MOVIE 43: this is guaranteed to be hot garbage, right

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Movie_43

Cast

The film features a large ensemble cast

Hugh Jackman
Emma Stone as Ellen Malloy
Chloë Grace Moretz
Gerard Butler as Chaun
Elizabeth Banks
Kristen Bell as Supergirl
Naomi Watts
Chris Pratt as Jason
Kate Winslet as Juliet Hulme
Anna Faris as Vanessa
Halle Berry
Richard Gere as Boss
Josh Duhamel
Uma Thurman as Lois Lane
Christopher Mintz-Plasse
Patrick Warburton
Seann William Scott
Liev Schreiber
Justin Long as Robin
Kieran Culkin
Kate Bosworth as Arlene
Jason Sudeikis as Batman
Leslie Bibb as Wonder Woman
Bobby Cannavale as Superman
Terrence Howard
Tony Shalhoub
Johnny Knoxville
Jack McBrayer as Brian
Jimmy Bennett
Matt Walsh as Amanda's Dad
Stephen Merchant as Donald
Emily Alyn Lind as Birthday Girl
Jeremy Allen White as Kevin Metzger
Martin Klebba as Killer Chaun
Aasif Mandvi as Asif
Julie Ann Emery as Claire
Beth Littleford as Mrs. Cutler
Mark L. Young as Calvin
Nate Hartley as Stevie Schraeder
John Hodgman as The Penguin
Julie Claire as Pam

if you're going to brag about the biggest cast ever assembled the first name at the top that I see shouldn't be Justin long

Hugh Jackman is listed first on all cast lists on that link....?

It will star one of the biggest ensemble casts ever in film[1], with Hugh Jackman, Emma Stone, Chloë Grace Moretz, Gerard Butler, Elizabeth Banks, Kristen Bell and Naomi Watts.

Kristen Bell as Supergirl
Uma Thurman as Lois Lane
Justin Long as Robin
Jason Sudeikis as Batman
Leslie Bibb as Wonder Woman
Bobby Cannavale as Superman
John Hodgman as The Penguin

this is all very, very concerning

the poster I mean

Directed by
Peter Farrelly
Elizabeth Banks
Steven Brill
Steve Carr
Rusty Cundieff
James Duffy
Griffin Dunne
Patrik Forsberg
James Gunn
Bob Odenkirk
Brett Ratner
Jonathan van Tulleken

most directed movie ever too

MOVIE 42 was Epic Movie, correct?

http://ia.media-imdb.com/images/M/MV5BMTQwOTMzNjA0Nl5BMl5BanBnXkFtZTcwMjgzNTUyMQ@@._V1._SY317_.jpg

it's basically just an anthology of unconnected sketches, right? not sure why they'd even put this in theaters instead of just throwing it on HBO as a 'funny or die' thing or something like that.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WqzeWiQAFq8

Based on the long preview I would be really impressed if they manage even a halfway coherent plotline out of this

right, cos that's clearly what they're going for

I guess every generation needs its own Amazon Women on the Moon.

i'd say a movie like Super Troopers is a good model for how to build a plotline into a movie that just wants to be a series of sketches. it is possible

Super Troopers has a small core cast and a plot that runs through the whole movie, with lots of comedic tangents. does this look like that to you?

It's clearly in the vein of Kentucky Fried Movie and Amazon Women. Super Troopers is a delight, but not at all like this.

the one thing i remember from the preview is that halle berry sticks something in her vagina while in a restaurant

okay that did not make it into the television edit of the trailer

"French fries, ma'am?"

i saw it on TV last night! on cable tho

TBS continues to break ground

Yeah, I think it aired during Colbert last night.

Kinda wish they had gone for It's a Mad, Mad, Mad, Mad World 2, but Kentucky Fried Movie 2 has its appeal too.

i'm kind of curious about the economics of something like this, or even the Valentine's Day/New Year's Eve type movies. i guess you can get dozens of actors who command a 7 figure salary to do a couple days of shooting each for relatively cheap? for a project that might be fun but has relatively little prestige or box office potential?

