IMDb > Daddy Day Camp (2007) > Reviews & Ratings - IMDb
Daddy Day Camp
Quicklinks
Top Links
trailers and videosfull cast and crewtriviaofficial sitesmemorable quotes
Overview
main detailscombined detailsfull cast and crewcompany credits
Awards & Reviews
user reviewsexternal reviewsawardsuser ratingsparents guidemessage board
Plot & Quotes
plot summarysynopsisplot keywordsmemorable quotes
Did You Know?
triviagoofssoundtrack listingcrazy creditsalternate versionsmovie connectionsFAQ
Other Info
box office/businessrelease datesfilming locationstechnical specsliterature listingsNewsDesk
Promotional
taglines trailers and videos posters photo gallery
External Links
showtimesofficial sitesmiscellaneousphotographssound clipsvideo clips

Reviews & Ratings for
Daddy Day Camp More at IMDbPro »

Filter: Hide Spoilers:
Page 1 of 4:[1] [2] [3] [4] [Next]
Index 31 reviews in total 

82 out of 118 people found the following review useful:

God-awful Family Film with Little to Offer

2/10
Author: PoisonKeyblade from Long Island, New York
9 August 2007

After sitting through the entirety of Daddy Day Camp, I have to wonder what was going through everyone's minds who were involved in the making. The most likely reason was probably them thinking, "Is it really possible to make a movie this year that is worse than Evan Almighty and Delta Farce? Let's go for it!" Fortunately, Daddy Day Camp is nowhere near as horrible as those other two films, but lord know that it does come very close. This abomination of a movie somehow manages to feature a great actor, Cuba Gooding, Jr., in by far his worst role yet.

Anyone even slightly familiar with the first film will know the deal here. Low on money, Charlie Hinton decides to open up a camp similar to the day care service he ran in the first movie. Along the way, he must resolve problems with his father and show his son that he really loves him.

Yes, I know the plot sucks. While the first movie wasn't anything to write home about, Daddy Day Camp is about a thousand times worse. In the few scenes where there is supposed to be something meaningful occurring, everything just comes off in the wrong way. It might be because everything about this careless sequel is just ridiculous. Was it really necessary to make a sequel? The first film is almost entirely disregarded and almost every role is recast (although I haven't seen the first one in quite some time so there might not be any of the original cast members returning.) When Eddie Murphy turned down the movie, they should have just dropped it and forgotten about it. He was part of what made the first movie work, to some sort of level. His manic energy, his great comedic timing, his general appeal… Cuba Gooding Jr. is a great actor, but this role was just altogether wrong for him. It just didn't work as well as it should have. That being said, however, he was certainly the best aspect about this utterly atrocious film.

Daddy Day Camp is missing much of the magic that made the first movie watchable. None of the scene meld together very well (some of the younger characters go from heartfelt moments, to being rude to other kids for no reason to be rude and increasingly annoying) and the writing and dialogue are as unbelievable as they come. The villain is just pathetic, and the lesson that is supposed to be learned by the end of the film is a very weak one. Since none of the younger characters follow this lesson throughout the movie or seem to have learned anything by the film's end, it all feels just so useless. There are also, of course, those same old gross-out gags that you find in any boring family comedy. Here, however, they are not done as tastefully as in Underdog or as effectively as in the Cheaper By the Dozen films. In Daddy Day Camp, just like with the first film, it is pretty much lame gag after lame gag, watching flashy boring moments thrown onto the screen in the hopes that something will stick and not come off as completely and totally immature. In the first film, more often than not, most of the gags worked to a certain extent. In this film, there are very few redeeming factors, though. Barely any of those gags work. In fact, I didn't even crack a smile throughout the whole movie, and I am incredibly easy to please.

Another huge problem of the film was that most of the child actors were not only annoying, but their acting was so bad that I wanted to kill myself. Each person had their moments, but the kids mostly came off as incredibly inexperienced. Movies as bad as Daddy Day Camp could at least have the common decency to provide us with a semi-likable cast of children that won't annoy us to death throughout the movie. The people who cast this predictable shame of a movie should have learned a lesson from the talents of the kids in the feature film adaption of How to Eat Fried Worms. All of those kids were incredibly likable, and I loved every minute spent with them and their childhood lives. That film is much more interesting and complex than this simplistic bore-fest that cannot even credit a single laugh to its name. With Evan Almighty, I did at least laugh quite a few times. In Daddy Day Camp, I cannot even give it that compliment. The only reason that it ended up better than Evan Almighty was because of the story between Charlie and his father. Surprisingly enough, it actually worked at times, and it worked very well I must say. And not all of the kids were completely terrible.

So all in all, Daddy Day Camp was a pretty crappy movie filled with wasted talent and some of the worst child actors I've seen on screen. It is really obvious from the get-go that very little effort was put into this boring sequel. I just hope that nobody goes into this movie expecting even a relatively good movie, because it disappoints with even the lowest of expectations. 2.5/10

Was the above review useful to you?

