Talk:Harold & Kumar Go to White Castle/Archive 1

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search

importance High

get it ;) Andman8 05:19, 25 July 2006 (UTC)

Got it. Fixed it. Mdsummermsw 18:58, 13 November 2006 (UTC)

Claims of "anti-white racism"

I loathed this film for its hatred of whites. Every white is bad, while every black or Asian is good seems to be the message in this crap film. Not to mention its loathing of gays. The film is unfunny and offensive.

  • aw shutup. whites have been biased against blacks and asians for centuries. as for being anti-gay, hell kumar just so happened to be straight vis-a-vis the male nurse, so what's the problem? that was the funniest part of the movie.

I'm more upset about the womem in the movie. With the exception of harolds love interest, all the other women in the movie were portrayed as nymphomaniacs and their only purpose in the story were to be sex objects.

"Harold and Kumar" makes fun of the kind of racism that non-whites have always gone through in America, and I see it really struck a personal nerve with the author of the first paragraph. Hit a little too close to home? Crying "anti-white racism" is a standard tactic of white-supremacist bigots nowadays, in response to people who call them out on their own racism towards non-whites. David Duke in particular has pioneered this tactic. By the way, there WERE sympathetic white characters in the film -- Rosenberg and Goldstein... oh, wait, they're Jewish. And Jews don't count as real whites in the eyes of white supremacists.

'Typical response from someone with no defense...change the topic. Instead of refuting my correct assertion that the movie is racist against white people, you call me a white supremist and as a result I am filing a hate crimes complaint against you with Wikipedia.

However, I will concede that the charges of homophobia and sexism do have more merit -- but unfortunately that seems to be standard for the "dumb raunchy comedy" genre that this movie comes from. Oh well, you can't have everything.

what about the hippie at princeton, or the two battleshits girls? let alone rosenburg and goldstein. you're claims of anti-white racism are busted, and i'm one of the whitest guys you'll meet. is it simply the fact you can't handle a film without a white lead? Xcomradex 00:51, 5 August 2006 (UTC)

Also, what about Maria? Oh she doesn't count, she's a woman.

Hello. I'm white (and non american) and i loved it! Its nice to get an idea about how other cultures see (american( ;) ) whites. And all you complainers please give it a rest. This is one movie that fields a slight opposite view: there are soooo many being made with "normal" sterotypes. How often do we see black people being the good - or even better- just normal guys? -excepting of course "black" movies, where by i mean most characters are black. I dont accept the above assertion that it "seems to be standard for the "dumb raunchy comedy" " to include sexist and homophobic types. You could replace those two words with almost any sterotype and the comment would still be valid, and "unfortunate" , and all not cool. So dont brush it off like that. eh.

I saw John Cho on Late Night with Conan O'Brient selling this movie when it came out in US theaters. He said what he really liked about the movie is that the main two characters are Asian and they aren't sterotypes of typical Desis and Koreans, instead they are stoners looking for the perfect meal. The movie does address the stereotype of Kumar being forced by his doctor dad into medical school, and Harold getting stuck with somebody else's work because he's "good with numbers". I would agree most of the white characters are bad stereotypes of crazy white people which really adds to the humor. Idiot cops (not a high percentage of cops are idiots but you know a lot of cops there are some real crappy ones), extreme sports morons (these people do exist), etc are pretty entertaining in this film. Goldstein and Rosenberg, aside from having very Jewish names, are more like the real generation of youg Jews who aren't terribly religious. Are the racial sterotypes uneven in this movie? I couldn't disagree with that, but it's not like the two main characters are upstanding Asians and all the white people are poor losers. The main still hcaracters still have to grapple with their own situation in genetics and the sterotypes and situations that come with it. - Don Bradshaw

Well received by critics?

It says in the entry that the film was well received by critics. Hmm... Check out the BBC's review here:

This is such an "American" film (i'll bet 90% of those outside the US did not even know what White Castle was), that i imagine the critics were pretty polarised between the US and elsewhere. A wide sample of US reviews are in general, relatively positive, 72% ("The likable leads and subversion of racial stereotypes elevate Harold and Kumar above the typical stoner comedy.") and 64%. Quite how we sample global response to a film, i don't know. Rockpocket (talk) 19:44, 7 May 2006 (UTC)

How about a change in the main article to 'fairly well received by critics' ? As a compromise? 64% isn't a huge endorsement, for example. Magic Pickle 17:27, 12 May 2006 (UTC)

Sounds fair enough. Rockpocket (talk) 19:07, 13 May 2006 (UTC)


I somehow landed at this page from a rather circuitus rout of link-following, and I noticed that this page is rife with grammar mistakes. If I didn't have class like, right now, I'd fix them. Someone else might want to clean this page up before I get back, however.