Stars probably take the gamble that it will do well on ppv and dvd.

The gross for "New Year's Eve" was almost triple its budget and everything about it was a hot tranny mess

I kinda want to see it.

I will never not laugh at Johnny Knoxville taking a shot to the balls.

not sure if the audience for a cavalcade of stars proving they're not afraid to say "butthole" 900 times is as big as the audience for a cavalcade of stars falling in love.

djp that is disrespectful to trannies

though hey one of my favorite movies is The Ten so I guess I can't throw stones

NYE is prob not a great comparison point. but i mean almost any of these folks, if they're dying to work for less than a week on something silly and R-rated, could go host SNL or book a guest spot on an Adult Swim show or do a Funny or Die viral video. that they're just throwing up their hands and calling this "movie 43" suggests turning any kind of profit, on DVD or otherwise, is not a major ambition.

wikipedia says this was shot in 2010, so i assume they've been letting it age like fine wine

i wonder if they just spent two and a half years cycling through the first 42 working titles

according to Wikipedia they started in 2010 but it took several years to shoot because of everyone's schedules

I remember seeing a web trailer for this maybe as far back as a year ago.

according to Wikipedia they started in 2010 but it took several years to shoot because of everyone's schedules

ah, should have scrolled down.

all the same...a movie that's not afraid to offend from the directors of Mr. Deeds, Paul Blart: Mall Cop, Tales From The Hood, Practical Magic, Super, The Brothers Solomon, and Tower Heist

the most offensive thing about Tower Heist was how non-offensive it was

cool that elizabeth banks is getting into directing, though

ha yeah I noticed that too

just gonna assume she directed Halle putting things into her vagina regardless of any scurrilous info on that Wikipedia page

my guess is two good bits and a lot of "YES DOCTOR I SAID MY GENITALS" "WITH A <ethnicity to be decided upon later>???"

xpost!

So this will probably be The Underground Comedy Movie for a new decade?

i mean, i loved Kentucky Fried Movie when I wasnt old enough to rent Kentucky Fried Movie on VHS but not old enough to see it in the theater. I have no idea why this isnt going right to DVD considering its prime audience is like 15 yos

*WAS old enough to rent

should also be noted that kentucky fried movie and the ten were both a bunch of sketches by one comedy team, not from 12 directors and 15 writers

also, like theres this whole new generation of things that are "more dirty than funny" like the billy eichner subway posters that say GET QUIZZED IN THE FACE

So I don't want to read this thread; can someone summarize whether it is okay for me to see this movie, and if I do, whether I'm allowed to laugh at it? Thanks in advance.

The Wikipedia page alleges this as a credit:

Michael Wilbon as Human Buttplug

I have doubts.

why didn't they just write "as himself"

I laughed like 6 times at the trailer, don't get the hate

i want to go see this with Morbs

This is how At the Movies should be re-booted.

morbs is either going to like it or make some comment about how he'd rather watch this than some quentin tarantino movie

so this movie was made for only $6 million apparently, and has already made a tidy profit in Russia. It also opened to a higher per screen average than Zero Dark Thirty in the UK this weekend.

lol Wikipedia:

Movie 43 is a 2013 American "comedy" film [citation needed]

This movie is awful, but I laughed a bunch. People seem apoplectic about this fairly harmless thing (which isn't particularly cynical, and is rarely cruel - just dumb), when surely it's a GOOD thing that a studio threw down for a wide-release film that cost $6m and isn't based on a friggin' videogame/superhero or an '80s reboot. Anyway, yeah - it's worth the price of admission for the Rusty Cundieff skit. Lots of fun.

One of two 0-star reviews on Slant in the last week.