24 out of 29 people found the following review useful:

Send Fred Savage to Movie-making Day Camp

1/10
Author: criticlh-1 from Seattle
11 August 2007

*** This review may contain spoilers ***

It is impossible to have a spoiler for this movie, because it is already rotten. At age 31, Fred Savage should know better. Directing his first feature film after years of work in television, he allows Cuba Gooding, Jr. to shamelessly mug the camera as if his eyebrows needed exercise. I have had high school student directors who exercised more restraint than this. I really don't mind fourth-grade gross-out humor either (my wife teaches fourth grade), but the bits in this sad excuse for a movie are merely gross without being remotely funny. Brown (did it have to be brown?) water gushing from the most disgustingly filthy toilet in history is not funny. Having a small boy throw up in the camp director's tent is not funny, no matter how tightly Gooding can clench his facial muscles in response. The most amateurish comedian knows that jokes have to be set up. In this movie there is no setup, there is no payoff, hence there is no joke. Having Gooding's character take a pratfall every third time he stands up doesn't help. In a theater full of families we were 50 minutes into an 80 minute movie before anyone actually laughed.

It would be tedious to note every major problem in this movie. Here is one. The big bully kid (there has to be one, of course) who looks to be about twelve going on thirteen, turns out to have a bed wetting problem (note the originality of this plot twist). A big, bad Marine colonel admits that he had the same problem until he was ten. This means the bully must be under the age of ten. But in his first appearance in the movie this same kid complains, "I wanna stay home and watch nudie movies." For those who may have forgotten fourth grade, this is not normal nine-year-old dialog. I begin to wonder about Fred Savage's childhood. Oh, that's right. He grew up in Hollywood.

There is only one exception to the annoying hyperactivity of the entire cast: the quiet dignity of Richard Gant as Gooding's Marine colonel father. An excellent actor who has never made it big, Gant almost manages to make his scenes work. The problem is that even though others are on screen at the same time, Gant is always working alone.

Not even the moral of the story - and this being a "family film" there must be a moral - provides any redemption for this movie. The closing scenes seem to establish that if the other guys cheat, you should cheat right back. Let's hope director Savage watches a few good comedies before he tries again.

Was the above review useful to you?

25 out of 35 people found the following review useful:

Average movie..definitely NOT worst in the history!

5/10
Author: toh-3 from Russian Federation
23 December 2007

This is my first comment on IMDb, because i am not very good in English. But seeing that this movie was so underrated, i cant resist to write review. This is good kid-movie! It kinda remind me my childhood. Kid's acting was not annoying, and directing - not boring. Storyline - simple, but not crazy unbelievable. Jokes makes me smile, but not laugh of course, i am probably too old for this humor :) But kids may like it very much. And most important, movie is not stupid and has some moral thoughts.

It is definitely NOT 2nd worst movie in history! I see A LOT of movies every day and to half of them i am not paying attention too much or just turn off after few boring minutes. Daddy day camp i watched till the end (and with some pleasure). 5/10

p.s. but if this movie had 3/10 i am probably never would watch it :) "Worst in the history" take my attention.

Was the above review useful to you?

7 out of 8 people found the following review useful:

Not bad enough to be on the bottom 100 of IMDb, but still pretty bad.

3/10
Author: callanvass
26 June 2010

Daddy Day Care was a sweet and simple movie that I enjoyed quite a bit actually, I really don't think it needed a sequel of any sorts. As you may have seen in many of my reviews for his films, I am a huge Cuba Gooding Jr. fan and he is MUCH better than the turds like this that he is producing now a days. I will say I expected much worse, so that's a compliment I can give it I suppose. The really sad thing about this movie is that it's obvious Cuba is trying his heart out for this movie to be good. He's no Eddie Murphy but his effort his very much appreciated, I just wish it was in a much better movie. The kids have no depth to them, they're annoying and they certainly can't act, they look like that just kids. It's a film of unfunny gags for toddlers, and it just has no real heart or soul to the movie other than the relationship of Cuba, his son and Cuba's father which is superbly played by Richard Gant.

Performances. Cuba Gooding tries admirably, but he's still not that great. It's not his fault as he's stuck in a crummy movie, that should've went DTV but he tries and I give him a lot of credit for that. Lochlyn Munro is average, and grated my nerves on more than one occasion. I get he was supposed to be annoying, but he overdid it. Richard Gant is up for the task and delivered a funny performance.

Bottom line. It's not bad enough to be on the bottom 100, but it's still pretty bad. There's a shortage of laughs and a lot of annoyance to go through. Not recommended, stick with the cute original.

3/10

Was the above review useful to you?

10 out of 15 people found the following review useful:

All in all, it's still terrible...

