The Dukes of Hazzard: The Beginning (TV Movie 2007) Poster

User Reviews

Review this title
34 Reviews
Sort by:
Filter by Rating:
1/10
Travesty
licoriceallsort4 March 2007
If anyone truly remembers the Dukes of Hazzard TV show from the late 70's and early 80's, this review will ring true with them. The TV show was about good wholesome entertainment for the entire family, with nary a swear word. This movie was clearly made to cater to teeny boppers and idiotic adults with nothing better to do than watch pointless junk on the television. This has nothing to do with the 'beginnings' of the Dukes. It is set in modern day times, with horrible casting and a misuse of Willie Nelson. In the original show, Boss and Jesse Duke were moonshiners from the '20s. By this standard, they would be moonshiners from the mid-80's. Give me a break. Please don't waste your time! And Warner Brothers, please stop using the Dukes in your craptastic films! Let them rest in peace!
50 out of 71 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
1/10
Dukes in Hazzard in name only now
lebanesecuisine12 March 2007
Growing up The Dukes of Hazzard was one of my favorite shows. The cast had charisma, and the show had an authentic, country feel to it. The 2005 movie was part of the "re-imagination" trend in movies that started with The Flintstones and continues today with this atrocity. Instead of re-imagining them in today's times they should have cast the younger Dukes in the 1960's when they would have been legit teenagers, to keep in continuity with the show. They should have done this with the 2005 movie, too. This movie is a cynical, straight-to-DVD-and-TV, bottom-of-the-barrel hack job and it barely held my attention.

The problem with the plot is that it's a low-rent version of the TV show. Aren't there any writers in Hollywood who can write an original Dukes of Hazzard movie? My guess is there are plenty, but the producers have too much contempt for their audience to think they would appreciate a gritty, true-to-the-spirit-of-Hazzard script. Fans of the original series shouldn't avoid it because of profanity, they should avoid it because it is Dukes of Hazzard in name only now.

The most important thing to me is the casting of Daisy, and they failed miserably here. In the series Daisy was a smart woman who happened to wear cut-off shorts. In 2005 she was a sexpot wearing cut-off shorts, nothing more than eye candy, playing the part as a parody. There's little to say about April Scott: she isn't even close to being a young Daisy in this movie. I'm not talking about physical proportions (although I think she's too thin for a southern Belle); I'm talking about charisma and the intangibles you need to play an iconic character. She doesn't have it.

The lameness extends to all aspects of the re-imagining. The characters have become lame caricatures of themselves, and Hazzard County is no longer the dusty, mythical Confederate backdrop it once was. There's no point in "re-imagining" the Dukes of Hazzard if you're going to get politically correct. The original series was uncynically proud to be Dixie, and that was a huge part of it's appeal. If this movie is a finger-in-the-wind to see if a new TV series will work, I hope it fails miserably in ratings and sales.

And Willie, did you really need the paycheck?
26 out of 39 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
1/10
Unbelievable...??? How do they greenlight these...???
sd776719 March 2007
Warning: Spoilers
I mean, I know it's for the money. Movie-making is a business arterial. But if they go in intending to "bilk" all the Dukes fans out there, who they know will rent or buy just because it's the Dukes, then at least stick to the proper formula. I liked American Pie too, but the crude stuff doesn't belong in a Dukes story. And what was the story, anyway? The scenes they do use seem entirely disjointed. I need to write ten lines here, so I will go on to say that I read many a user review on here, yet I post very rarely. This movie here just plain stunk. At least they didn't trash too many General Lees. But come to think of it, any more General Lees sacrificed for more lame remake movies like this are a travesty. In fact, since it's NOTHING like the real Dukes, it can't even be considered a remake anyway. I agree with many people who feel there are only one real Bo, Luke and Daisy. In fact, everyone is around except Sorrell Booke and Denver Pile. I can understand if they don't want to make another "reunion" movie, and that's okay. Just leave the General where he lays then, flying in the memory of a great TV show.
8 out of 10 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
7/10
Fun film but rather disjointed
kthoran4 March 2007
This movie is rather entertaining but has some glaring flaws.

To start with if we are to believe that this version of the Dukes tale is "the beginning" then the story should begin at an earlier time instead of the present day.

