6 reviews
If you've seen the original, seriously, don't waste your time. It doesn't come close!
The best thing about this was Andrew Schulz and a few of the jokes scattered throughout the film.
To be honest this misses the mark and is just an average film, I know they had to change it up compared to the original, modernise it etcetera and they did that well, although in an annoying way, in my opinion, but I'm old enough to remember the original lol...
Which is a classic and still stands up today, there was no reason for a remake. This is just an average streaming film about basketball.
I'm trying to be vague here to avoid spoilers, but it feels like there's none of the ICONIC moments from the original, a lot of content and story missed out. It doesn't even feel like it's about the 2 of them, one is an extra in the others story and now the title doesn't even make sense...
Some okay acting performances and some of the soundtrack was alright I have to admit, but other than that nothing stands out.
The original is streaming for free as well, personally I feel like I've wasted an hour and a half odd, when I could have just watched the original, but I had to find out for myself since I'm a huge Schulz fan and he's mentioned it on Flagrant.
5/10 bang average streaming film, the funny moments saved it from being lower than that!
The best thing about this was Andrew Schulz and a few of the jokes scattered throughout the film.
To be honest this misses the mark and is just an average film, I know they had to change it up compared to the original, modernise it etcetera and they did that well, although in an annoying way, in my opinion, but I'm old enough to remember the original lol...
Which is a classic and still stands up today, there was no reason for a remake. This is just an average streaming film about basketball.
I'm trying to be vague here to avoid spoilers, but it feels like there's none of the ICONIC moments from the original, a lot of content and story missed out. It doesn't even feel like it's about the 2 of them, one is an extra in the others story and now the title doesn't even make sense...
Some okay acting performances and some of the soundtrack was alright I have to admit, but other than that nothing stands out.
The original is streaming for free as well, personally I feel like I've wasted an hour and a half odd, when I could have just watched the original, but I had to find out for myself since I'm a huge Schulz fan and he's mentioned it on Flagrant.
5/10 bang average streaming film, the funny moments saved it from being lower than that!
First of all, selling this as a remake of a sensational film is a bad move. If you're not at least almost as good, you've already lost. But yeah, you probably get more views that way.
On its own, the film is OK. It's about basketball, after all, and it has one or two good scenes, such as Lance Reddick in the hospital. A 5 seems to be a fair rating to me.
In general, though, it's a good look at what's been lost in recent years. Microwave food instead of a home-cooked meal. Off-the-shelf goods instead of natural chemistry. Probably the zeitgeist of the decade. Maybe even Wesley and Woody wouldn't be able to make a film like the original WMCJ in 2023.
On its own, the film is OK. It's about basketball, after all, and it has one or two good scenes, such as Lance Reddick in the hospital. A 5 seems to be a fair rating to me.
In general, though, it's a good look at what's been lost in recent years. Microwave food instead of a home-cooked meal. Off-the-shelf goods instead of natural chemistry. Probably the zeitgeist of the decade. Maybe even Wesley and Woody wouldn't be able to make a film like the original WMCJ in 2023.
- teletrader85
- May 20, 2023
- Permalink
It's fine. I didn't expect much and I watched it while I waited to head out.
Don't base your evening around watching it. Don't expect a shot for shot remake of the original.
Jack Harlow surprised me by how watchable he was, and watchable really is the operative word for this.
The two leads also don't try and do a bad impersonation of Wesley and Woody either - which I appreciated.
Would I watch it again? Never Would I recommend it? Not likely
If they stole wrote tag lines like they did on vhs and dvd, it would say... it's watchable.
The supporting cast are decent too, and the cinematography is also decent too.
Don't base your evening around watching it. Don't expect a shot for shot remake of the original.
Jack Harlow surprised me by how watchable he was, and watchable really is the operative word for this.
The two leads also don't try and do a bad impersonation of Wesley and Woody either - which I appreciated.
Would I watch it again? Never Would I recommend it? Not likely
If they stole wrote tag lines like they did on vhs and dvd, it would say... it's watchable.
The supporting cast are decent too, and the cinematography is also decent too.
- liamvictorjones
- May 20, 2023
- Permalink
The story is twisted out of realism and scripted into a joke that must purely be taken as a REMAKE and NOT an improvement. The Jeremy and Kamal characters are not portrayed with enough perils in poverty to provoke the idea of street gambling as a sourse of income. The music used in the movie makes silly of the conversation between Jeremy and Kamal as there relationship develops which seems to attempt to hide poor story development. The basketball side of the story is poor and lacks creativity by the director. However, the idea of the two developing a skillset together in basketball that can be driven into a 'two on two' tournament is well within the grips of the story. So, it does earn the title of White Men Can't Jump.
Kamal (Sinqua Walls) was once a top basketball prospect, but his anger issue got in the way. He's now struggling to make ends meet with a package delivery job. Jeremy (Jack Harlow) is a former college basketball player who still dreams of getting to the NBA G-League despite his bad knees. He uses his nerdy white boy looks to hustle pickup games. He and Kamal try to win a 2on2 tournament for the cash prize.
This is redoing the '92 movie with lesser actors. Jack Harlow is a rapper trying to act. Maybe they were hoping for Eminem, but that's an one-in-a-thousand case and he was playing a version of himself. They need a real actor. I could accept one basketball player as one of the pair. Sinqua Walls is better. At least, he is an actual actor. The story is fine. The trash talking is great. There is potential here to pay homage to the original. They just need better actors.
This is redoing the '92 movie with lesser actors. Jack Harlow is a rapper trying to act. Maybe they were hoping for Eminem, but that's an one-in-a-thousand case and he was playing a version of himself. They need a real actor. I could accept one basketball player as one of the pair. Sinqua Walls is better. At least, he is an actual actor. The story is fine. The trash talking is great. There is potential here to pay homage to the original. They just need better actors.
- SnoopyStyle
- Jul 27, 2025
- Permalink
I believe this is a decent movie. Had it not been called a remake of White Men Can't Jump viewer's expectations would have been fresh, instead of comparing it to a classic. As many have stated, "Enough with the remakes!!!" Its ok to pay homage or be inspired by previous creations without calling it a remake. TV/Movies are so stale now. Rarely are there any new and creative ideas. Its the same formula and its is boring! As for this movie it's not going to win any awards or be a cult favorite, but its watchable. We are all seriously sick of the race conversations in EVERYTHING we view. We are watching to escape some of the woes of the world not be drowned in them!
- thandiesimone
- May 21, 2023
- Permalink