Pretty big page for pretty mediocre movie, don't you think?

Mediocre to you.. possibly groundbreaking and professional cinema to others. Ahh the beauty of the world and all the individuals (and opinions) in it. Although I believe the official explanation is that "Wikipedia is not paper" and as such, articles can be as long as they are relevant :) MrHate 23:03, Jun 9, 2005 (UTC)

Uh...The size of the page has ABSOLUTELY NOTHING to do with how "good" or "important" something is. On The Colbert Report, Colbert mentions this saying [about Wikipedia], "I love any encyclopedia that has a bigger page about my show that on the Lutheran Church." Oh-and in my opinion, this is a great movie. Just my opinion, though.Chrisyamauchi October 3, 2006 9:55


I removed the line "Harold & Kumar often approaches epiphanies about racial stereotypes and then ends up dodging them in exchange for cheap gags. This juxtaposition often ends up leaving more of an impression than could be left if the situations were approached seriously." as this appeared to be POV to me. Asbestos | Talk 16:28, 28 Nov 2004 (UTC)

Yeah, it looks like it. It probably should be reworded to be more neutral. 21:51, 28 Nov 2004 (UTC)

Harold and Kumar get the Munchies

I changed the opening line from released internationally as to released in some countries as because here in Australia, it's called Harold and Kumar go to White Castle even though we don't have White Castle's here :) Strangely enough, the same thing happened with "Encino Man"... released in the rest of the world as "California Man" as they didn't think non-Americans would know what Encino was. For some reason here in Australia we got it as Encino Man too. MrHate 03:30, May 18, 2005 (UTC)

In Canada they released the Movie as Haorld and Kumar go to white castle and there aren't any in Canada. Plus the movie was filmed here in the great white north. Canadian Colin, November 29th, 2005

There aren't any in Canada, true, but there are in Detroit; meaning many Canadians will be familiar with it. Likewise, when I was in college (at Bowling Green State University south of Detroit), I knew of Tim Horton's long before any locations opened in the United States. -- SwissCelt 19:01, 12 February 2006 (UTC)

I live in LA, and there are no White Castles on the west coast. Still, it's not hard to figure out that WC is a burger joint. H&K Get the Munchies is a pretty lame title; they should have left the original in UK.

I live just outside of Toronto in Canada, and im very familiar with White Castle, as I've been there many times when across the border. So I would have to agree with SwissCelt. Most Canadians know about all the US fast food joints we don't have here such as Bob Evans, Sonic, and the like. You rarely meet a Canadian who hasn't travelled down an Interstate. Same with American knowing about Tim Hortons before it opened doors in the States. Know why they kept it White Castle in Australia I have no clue. Well maybe one day we can say White Castle isn't just a burger joint in the US, but North America . . . I love those burgers! Decimal10 08:15, 15 August 2006 (UTC)

I live in Washington, where we don't have White Castle restaurants. I was very confused when I first heard the movie's title, since all I had heard of White Castle before was the frozen burgers sold in the freezer aisle at the grocery store. --Brandon Dilbeck 06:33, 5 November 2006 (UTC)

Skull Cap?

Skull cap? Isn't it called Kippah?

Or, more commonly a yarmulke, which is what I've changed it to. — Asbestos | Talk 20:46, 29 May 2005 (UTC)

My expansion

How accurate is my expansion of this article to include a summary of the film?


I changed "non-white" (in referrence to the protagonists' allies) to "ethnic minorities" since Rosenburg and Goldstein are Jewish and thus, in my opinion anyway, white.