Additionally, the story isn't particularly compelling and doesn't reveal anything new about the origins of the Dukes of Hazzard but is instead another opportunity for the star of this franchise, the General Lee, to shine one more time which it indeed does. Humor and silliness is abundant and the eye candy is there but one is left with the feeling that this movie wasn't properly executed which perhaps explains why Warner's decided to skip releasing this at the box office.
13 out of 23 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
3/10
weak leads and unfunny
SnoopyStyle21 November 2016
Bo Duke (Jonathan Bennett) gets arrested in Chickasaw County, GA for creating mayhem with his driving. Four counties over, his cousin Luke Duke (Randy Wayne) is arrested for causing fireworks mayhem. The boys are sent to work for uncle Jesse Duke (Willie Nelson) who is selling his moonshine "medicine". Daisy Duke (April Scott) is an awkward church-going virgin. Rosco P. Coltrane (Harland Williams) is the sheriff in Hazzard County. Boss Hogg (Christopher McDonald) runs the town and actually has a piece of Jesse's business. He is looking to expand and threatening to foreclose on Jesse's farm. At school, Daisy introduces her cousins to Cooter (Joel David Moore) in auto shop class. The boys find a 1969 Dodge Charger on the bottom of a swimming hole and restore it christening it 'The General Lee'.

This is a lot of T&A, sometimes bare and plenty in tight outfits. Obviously, the filmmakers know what they're going for. This is a softcore B-movie with whatever scraps they can gather. A prequel to Dukes was always going to be a high hill to jump. This is giving up before they started. None of this is that good. Sadly, none of it is expected to be good. They lured Willie Nelson back and brought out an unfunny version of Harland Williams. The two young new actors lack the charisma to lead. April Scott has her impossibly skinny waist and her Barbie-like figure. The story is a mess and none of it is funny.
2 out of 2 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
1/10
bad very bad
walterdodger4405 March 2007
Warning: Spoilers
This is a horrible remake of a great show. The story line doesn't follow any of the true events that lead to the beginning. The General was not found at the bottom of a mud hole. What happen to the Hazzard County race that the General was built for? How can somethin like this be put on the air? Bo and Luke are supposed to be good guys. These two are immature trouble makers. Whats up with Daisy? She should be a Smart sexy lady; not a dummy with a unpropotioned body. If you want to remake something give credit where it's deserved! I loved the show so much in the 80's I currently own a 69 charger complete with Dixie horns. Walter p.s. you know what would complete this movie and make it the worst show of all time? change the general to a 69 camaro!
9 out of 16 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
1/10
Ashamed to say I watched it...
BUCKAROOBONZAI3422 August 2007
I grew up in the 80s, and was a loyal follower of the Dukes' TV show, so naturally I wanted to see this movie. Since it was supposed to be about the origins of the Duke boys and the General Lee I was expecting something informative and entertaining. What I got was a film about foul-mouthed teens and sexual exploitation. This is without a doubt the worst Dukes movie/show i have ever seen and I am ashamed to say I watched it. This movie was obviously aimed at the teens/young adult crowd, not that I would allow my child to go see it. The only saving grace was the above average acting of the main cast, though I'm not sure how they got Willie Nelson to be a part of this.
7 out of 13 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
1/10
Worst.Movie.Ever
edculle19 March 2007
In short - offensive, painful to watch and not even remotely entertaining. As witless as the original Dukes of Hazzard TV series was it was at least wholesome/entertaining/witless fun with mostly talented and likable cast members. No such thing can be said about this direct to video 'prequel' to the TV series. As a person who (sadly on so many levels) remembers and enjoyed the original series I was trying to keep an open mind and hoping for a new spin on the old and 95 minutes of entertaining fluff and car chases with the General Lee. The choice for script material, acting, childish/offensive language, music, sound effects, editing and the actors themselves make the old series seem like Masterpiece Theater by comparison. Christopher McDonald and Harland Williams as Boss Hogg and Sheriff Rosco P. Coltrane respectively will go down in movie history as possibly the two worst replacements for the talented Sorrell Booke and James Best from the series. Rather than good, family fun this movie is another in a long series of horn-dog teenage films with more in common with Porky's or American Pie. Full of crude language and sexual innuendo (even in the rated version) and references, likely only to get an 'R' rating, as a replacement for actual humor or storyline. I won't even comment on the pointless and excruciating to watch cross-dressing scene. Even the sound is poorly done with, in one scene, the exhaust noise from the General Lee coming from the left (hood) side of the screen as it was started for the first time. Don't buy this movie, don't even rent it - go out and buy/rent one of the first 2-3 seasons of the series.
11 out of 24 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
9/10
I loved this program. It followed the original series.
deenakae5 March 2007
This program seemed a lot like the original series. I loved it. The format of the show followed the format of the original series. The characters were believable as their predecessors younger selves. The feel and flavor of The Beginning was true to the original series.The Dukes of Hazzard: The Beginning definitely did not disappoint. Now we know why the feud with Hogg and the Duke Boys. I loved it. Is Dukes of Hazzard: The Beginning going to be a series? I would watch it faithfully. The characters are a delight. The actors actually caught the essence of the original characters. I also loved seeing Flash as a puppy. That brought back memories of the original. So true to form. Hooray and much applause to all involved in the making of this program.
15 out of 37 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
10/10
good movie
tweeter_7167 March 2007
This one is better then the one that played at the movie if you liked the TV show you will like this movie.Its got every thing the show had and a little more. the movie was funny and Willie nelson does a good job once again. Cant wait for it to come to DVD so i can add to my collection of dukes.And daisy's hot as ever course jessica simpson is pretty out but this chick fit the part. The boys playing bo and Luke did a good job. Even thou in the TV show bo was not that dumb but it made the show funny so i suggest to sit back if you haven't seen it yet and grab some beers and order a pizza cause this movie is worth the watch . I hope there will be a part 3 cause the dukes live on.
11 out of 28 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
2/10
Was never a classic
eriktrapper27 August 2007
First off those reviewing this like some sort of classic was wrecked... come on. The TV show was face it, never some sort of classic. The story line, dialog and acting was always half rated. The same routine in every episode, same bad slap stick. It was never an original show, it is an good example of another bad 70's show.

