I thought Jim Carrey has aged a lot more over the past 20 years than Jeff Daniels did, Jeff Daniels looked like he was only several years older in this movie than he did in the first Dumb And Dumber movie but Jim Carrey looks like he's aged 20-25 years since then.
shareThat's what I thought just watched it, must be all the bad movies he has made since then.
shareI keep thinking about how much more Jim Carrey aged than Jeff Daniels from the first film to this movie. it's really interesting when you consider the fact that Jeff Daniels is about 10 years older than Jim Carrey but Jim Carrey looks older than Jeff Daniels right now. Jim Carrey aged a lot more than Jeff Daniels in these roles over the past like 20 years because Jeff Daniels character in the first one always looked so slobby, disheveled, and like such a pig, whereas Jim Carrey's character in the first one looked like a clean cut guy. don't you think that's why Jim looks like he aged a lot more than Jeff from the first one to this one?
shareWatching this movie now and I disagree. I see a lot of wrinkles in Jeff Daniels face than I see in Jim Carreys. To me, Jim Carrey looks the same as he did 20 years ago. At least in this movie
shareI agree 100% and think the OP surely must be pulling our legs. In character Carrey looks virtually the same as in 1994, where as Daniel's has obviously aged.
shareJim looked terrible in the movie. But when he comes his hair like normal and puts the cover back on his tooth, he doesn't look that bad.
shareI thought the same exact thing.
share[deleted]
That's what happens when you make a lot of expressions with your face--it ages you.
shareI think so. He didn't look too much different than the 1994 Harry, whilst Jim Carrey had more wrinkles and that wig.
share