Characters rather than plot

Explaining my rather bold edit: I was copyediting the plot section, and thought a small segment explaining the characters would make things clearer. Well, by the time that had been done, the plot section itself was looking mighty redundant. I think that Harold & Kumar, being such a picaresque movie, benefits more from a treatment of characters rather than an inevitably "And then"-ish plot summary. However, that's just my opinion. RMoloney 00:12, 13 September 2005 (UTC)

I think we should call it even and include BOTH a character and plot summary.

marijuana terms

The article never actually uses the word "marijuana", but rather just "weed", with various links: weed (unpipied, obviously an incorrect link) weed piped to "marijuana", and weed piped to "cannabis (drug). We should probably settle on one. Since "weed" is a slang term, it should probably be "marijana" on first reference too. Whaddya think? --Jfruh 20:02, 21 February 2006 (UTC)

White Castle in New Brunswick, NJ

I have verified the existence of a White Castle in New Brunswick, which has been reported on Google Local and some other websites (Google it, you'll find out.) It is a couple of doors away from the Coach USA/Suburban Transit bus depot/garage on Somerset St. 02:07, 10 March 2006 (UTC)

There's also one in legdewood, nj.--Dangerous-Boy 20:56, 31 May 2006 (UTC)

First Vs. Second Generation

Harold's dad has an accent. Doesn't this mean Harold is first generation?

I think you mean Kumar.--Dangerous-Boy 20:56, 31 May 2006 (UTC)

Accent itself does not denote birthplace, or thereby, "generation".

True, but it indicates where a person was raised. It's true, Kumar's father could have been born in the US and then raised overseas, but it's much more unlikely than his being an immigrant. BillMcGonigle 00:36, 29 October 2007 (UTC)


In contrast to the positive, non-stereotypical portrayals of ethnic minority characters, all ethnically European characters in the movie are presented negatively: the racist medical school professor; Harold's two senior co-workers at the investment bank, who lie to him, threaten, and intimidate him into doing their work over the weekend so that they can go party; the ditzy and whorish British girls Kumar meets at the university; the obnoxious, violent extreme-sports punks, who continually harass the minority characters; the price-gouging, sniveling, whiny "business hippie" who overcharges Kumar for marijuana; the drug-taking lunatic car thief Neil Patrick Harris character; the scab-ridden, pus-oozing, Jesus-obsessed Freakshow and his wife, who kidnap Harold and Kumar for use as toys in an orgy; and the brutal, racist, stupid, and exclusively white police force that arrest and detain Harold and beat his black cellmate for no reason.

That is sooooo not neutral but I am too lazy to fix it.--Kugamazog 01:22, 13 May 2006 (UTC)

Please explain. How is it not neutral? There is not a single European-descended character in the movie who takes any sort of positive action whatsoever towards the two main characters. Every one of the white characters hinders the protagonists and keeps them from their goal, throughout the entire movie. This is a simple matter of fact, not of POV. There are no two ways to interpret this; either there is an ethnically European character who does not act negatively towards the main characters, or there is not. If any of the descriptions of how these characters hindered the protagonists are inaccurate, please fix them. If there are any other ethnically European characters in the film who are not mentioned here who do something positive for the main characters, then that invalidates the factual assertion that all European-descended characters are presented negatively; in which case, please point out which characters do this, and we can change the paragraph appropriately. Kwertii 05:39, 13 May 2006 (UTC)
Looking at it again, I'll agree it's all factual. In fact, I never said it wasn't. It just comes off as someone really angry when you read it. --Kugamazog 12:52, 13 May 2006 (UTC)

There is not a single European-descended character in the movie who takes any sort of positive action whatsoever towards the two main characters.

Crying "anti-white racism" is a very common tactic of white-supremacist bigots nowadays. David Duke has totally perfected that approach, with his talk of "white civil rights." And by the way, there ARE "European-descended characters" who are portrayed positively in the film, Rosenberg and Goldstein who are FRIENDS of Harold and Kumar.... oh wait, they're Jewish, and to white supremacists, Jews don't count as "European-descended characters."

Once again, what about Maria? Does she not count?

Here here. She does count, "European-descended character". Esp if we are counting Rosenberg and Goldstein. Not all jews are Euro decended, some are quite dark, as they supose jesus was, and some have blond hair and blue eyes. Generalising again, arn't we.

Wern't there white nurses and white castle staff? They did a good job. Or the white cop chasing the white punks?

What is the name of Freakshows wfie?

Whats the name of Freakshows wife in Real Life, not in the movie.

here ya go, ya big ol' perve :p riana 16:15, 8 June 2006 (UTC)

Description of Bradley Thomas, the "business hippie"

He enjoys listening to Phish and writing poetry of questionable merit. He overcharges Kumar for weed, claiming he is a "business hippie."