Second the questioning of language and half naked girls... well it was American TV and that was the only reason you never had more in the show. So it is a teenage romp looking for excuses to make bad sexual jokes and show topless girls. That is all it is No classic was wreck and all this discussion on how the movie should have been made to hold a timeline, as though a piece of history needed to be presented properly... come one! yes I watch it when I was a boy and the fact that it was great entertainment for us as pre or early teens says something about the original... let not try to glorify mediocrity... There were some cutting edge shows in the 70s for the time period and this is hardly one of them. SNL, All in the family, Second city TV, MASH, Monty Python to name a few did something no one else did at the time.

So watch this movie if you want bad jokes, stupid dialog and an occasional excuse to see breasts bouncing around. Otherwise just keep moving on
7 out of 16 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
10/10
I don't see what all the complaints about
Payback101624 October 2008
Warning: Spoilers
I mean yeah, it doesn't have what I expect from the TV series that we grown to love and sure that most of the former dukes cast including Bo duke himself John Schneider didn't really like this or the other movie, but it's still good I mean it's pretty obvious they'd start out as moonshiners why do you think the TV's rosco keeps an eye on them in the series and come on all the guys that watched this movie and the seires you got to admit you liked when they uncensored daisy. and come on it's the 21st century what the filmmakers did was what the guys who made the series have been dying to do but can't because the FCC had a tighter stranglehold back then. I've seen this movie I laughed and I liked it. and I bet you guys didn't even watch it you guys just listen to what others said and thought "oh ya he's right I never seen this movie I guess because he's right I should boycott it" if that's true then watch the damn movie before you can criticize it. Oh and just so you know the moon shining business plot is not only true to the TV series but to the movie "Moonrunners". if not for that then there wouldn't be the Good ole boys.
4 out of 8 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
1/10
This movie has no business existing
FilmbenderX29 May 2019
This is just gut wrenchingly bad. I'm pretty sure any review above 2 stars is put out by the producers or other invested interests. Just don't bother.
1 out of 1 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
1/10
Worst remake / reboot ever!
lovettstough21 April 2019
The Dukes of Hazzard the television show was my favorite television show as a kid growing up. The television remake that had all the old cast members who are still alive in it was the best remake. I think there were one or two of them. The one with Jessica Simpson was slightly better than this one but nothing beats the ones with the original cast members. This one is by far the worst one though. This one is just a disappointment & a shame.
1 out of 1 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
4/10
Not a fan
misswritercreates13 April 2019
I didn't like this movie at all. It was almost like watching some crappy teen movie. Just horrible and would not recommend. Only giving the stars out to willie Nelson who's great and the car was awesome as always.
1 out of 1 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
3/10
Horrible movie
adistfb3 March 2019
Simply said, bad acting, bad story and almost everything is bad. I gave it 3 just beacuse I don't want to give 1 to any movie.
1 out of 1 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
1/10
Not a true Dukes of Hazzard movie, waste of time, waste of potential.
cole-dooley6662 January 2015