3/10
Author: mvd102000 from United States
15 June 2008

Really, I'm only commenting because the original "most useful" comment was idiotic, and praised the movie. Upon seeing the case for the movie, I realized that Eddie Murphy was not in the movie. I turned the case around, and discovered that the same character was being played by another actor; an actor who shouldn't be in terrible sequels, playing an already well-known actors character, only a few years after the original had come out. The film itself delivers a lack-luster storyline and secondhand laughs. The acting isn't so great and the believability of the entire thing is low, much unlike most of the first movie. I'm going to have to say, for Oscar-winning Cuba Gooding Jr. to take a role such as this, he may have risked his entire career's great overview. The original itself wasn't exactly sequel prone, but at least it was watchable.

Was the above review useful to you?

13 out of 21 people found the following review useful:

simply a horrible idea

1/10
Author: MLDinTN from TN
13 August 2008

This movie was just awful. The plot is 2 guys who run a day care decide to take over a day camp. One of the guys, Charlie, is at odds with the guy who runs the other more fancy camp. Charlie doesn't want that guy to take over the older camp. Some of the "funny" parts were the cleaning up of the camp. It's always so funny to see someone fall through a roof while hammering or cleaning up a nasty bathroom. It will have you rolling in the floor, NOT!! So, the ending is the predictable competition between the 2 camps and the other camp cheats to win some of the games. But, Charlie's kid saves the day by winning.

Why would Cuba Gooding be in this. He must have been desperate for a check.

FINAL VERDICT: You will hate yourself if you waste 90 minutes on this. Don't do it.

Was the above review useful to you?

11 out of 18 people found the following review useful:

I liked the first one, this one was horrible though.

2/10
Author: videogamer3960 from United States
10 March 2008

I saw this movie when they forced us to see it in summer camp. It was a lot worse than i expected. Most of the movie is 'pee' jokes and shallow kid humor. It doesn't help that the acting is terrible, and even though the movie is short, it feels as if you have been tourtered for days. If you even want to think of getting this movie for your kids, put it down and get the billionth season of spongebob. So if you want a horribly made summer movie that should have won the razzie award for best picture, go ahead and see this movie. If you want a good movie go see juno or ratatouille for the kiddies. Well i've hope i got my point across, do not see this movie. Bye.

Was the above review useful to you?

6 out of 9 people found the following review useful:

Most Pointless Sequel Ever?

2/10
Author: benangelus57 from United Kingdom
15 August 2008

OK first off i was put off this movie by the fact that Eddie Murphy didn't want to be in it, which looking at the films he pumps out now is saying something (i have Norbit in mind) i only saw this movie as a friend had it so it didn't cost me anything, and i was sorely disappointed.

I had always liked Cuba Gooding Jr. since i saw him in rat race, but this has ruined my opinion of him.

I found this movie unfunny and as it develops it becomes a poor mans cheaper by the dozen 2 (which was no masterpiece itself) truly a film to avoid

Was the above review useful to you?

10 out of 17 people found the following review useful:

The director must have been high

1/10
Author: e_barker from United States
5 September 2007

*** This review may contain spoilers ***

OK look we all know studios love sequels, just look at how Disney whores out its stuff, they make money, usually. This time however the studio and the director could get no one from the original movie to come back. I think the preview was funny when it said "from the studio that brought you Daddy Day Care", like the studio ever really matters. That's like saying, "Yea we made that one and then we made Bikini Sluts 9", since studios make a wide variety of movies. Anyway, OK so you want to make a sequel and you can't get anyone from the original, they why would you use the same character names. I mean what are we supposed to think that people morphed overnight. We aren't talking about like one minor actor decided not to come back, no one would even be associated with the film, not even for a brief walk-on.

Was the above review useful to you?

2 out of 2 people found the following review useful:

You'll know what you'll get even before you watch it

Author: Wizard-8 from Victoria, BC
21 June 2010

One day, I would really like to see an interview with Cuba Gooding Jr. as to why he accepted one crappy movie project after another after getting an Oscar, eventually finding himself only able to get work in direct-to-DVD projects - or movies originally intended to go direct-to-DVD, as this project was. His performance here isn't exactly one that suggests he cares about how he comes across - he is constantly mugging and overacting, and it's hard to care for his character or for Gooding himself. It's also hard to care about anything else in this movie. The bad guys are cartoon characters, and the white partner of Gooding's character is given almost nothing to do. As for the rest of the protagonists, they are a group of people you will hope will fail, mainly because the kids are obnoxious stereotypes. Throw in some gross literate potty humor, as well as the production values of a television drama, and you get what you think you'll get just by seeing the front of the movie's DVD case.

Was the above review useful to you?


Page 1 of 4:[1] [2] [3] [4] [Next]

Add another review


Related Links

Plot summary Ratings Awards
Newsgroup reviews External reviews Parents Guide
Official site Plot keywords Main details
Your user reviews Your vote history