I'm not going to delete this, but this doesn't sound like it belongs here. I have no idea where the person who wrote this got this from. Listening to Phish and writing bad poetry are two major stereotypes of hippies, but not once in the film is it ever indicated that Bradley Thomas listens to Phish or writes poetry. Bradley Thomas is really a very minor character and the film doesn't go into depth on him at all. Did I miss something?

It is implied that Bradley listens Phish because after Kumar mentions Phish and Poetry, Bradley says "My poetry is not lame," implying that he is guilty of atleast the poetry. It is up to the audience to assume the rest, whether to support the stereotype or deny it.

That's actually Kumar's description of BT the BH. I didn't add it, and it should be reworded. !BabuBhatt 00:08, 28 June 2006 (UTC)

You Do Realize What is Legal In Amsterdam Right?

In the article, it says that they implied that they thought marijuana was legal, which it isn't, but I thought they were thinking of prostitution? That is legal. I might be wrong, but it's something I noticed.

Well I would like to point out that the Pot policies in Amsterdam are very lax.. meaning that getting caught with personal use (very hard to do as the police really don't care) is hardly punishable. Plus it is permitted to smoke in the coffee shops and various other establishments. So Amsterdam would indeed be the pot-heads "Mecca".

One of the things about this film is that the audience is led to assume certain things. Kumar could have been implying drugs or he could have been implying prostitution. It's up to the audience. The joke as said in the movie isn't funny until the audience fills in the blank.

No White Castles outside the US

because there are no White Castles outside of the U.S. - That's not exactly true. There was a few here in Malaysia, but they shut down.


It says here that the opening is filmed at IBM office building in Markham ON. Actually, its filmed in a building in Toronto, just meters away from the border to Markham

Yeah the building is the Steelestech Building at Victoria Park and Steeles. --Yllianos 17:39, 21 September 2006 (UTC)

Original Research

Let's try it this way: the content of this article and the movie may or may not be factual and/or racist and/or whatever else. The point is a whole buttload of stuff in this article is OR. Most of this talk page is arguing facts. THAT HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH IT. Is it verifiable from a source? Most of the content is not. Mdsummermsw 19:06, 13 November 2006 (UTC)


For the love of all that is right and good in the world, Kumar does NOT lick Harold, the cheetah does. If you think otherwise, I invite you to plunk down another 5 bucks to rent this trash a second time to verify that. In this movie where very little makes sense, Kumar did not decide that the best way to wake up his friend is to lick him. Mdsummermsw 14:47, 14 November 2006 (UTC)

Kumar licks Harold on the cheek, because he'd been out for half an hour and he thought 'something gay' might wake him up. You can send me that $5 instead. BillMcGonigle 00:37, 29 October 2007 (UTC)

Technically, the cheetah AND Kumar lick Harold. These are two different events. The cheetah licks Harold when Harold and Kumar first encounter the cheetah and Harold faints. Kumar licks Harold in an attempt to wake him up from his "White Castle/Maria" Dream Sequence. DrifterX619 07:36, 21 November 2006 (UTC)


Is Kumar's shirt really so important as to warrant a whole section about the logo? It seems incredibly irrelevant and out of place. L4ck 0f 54n17y 04:37, 28 December 2006 (UTC)

Telling off Harold's coworkers

At the end of the film Harold is in White Castle and sees his two co-workers that (earlier) coerced him to do their work. Turns out they spent their time with whores. Anyway, Harold tells them off and says something that makes the girls leave the two co-workers. I don't know the details, but I do know it is missing from the page. Can somebody add? 17:48, 8 January 2007 (UTC)Piepants

"I know, Extreme Sports Punk #1"

Just after the jeep is stolen from the Punks one says to another "Dude that was so not extreme" to which he replies "I know, Extreme Sport Punk #1" This is obviously there to reference the generally lazy naming of bit "speaking role" players in films (especially in teen comedies). Could this be integrated into the article somehow? Possibly in the stereotyping section. Or possibly renaming the section to "Themes" with "Stereotyping and Racism" and "Self-reflexive Satire" as subsections? Just some suggestions. --Offput 01:22, 9 January 2007 (UTC)

Why White Castle?

Does anyone have information as to why White Castle was chosen for the film as opposed to other chains? Was it an endorsement deal, etc.? Ham Pastrami 06:35, 11 June 2007 (UTC)