I was stoked to watch anything Dukes related, but then I was immediately disappointed and disgusted. The acting is terrible and the characters are not likable. The plot was forgettable I don't even know if there was one. There were so many crude and immature jokes and lines, usually sexual. Kids should not watch this movie it's so raunchy. It's nothing like our cherished old time Duke boys show, nothing like it. Willie Nelson is the only highlight of this crappy, abhorrent failure of a movie and they make Uncle Jesse say unacceptably explicit jokes as well. Don't waste your time you will instantly regret investing any amount of time viewing this p.o.s.
1 out of 1 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
7/10
Return to Hazzard
srgtrock18 July 2010
I was a die hard fan of the original TV series 3 decades ago, I never missed a show, and even watched the Coy and Vance episodes. I enjoyed the 2005 movie as Knoxville and Scott did a great job as Bo and Luke (the rest of the cast left much to be desired).

This new movie, even with it's minor profanity (which would have worked better omitted, in my opinion), was still a funny and enjoyable movie. The story is a bit unique as it tells the story of how the towns folk started off before the '79 series made its debut, surrounded by the typical Dukes of Hazzard cliché'd plot. The movie keeps you entertained with a good amount of action, car chases down the dusty roads of Hazzard County, crooked cops and shine runners. A typical 70's country environment all set in a modern day environment which seemed out of place for some parts of the movie.

Everyone did a fine job acting their respective roles, even though I still don't enjoy Willie as Uncle Jesse, he did a much better job in this move than he did in the '05 movie.

With it's few flaws, it's still a pretty enjoyable movie for any action/comedy fans, or fans of the original series. It's like coming back home again.
1 out of 1 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
3/10
Poor, crude and juvenile
Enchorde20 January 2010
Warning: Spoilers
Recap: Bo and Luke Duke are cousins that have an uncanny ability for getting in trouble. To get them straightened out their parents send them to Uncle Jesse and his farm. But Uncle Jesse is pretty good at finding trouble himself, being in the moonshining business like he is. But now the town's major Boss Hogg want to maneuver him out, so the whole family must work together to save the farm. But what about young cousin Daisy, the good girl in the family…

Comments: A really juvenile and poor attempt to make a prequel of the "Young… " kind. Supposed to follow in the wake of Dukes of Hazzard (2005) but compared to that the previous looks like a masterpiece of class and intelligence. And that is saying some. The jokes in this prequel is crude, and mostly not funny at all. It is very juvenile and tries to cover up the lack of good jokes or serious story with a bunch of bare breasts and semi-nudity.

If you have seen the modern remake you might have found it rather silly. Then you might find it hard to believe that this much, and I mean much, sillier than that. It is really stupid actually. Almost all characters, apart from Uncle Jesse, that is played by Willie Nelson, and Daisy, have regressed back to being immature teenagers. Everything for being as silly as possible and desperate for (accidently) falling over a cheap joke. The result is of course that it is tiresome and boring instead.

Can't really imagine why Willie Nelson agreed to do this, I thought he had more class than this. The only other actress to leave this movie with her respect mostly intact is (beautiful) April Scott. The character Daisy seem to have some intelligence and depth, even if she too suffers from the juvenile-disease.

I liked the Dukes of Hazzard (2005). Sure, it was a little immature and silly, but in all managed to balance it pretty good. In this sequel they have lost it all and tipped over completely.