You'd have better luck getting me to watch Les Miz

the more terrible reviews this gets the more i want to defend it. Of course that would require actually watching it, which i'm not yet willing to do

http://www.guardian.co.uk/film/2013/jan/29/movie-43-hollywood-humiliation

crazy that this really terrible-looking movie ended up being bad!!!

haha

there's something magical about movies described as the "worst of all time". i'll def be checking this out.

It doesn't seem spectacularly bad to me, just dumb jokes that don't seem to work.

just started reading the AV Club review, poor Anna Faris

Yeah, I feel "worst of all time" fascination would have to be something special, not a collection of unfunny collegehumor skits. I imagine this is just queasily dull like Sex Lives of this Potato Men.

Well, does it feature Adrian Chiles?

This movie has some funny gags in it. People celebrating this as 'the worst movie ever!' don't actually watch or care about movies.

Mostly people seem to be thinking it's horrible and wishing they hadn't seen it tho, not "celebrating" its awfulness exactly

wait so does chris pratt get naked in this? that's the only thing that could motivate me to see this

Tampax
Directed by Patrik Forsberg
Two women use, discuss, favor, and argue about tampax

poor griffin dunne

tampax is the name of their dog.

Weird fact from the Guardian story: it's made back its $6m budget from Russian box office alone.

yeah, I bet the rooskies are just eating this up.

coprophilia is so hot right now

In mother russia, poop eats YOU!

it's funny how they're going out of their way to point out the movie wasn't a money-loser, when what that means is a bunch of successful actors appeared in skits about poopie for no money

poor griffin dunne
― buzza, Thursday, January 31, 2013 4:16 AM (10 hours ago) Bookmark Flag Post Permalink

He seems to be doing alright. It was nice to see him in one of the last Girls episodes.

His skit is by far the weirdest in the movie, and certainly the most tonally different. It looks great (though there is an extended shot of Emma Stone that might be more out of focus than anything I've ever seen in a major movie. Like, maybe she just dropped in for a single take and bailed).

He's a veteran of the sketch anthology movie, too, having appeared in Amazon Women on the Moon (which this movie most closely resembles) in '87.

i'd like to think this movie might have cost that dude who produces farrelly bros movies a little social capital on top of the $6m

https://www.asiabooks.com/images_books/9780977507078_C0_S.jpg

Unrated version on DVD is gonna blow this out of the water

Just waiting on the porn parody Movie 69

Also this film vs

http://www.avclub.com/articles/the-surreally-incompetent-not-another-not-another,91699/

On the plus side, I've just found out there's going to be a Cloudy With a Chance of Meatballs 2.

now on netflix instant!

Somebody else watch it so we can discuss its glory

This wasn't the worst thing.

Yeah, there's a handful of funny sketches in this.

Seriously all the harry knowles wannabes just raring to try out their best "It was like Princess Di crashing a turd into a wet Hitlerbortion" lines before entering the theater

JB Smoove, Jason Sudekis, and Terrence Howard were downright hilarious in this, fuck the haters

I've got your back on this. I just realized I had previously said:

This movie is awful, but I laughed a bunch. People seem apoplectic about this fairly harmless thing (which isn't particularly cynical, and is rarely cruel - just dumb), when surely it's a GOOD thing that a studio threw down for a wide-release film that cost $6m and isn't based on a friggin' videogame/superhero or an '80s reboot. Anyway, yeah - it's worth the price of admission for the Rusty Cundieff skit. Lots of fun.
― Walter Galt, Tuesday, January 29, 2013 11:31 PM (9 months ago) Bookmark Flag Post Permalink

and

(Griffin Dunne) seems to be doing alright. It was nice to see him in one of the last Girls episodes.

His skit is by far the weirdest in the movie, and certainly the most tonally different. It looks great (though there is an extended shot of Emma Stone that might be more out of focus than anything I've ever seen in a major movie. Like, maybe she just dropped in for a single take and bailed).

