens to be my second fav hughes film just after "the breakfast club" and when I tell my freinds about it they allways go "whats that?...".The film was just murdered by critics and was a flop when it was release in the winter of 91,I was only 9 back then when I saw it in the cinema and I fell in love with it even if I didnt get the message of the film as much as I do now as an adult. The film as great acting ,great early 90s background that would put anyone in their late 20s in a nostalgic mood ,the chemistry going on between Ed O Neil and young Ethan is just really good , You forget Ethan is a kid in that film , its like his the same age as O Neil when it comes to his performance.Of course there are a couple of surreal moments but all Hughes related movies has.And the all message of the movie was so original,Hughes decided this time to create a very unlikeable character and show us what made him tick and in the process make us like him,make us realise that we should not hate a spoiled rotten child because most of the time the parents are to blame and we should help them before its too late and they grow into adults.Geez Im rambling on..I just never understood why this movie is so underated.Thanks to anchor bay for giving us a dvd of this film,they often release movies that fell under the radar,I am gratefull to them because I am sure this movie would have never come out on dvd if it wasnt for them.

[–] cullencs 16 years ago

I never understood either. Very underated for sure. I remember being in the hospital for about a week or two back in 93 when I was a freshman in high school. I got to watch a bunch of movies when I was there. I remember watching Dutch for the first time. It made me laugh a lot and actually helped me feel better...well, not to that extreme, but I enjoyed it a lot. Just got done watching again. Still love it. When Dutch is in that bed at the shelter and it keeps falling apart...hilarious.

[–] sweiland75 16 years ago

I don't know, but I consider it to be a classic.

http://www.worldcommunitygrid.org/ You can help change the world.

[–] Narthumpulous 16 years ago

I agree. This movie definitely has a lot of heart. I first saw it as a kid aswell, and came across it on one of the movie channels earlier today (now in my early 20's). It resonated with me pretty well back then too, which says a lot for how well directed it is, in terms of giving the audience insight into the characters minds, etc... Good stuff.

"Aint you never been to the theatre before?" - Bill the Butcher

[–] 16 years ago

[deleted]

[–] wowandflutter 16 years ago

5.7? Seriously? I just saw this movie on Encore today - the first time I saw this film was when I was a kid, and I can't remember if I saw the whole entire film then or not. But I did remember that I loved it, and even still loved it when I saw it today. It has the perfect blend of comedy and drama and Ed O'Neill was great in his role.

I just love John Hughes' films. I would probably give this film AT LEAST a 7.5 ... I don't know anyone agree? Or is that too generous of a score? I, for one think between a 7.5 and an 8.5 for sure (out of 10).

My Movies: http://www.imdb.com/mymovies/list?l=27274808

[–] LuckyLuigi 16 years ago

It's a mystery to me as well...gave it a well deserved 9 which means excellent in all ways but lacks the divine touch of brilliance of for example Seven Samurai.

[–] 16 years ago

[deleted]

[–] YourLipsareRed 15 years ago

I definitely agree. This movie is beyond hilarious..but is soo unknown!

I guess I'll cut my losses, and turn my tricks at the magic show..

IheartRiloKiley.

[–] Boomstick87 15 years ago

I've always loved "Dutch". Just got done watching it for the first time in a few years. Still makes me laugh to this day. But the reason it's so unappreciated is because it's seen as basically a retread of all other John Hughes stuff. At least, that's what the critics said. Put "Home Alone" and "Planes, Trains, and Automobiles" in a blender, and you'll get "Dutch". And maybe people thought that it was just a throw-away vehicle for Ed O' Neal, who was pretty popular with "Married...With Children" at the time. But even then, the movie wasn't a total flop. According to Wikipedia, it cost $1,000,000 to make, and the total gross was $25,000,000. Not sure if it's domestic box office or worldwide, but still, not bad.

[–] lkfitz 15 years ago

This movie is terrific. I effing love it.

----------------------------------------
Twitter: Diversionized

[–] joshwinkler87 15 years ago

This film really is not that great. Read Roger Ebert's review of it and that pretty much sums of what is wrong with it. The story seems too unrealistic and quite frankly I did not understand who was supposed to be the protagonist of the film (Dutch or Doyle) and I didn't really like either one of them to be honest. There's no way that anyone would do the things the characters do in this film.

Another thing I don't like is the stereotypes. I don't think I have ever seen more stereotypes of rich, working class, and poor people in my life. Another thing, this film tries to portray the rich as being the enemies of the poor and that all poor people are nice, hard-working people screwed by the system while the rich are all snobs who had everything handed to them in life and hate poor people.

This is certainly not the best film to ever come out of the brain of John Hughes.

[–] doldrums452 15 years ago

I love this film! In fact, my whole family loves it, come on, it's hilarious you'd have to be brain dead not think it was funny. Oh well, I guess to each their own.

I'm like a bad penny, I always turn up.

[–] Promontorium 14 years ago

Half of what you wrote is remarkable bullsh!t.

You say it portrayed stereotypes of all rich being bad and all poor being good, but this is b.s. they get hustled by some poor people, they get charity from others, they make friends with some, and enemies of others. How could that possibly be considered a solid portrayal of a stereotype? Second part of this bullsh!t claim is that the rich are all portrayed as bad. Except that both Dutch and the boy are rich. Dutch is a self made man. While the boy has been given everything.

What you ignorantly claim as a portrayal of stereotypes, is what the film fleshed out in the boy's assertions about these stereotypes, the film was his learning arc in becoming a more enlightened person, but you apparently didn't follow.

Another mountain of b.s. in your post is this claim that it's too "unrealistic" yet you don't list any examples. "There's no way that anyone would do the things the characters do in this film." I can't pretend to know what the hell you're referring to, so I'll explain the main plot to you, and see if any of this sounds "unrealistic". Dutch is getting serious with the boy's mother. He realizes he doesn't know the boy at all and decides to stage an excuse for them to take a long time getting back so he could get to know him better. Things don't go as planned, but Dutch is adamant in stalling their return home long enough to win the boy over. He knows the typical reaction of a kid to a "new dad" is to reject, and considering the kid goes to a boarding school, he might not have much opportunity to change this negative perception. That's the plot. "Unrealistic"? I don't know. The whole point of most films it to portray extraordinary events, things that don't usually happen.