3/10
1 out of 1 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
5/10
The Dukes of Been There, Done That
Robert_Hearth22 April 2007
Warning: Spoilers
"The Dukes of Hazzard: The Beginning" (2007)

Directed By: Robert Berlinger

Starring: Jonathan Bennett, Randy Wayne, April Scott, Christopher McDonald, Willie Nelson, Harland Williams, & Joel Moore

MPAA Rating: "Unrated" (for sexual humor and dialogue)

***PLEASE NOTE: This Is A Review Of The "Unrated" Version Of The Movie***

After a long-running television series (that survived for six years and still remains a fan favorite) and a big-screen movie all based on the same material and the same characters, I believe we have seen everything that the Duke boys have to offer. We have seen countless chase scenes, the "General Lee" getting destroyed and resurrected over and over, and Daisy Duke in all of her glory. What else is there to show? Well, as "The Dukes of Hazzard: The Beginning" shows, not much. I have only seen bits and pieces of episodes from the original television series and, though it certainly is not the most intelligent piece of televised history, it is still a classic show that is entertaining. In 2005, its big-screen adaptation (starring Johnny Knoxville, Sean William Scott, and Jessica Simpson) was a moderate success despite critical pounding. I found it to be an average movie that, like its source material, lacked brains, but made up for it with its entertainment value. With, "The Dukes of Hazzard: The Beginning", nothing new is presented and everything seems recycled…but is it as fun as its predecessors?

Bo (Bennett) and Luke (Wayne) Duke have gotten into a spot of trouble and have been sent to live with their Uncle Jesse (Nelson) and their dowdy cousin, Daisy (Scott). Uncle Jesse is a farmer and a moonshiner who develops a huge rivalry with the most powerful man in town, the notorious Boss Hogg (McDonald), who is threatening to foreclose on Uncle Jesse's farm. I'll give you a little hint. This plot has been done before, both in the television series and the 2005 film. It is nothing new, but the real fun in "The Dukes of Hazzard: The Beginning" comes with how it explains the back story of Hazzard county. We are given explanations for the rivalry between the Dukes and Boss Hogg, Daisy's famous shorts, Flash, and, of course, the birth of the "General Lee". I enjoyed watching how everything came together…though I would have preferred to have seen it all happen in a plot that wasn't so completely recycled (and poorly assembled, I might add).

I liked the cast of the 2005 movie, even if Daisy Duke was a blonde. So, I was disappointed to see that only one person would be returning--Willie Nelson. Not surprisingly, Nelson gives the best performance in the movie. Jonathan Bennett is usually a good actor…but, here, he overacts in a few scenes. I found his portrayal of Bo to be rather average, which kind of disappointed me. Randy Wayne suffers from the same problem, though not quite as badly. His performance is okay. They were both too animated, unfortunately, giving the characters a slightly cartoonish feel. April Scott made me sympathize with Daisy, bringing more to the role than just a flawless body (though, she brought that too). I liked it. Christopher McDonald was a bad guy. I bought it. Harland Williams shocked me. He just didn't do anything for me. I could see how the screenwriters envisioned his performance (probably to be much like that of M.C. Gainey in the 2005 movie)…but, instead of playing it with even an ounce of evilness, he was goofy and comedic. He missed the point.

I want to make something very, very clear. "The Dukes of Hazzard: The Beginning" is not a quality film. It is cheesy, silly, and many of the scenes are just not plausible. I mean, did you know that a car can turn up on its side and drive on two wheels just by you turning the steering wheel…or that a pig can escape its pin, climb up onto the roof, and then prevent itself from falling just long enough for help to come? But, really, did anyone watch the original television series to see intellectual situations with strong messages. People watched the show to be entertained and, for that purpose (and that purpose only), "The Dukes of Hazzard: The Beginning" works. It may be a guilty pleasure…but the fun you will have here is comparable to that of the original show.

Final Thought: "The Dukes of Hazzard: The Beginning" will entertain the people who enjoyed the original show.

Overall Rating: 5/10 (B-)
3 out of 6 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
1/10
Worst Prequel Ever
kath2829 September 2007
In Australia this film went straight to DVD and I must don't waste your time watching this.

I wish I could go back in time 90mins as I would have watched something else.

This is the so called unrated version.

