Is Animal House Worth Watching?
Answer: Yes, Animal House is definitely worth watching if you enjoy Comedy movies.
It features a runtime of 109 minutes and offers a solid storyline that appeals to general audiences.

Verdict:Animal House is a confirmed HIT based on our analysis of audience ratings and box office momentum.
With a rating of 7.0/10, it has delivered a compelling experience for fans of the Comedy genre.
Answer: Yes, Animal House is definitely worth watching if you enjoy Comedy movies.
It features a runtime of 109 minutes and offers a solid storyline that appeals to general audiences.
Last updated: January 18, 2026
Released in the dynamic cinematic landscape of 1978, Animal House emerges as a significant entry in the Comedy domain. The narrative core of the film focuses on a sophisticated exploration of At a 1962 College, Dean Vernon Wormer is determined to expel the entire Delta Tau Chi Fraternity, but those troublemakers have other plans for him. Unlike standard genre fare, Animal House attempts to deconstruct traditional tropes, offering a conventional take on its central themes.
The success of any Comedy is often anchored by its ensemble, and Animal House features a noteworthy lineup led by John Belushi . Supported by the likes of Karen Allen and Tom Hulce , the performances bring a palpable realism to the scripted words.
Performance Analysis: While the cast delivers competent and professional performances, they are occasionally hampered by a script that leans into familiar archetypes.
In summary, our editorial assessment of Animal House (1978) is overwhelmingly positive. With an audience rating of 7.0/10, it stands as a highly recommended experience for genre enthusiasts.
Quick Plot Summary: Animal House is a Comedy film that brings laughter through clever writing and comedic timing, offering both entertainment and social commentary. This summary provides a scannable look at the movie's central conflict and narrative structure.
The comedic structure relies on both situational humor and character-based comedy. At a 1962 College, Dean Vernon Wormer is determined to expel the entire Delta Tau Chi Fraternity, but those troublemakers have other plans for him. The film finds humor in relatable situations while maintaining narrative momentum. The jokes serve the story, with callbacks and running gags that reward attentive viewers.
Ending Breakdown: Animal House resolves its central conflict while maintaining thematic consistency. The finale has been praised for its approach to comedy resolution.
The conclusion addresses the core thematic questions, offering viewers material for post-viewing discussion.
The final moments of Animal House reflect the filmmakers' creative choices, offering an ending that aligns with the film's tone and style.
Worth Watching If You:
| Metric / Region | Collection (Approx) |
|---|---|
| Production Budget | $2.7M |
| Worldwide Gross | $141.0M |
| Trade Verdict | CLEAN HIT |
The estimated production budget for Animal House is $2.7M. This figure covers principal photography, talent acquisitions, and visual effects. When accounting for global marketing and distribution, the break-even point is typically 2x the base production cost.










Google Play Movies
YouTube
Amazon Video
Google Play Movies
YouTubeAnalyzing the audience sentiment, IMDb rating of 7/10, and global collection metrics, Animal House stands as a successful venture for the creators. It remains an essential piece of the 1978 cinematic year.
Animal House is considered a hit based on audience response and box office performance. With a rating of 7/10, it's highly recommended for fans of Comedy movies.
Yes, Animal House is definitely worth watching! It's a must-watch hit for fans of Comedy cinema.
Animal House may be available for rent or purchase on digital platforms like Apple TV, Google Play, or Amazon Prime Video. Specific streaming availability can vary by country.
**Dated and not very appealing to the current public.** There are comedies that are well-made, elegant, interesting, and there are comedies that are of no interest and will only have some kind of additional appeal to those who saw them when they were young or at the time when they were successful. I think this film fits into the second group: everything takes place on a university campus where the rector tries, with the help of a group of students, to come up with a plan to extinguish a student republic famous for its large number of problems and the poor academic performance. Of course, the students of this republic fueled by beer and madness will find a way to respond in kind. This is a film especially aimed at rebellious teenagers that came out at a time when being rebellious was fashionable. The world was in the aftermath of the Sexual Revolution and struggling with the first problems arising from drug and alcohol abuse that had spread at the beginning of the decade, but there were still those trying to keep this revolutionary flame burning. Today, almost fifty years later, with almost all of these actors experiencing the pain of old age, it is a film that is forgotten and seems completely distant from our current realities. A dated, aged film of no particular interest. For me, the most positive and interesting point that this film had was the inspired and good-humored participation of Donald Sutherland, an actor who is currently a veteran and has a wealth of work and awards to present. Seeing him here seems strange, considering who he is today, but he seems to simply be having fun and enjoying the pleasure of doing what he loves most. I can't say that the rest of the actors did a bad job. I honestly think that they all did very well, within what was asked of them. They simply cannot perform miracles.
Filipe Manuel Neto is a retard who says that this timeless classic is ''Dated and not very appealing to the current public''. It's actually a brilliant film and the only people it wouldn't appeal to is left wing Guardian newspaper reading labour voters, but no one cares about any of them anyway. Oh and the film isn't ''early 50 years old'', it's 45 years old. Big difference you old cunt.
I am reviewing the previous review rather than the film itself. When the author says "Filipe Manuel Neto is a retard" I give that a big thumbs up. I know retard is a loaded word, it's more than likely he's a failed artist, who is jealous of real artists success, like most critics.
This analysis is compiled by our editorial experts using multi-source verification and audience sentiment data for maximum accuracy.