User reviews

As far as being a classic, this movie doesn't even come close. Being that in the last 10 years there have only been a handful of decent National Lampoon movies you can't expect that this one was going to be one of the better ones. If you are looking for the rudeness of Animal House, or the Raunchyness of Van Wilder, then this isn't the movie you want.

On an up-note, if you are looking for a movie that kids can watch and would most likely enjoy this one isn't bad. As I mentioned it could have very well been made by Nickelodeon. The movie is pretty campy and there isn't any bad language or violence to speak of.. even the mobsters that appear in the movie aren't menacing. So if you are looking for something that a kid around the age of 6 - 12 could watch then this one wouldn't be a bad choice.

I think the concept for "Golf Punks" was something like, "Caddyshack" meets "The Bad News Bears". Trouble with that idea is that those films are some 15-20 years old. At the end of the 1990s, is there still a demand among moviegoers (or even video renters) for ragtag-band-of-lovable-losers-wins-the-big-match flicks?

National Lampoon used to attach its name to funny movies a long, long time ago. Remember "Animal House"? The "Vacation" series? For the past dozen years or so, quality has steadily declined. With "Golf Punks," National Lampoon has hit bottom. I can't recall another comedy so completely laugh-free. There's no humor, no drama, no triumph of the human spirit, no nothing. Just a few silly camera tricks that give the impression that the movie was made by a few high school students fooling around in the editing room.

Maybe National Lampoon will bounce back. If it's any consolation, it's hard to see how it can get any worse than this.

I must admit. It's not a great movie. Not a classic by any means. But I remember seeing it when I was little, and now rewatching it, was quite enjoyable. I don't regret watching it. Maybe a little cliché "losers vs elite", old rivalry, and so on and so forth, but, nevertheless, as a whole, leaving you with a sweet taste after watching. I recommend watching it on 1.5x speed, cause it may get ever so slightly boring.

Peter is a geek and is bullied at school. In an attempt to help him fit in more, his parents encourage him to pick a sport to play. Having failed at all their choices, Peter settles into a public golf course where he joins a team of misfits under the tutelage of the rundown and uncaring failed-pro Al Oliver. However, even as part of a team Peter finds that he is still looked down on by the other kids in his school – some of whom are in the upmarket private golf course in direct competition. On top of this Al has his own worries off the course as he owes a bookie a large amount of money due to a run of very bad luck.

When I saw that the opening credits had the attachment 'National Lampoon's' above the title listed in the TV guide, I immediately wondered if I should just bail out now. With a load of ironing to do anyway, I decided to just stick with it and not prejudge it on the basis of the name. However, I learnt that a dog is still a dog and even the most forgiving viewer will struggle to find anything of value here. The plot is the usual sports cliché of the underdog coming good but even that chestnut is fumbled in a film that screams 'cheap & nasty' from every pore. The script offers nothing in the way of actual laughs and just falls back on childish humour that even kids above the age of 5 will be furrowing their brow over. I could go on about just how bland the script is – it doesn't even have laughs that don't work in it, it just has no laughs at all.

The delivery of the film is also a pretty big problem too. The film is edited in a very cheap way, like anyone with a home computer can do – the screen slides in over other scenes, stuff like that and it all makes it feel like nobody could be bothered with it (not to mention the effect it has on the impression of structure of the film). The score is also nasty: having a cheesy, tinkly score with 'wacky™' touches does not make us think a film is 'wacky' it just highlights further how very lame the whole thing is. The delivery of the cast doesn't help one bit either. If I could think of one good Tom Arnold performance then I would say that he is wasted here, but to be honest I can't and this sort of material is about his level anyway. He puts on a smile all the time but really he is awful from start to finish. The kids are poor too – all stick into clichés or ethnic stereotypes (a hip black kid, an Indian kid with a funny name, a Philippineo who smiles and nods etc); they are so poor it is hard to watch and none of them are likely to have many acting jobs of any note in the immediate future. If it was worth the energy but it would be offensive but their characters were given no thought by the writers so why should I make any effort?

Overall this is exactly what we have come to expect from the National Lampoon stable. It is shoddy in nearly every way and I could not find one good thing to say about it except for the fact that it is quite short (although it feels longer). The production is cheap (with awful editing and a tiresome score), the material just lame and bland, laughs have called to say they won't be coming in today and can boredom fill in, while the whole cast range from poor to awful to offensive with none of them ever approaching a point where one could call them 'good'. A waste of time but happily, judging from the finished product, no talented people were wasted in the making of this film.