Well I'd hate to see what the original version was. Maybe a bit better than this crap.

Hopefully there wont be another movie in the series made.

If they do I hope they find better actors to portray the parts.

How Willie Nelson signed on for the sequel beats me,

Avoid at all costs
5 out of 13 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
6/10
Not bad.
Elmware28 March 2007
I just got it yesterday and it's not bad but a couple things just didn't quite tie in with the 2005 movie or the series, like how the Duke boys first got the General Lee was told differently in an episode in season 7. The location of Uncle Jesse's still was somewhere else on the farm and one of the doors on the General Lee opened while the other was welded shut. Also, they had the Dixie horn in the car already, but in the 2005 movie, Cooter and his friends have it installed while they are fixing the General Lee up.

They only jumped the General Lee once in the whole movie. Even though it was a huge jump, it didn't seem very convincing.

Most of the characters were better suited for their role, and they even had a somewhat more goofier and silly Rosco, which is the Rosco that I liked in the series. I think Cooter was too weird though.

April Scott definitely looked way better than Jessica Simpson.

They even had some funny jokes worth laughing at in this movie.
5 out of 14 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
All Duked Up . . .
zardoz-1319 July 2007
Warning: Spoilers
"The Dukes of Hazzard: The Beginning" (** out of ****) explores the origins of the popular CBS-TV series. Specifically, veteran television director Robert Berlinger and freshman scenarist Shane Morris show how cousins Bo and Luke Duke hooked up with each other, met Uncle Jessie, Daisy, and Cooter, and created a lifelong enemy out of Boss Hogg. After the less than spectacular but nevertheless adequate box office performance of the 2005 theatrical feature that toplined Johnny Knoxville as Luke and Seann William Scott as Bo, with Burt Reynolds cast as Boss Hogg, Warner Brothers must have felt that the franchise had enough life left in it to prompt a prequel. Actually, the 2005 comedy served as a prequel, while "The Dukes of Hazzard: The Beginning" takes us back before the cousins met in the feature film. As Bo and Luke Duke respectively, newcomers Jonathan Bennett of "Mean Girls" and Randy Wayne of ABC-TV's "Sons and Daughters" play them during their teenage years. The superficial but adequate straight-to-video introduction to the Hazzard County hellions generates a modicum of interest for two reasons. First, Shane Morris provides the answers to several questions that "Dukes of Hazzard" completists will appreciate. Second, Willie Nelson graciously reprises his role as Uncle Jessie. Evidently, Warner Brothers either anted up some serious cash or Willie must have felt in a charitable mood. Unquestionably, other than the young actor (Joel Moore of "Dodgeball") who impersonates Cooter, none of the cast is remotely memorable as any of the series characters. Comic actor Christopher MacDonald of "Thelma & Louise" is neither dastardly nor urbane as Boss Hogg, while Harland Williams of "Dumb and Dumber" fares only slightly better as Sheriff Roscoe P. Coltrane. Indeed, Williams is a big improvement over M.C. Gainey in the 2005 feature. Of course, nobody will ever top James Best as the craven lawman.

We learn in "The Dukes of Hazzard: The Beginning" that Luke got in trouble with the law for setting off a fireworks display to show his love for a woman who ignored him while Bo failed his driving license test seven times during which he careened around recklessly every time with the fuzz in hot pursuit. The authorities and the parents decide the best thing for their errant offspring is to pack them off for the summer to Hazzard County where Uncle Jessie plans to work their tails off doing chores around his ranch. The cousins meet Daisy (newcomer April Scott) just after she has taken a vow of abstinence. At this point, Daisy has not donned her trademark cut-off blue jeans. No sooner have the cousins settled into Hazzard County than they run afoul of Boss Hogg and nearly kill his prize hog Dainty. Inexplicably, Hogg keeps Dainty in a pen atop the Boar's Nest. Boss and Jessie are on the outs. Boss demands a greater percentage of Jessie's slim moonshine earnings and eventually decides that he wants Jessie's ranch, too. Naturally, Jessie is not about to part with the ranch that has been in the family for 150 years. This complication prompts youthful Daisy to apply for a job at the Boar's Nest as a waitress, but she still looks like a plain Jane. After she sheds her spectacles, ties her shirt above her belly and packs her booty into a pair of cut-offs, the owner changes his mind. Meanwhile, cousins Bo and Luke decide to help Jessie with his moonshine activities, but this requires that they obtain transportation. While skinny-dipping at a lake, they discover a 1969 Dodge Charger sunk on the bottom and raise it. Cooter helps them refurbish it and paint it orange. Cooter, we learn, has a thing about horns. Remember, he installed the Dixie horn on the General Lee in the 2005 movie. Jessie tells them every car that he ever owned he named after a southern general, so Bo names it the General Lee. When Daisy asks Bo what his favorite number is, he picks the number 01 and our heroine paints it on both the doors. Bo welds his door shut because he says it is cool. We learn why Bo slides off the hood. He claims it is easier than walking around the car to get into it. As the same time, Sheriff Roscoe keeps a weather eye on our heroes and totes around a puppy version of Flash.

