BUCKAROOBONZAI34 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.

Robert_Hearth "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 MooreMPAA 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-)

Elmware 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.

David Isaak 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?