The boys run rings around the local law enforcement, but they don't perform any acrobatics in the newly christened General Lee until the finale. Some of the one-liners are clever, but the attitude has changed considerably with "The Dukes of Hazzard: The Beginning" in this Unrated Edition. Unlike the TV series, this prequel features more risqué humor, along the lines of the "Porky's" movie. When the cousins meet Cooter in high school, they take his dune buggy for a ride and smash through the girl's locker room so that dozens of screaming bare breasted babes pursue them. There is also an amusing scene when Boss Hogg's wife Lulu (Sherilyn Fenn of "The Wraith") gets turned on by young Luke and shows him how to stuff a baked turkey. The basting scene is predictable but nevertheless cute. Of course, Bo doesn't share Lulu's enthusiasm. One major anachronism pops up when a character asks the Dukes about cell phone coverage. If this is genuinely a prequel, there were no cell phones back in the 1980s. Director Robert Berlinger keeps the action moving at a steady enough clip, but you can tell that this is just a warm up of a movie with no greater ambitions that to account for all things Duke. Seasoned fans of "The Dukes of Hazzard" would be justified in looking down their collective noses at this low-budget feature and ignore it completely were it not for Willie and the origins of the series.
2 out of 4 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
2/10
first half is so-so, but second half is downright lousy
fuzzhead7231 May 2007
Warning: Spoilers
My wife is a huge Dukes of Hazzard fan, and I enjoyed it as a kid as well. When I found out they made this 'sequel' to the movie, I really was looking forward to watching it. We sat down and watched it last night. Although I found the first 1/3 engrossing, the second third of the movie went downhill, and the final 1/3 was just plain boring. I got out a book and ended up reading and not paying very much attention towards the end. Yes, I thought it was that bad. I figured that maybe it had a fantastic ending or something that might have made up for how far downhill it slid, but my wife says no. The main reasons I have for not liking this thing at all are 1) predictability - just about everything in this movie goes by the book, and is terribly formulaic 2) the acting - over the top, not very believable 3) the writing, and some of the lines are particularly unbelievable and off putting. They could have made a great movie out of this if they had simply paid the writers for Frasier (or some equally talented folks) to come up with a witty take on the whole concept. One thing that really made me mad was the fact that my favorite character from the series was the most annoying in this - Cooter. I just found myself hating this clueless buffoon, yet also feeling sorry for him because he was in this movie. Please skip this one - you've been warned.
2 out of 4 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
5/10
THAT IS THE CAR!
nogodnomasters12 June 2019
Warning: Spoilers
The film is a supposed prequel to the popular Dukes of Hazzard franchise. The film gives us glimpses of Bo (Jonathan Bennett) and Luke (Randy Wayne) before they go live with their uncle Jesse (Willie Nelson). It also shows us the finding of the General Lee in a lake, the initial rift with Boss Hogg, and the transformation of Daisy Duke.

The accents were for the most part terrible. The unrated version featured numerous topless blonds that made the transformation of Daisy Duke into a vixen, anti-climatic. Harland Williams as Roscoe was over the top. The film was very corny and not well done.

Parental Guide: No f-bombs, some implied sex. Ample nudity (Casey Durkin, Carrie Minter plus many others)
0 out of 0 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
An error has occured. Please try again.

See also

Awards | FAQ | User Ratings | External Reviews | Metacritic Reviews


Recently Viewed