He's a veteran of the sketch anthology movie, too, having appeared in Amazon Women on the Moon (which this movie most closely resembles) in '87.
― Walter Galt, Thursday, January 31, 2013 2:56 PM (9 months ago) Bookmark Flag Post Permalink

this was kinda fascinating

just like how on earth did this even happen?

wiki on this is p revealing

Development

Wessler first came up with the idea for an outrageous comedy made up of several short films in the early 2000s. "It's like Funny or Die, only if you could go crazy," judged Farrelly, "because with Funny or Die, there are certain limits. And we just wanted to do that kind of short and go much further than that." Charlie Wessler affirmed that he "wanted to make a Kentucky Fried Movie for the modern age".[5]

Wessler then recruited three pairs of directors—Trey Parker and Matt Stone, Peter and Bobby Farrelly, and David and Jerry Zucker—to sign on to write and direct one-third of the project each. He then began working out a deal with a studio for the project, but the project did not stick. "They ended up calling me about a month after we started negotiating the deal and said 'we can't do it' because they had political pressure to not make R-rated movies that were marketed to teenagers," claimed Wessler. He then went to multiple other studios, but, according to Wessler, "no one could understand what [he] was trying to do".[6]

In 2009, Peter Farrelly and producer John Penotti took their pitch—along with about 60 scripts for the vignettes—to Relativity Media. At that meeting, Wessler, Penotti, and Farrelly presented one short that they already had shot, starring Kate Winslet as a woman going on a blind date with a seemingly successful and handsome Hugh Jackman. "They just looked at me and said, 'Go for it,'" Wessler told The Hollywood Reporter. "It takes a lot of balls to make something that is not conventional." Relativity funded a mere $6 million for the film, but no other studio would sign on. "Other potential backers", Farrelly revealed, "didn't believe it could happen—a movie with Kate Winslet for $6 million?"[6]

The film officially began shooting in March 2010, but due to its large cast, producer/director Farrelly told Entertainment Weekly that "This movie was made over four years, and they just had to wait for a year or two years for different actors. They would shoot for a week, and shut down for several months. Same thing with the directors. It was the type of movie you could come back to." Shortly before principal photography, writers Parker, Stone, and David and Jerry Zucker backed out of the project.[7]

The film ended up with 13 directors and 19 writers tied to it, each one co-writing and directing different segments of the sixteen different storylines.[8] Farrelly directed the parts of the movie with Halle Berry and Kate Winslet.[6][7][9]
Casting and filming

Wessler spent years recruiting actors for the film. Many turned down the project because they were asked to work for scale. "Most agents would avoid me because they knew what I wanted to do—what agent wants to book their big client in a no pay, $800-a-day, two-day shoot?" he said. "The truth is, I had a lot of friends who were in this movie. And if they didn't say yes, this movie wouldn't have gotten made." In the end, most of the actors were willing to take part because the film only required a few days of their time and often allowed them to play a character outside of their wheelhouse.[6]

Hugh Jackman was the first actor Wessler cast. He met the star at a wedding and then called him some time later and pitched him the short. Jackman read the script and agreed to be a part of the film. "He called me back I think 24 hours later and said, 'Yeah I wanna do this,' which I think is, quite frankly, incredibly ballsy. Because you could be made a fool of, or you could look silly, and there will be people who say, 'That's crazy; he should never have done it.'"[6]

After talking to the multiple agents of Kate Winslet, she eventually agreed to take part. The Winslet-Jackman sketch was shot shortly after, and became the reel to attract other A-list stars.[6]

John Hodgman, who plays opposite Justin Long in one sketch, signed on with no knowledge of the project. Long, Hodgman's co-star in the long-running series of Apple's commercials, asked him what the project was, and he then signed on, without still knowing too much. Hodgman said, "I got an e-mail from Justin that said, 'I'm going to be dressing up as Robin again. Do you want to dress up as the Penguin?' And I said yes. Without even realizing cameras would be involved, or that it would be a movie."[6]

Others were not so affable. In fact, some stars hedged: Richard Gere, a friend of Wessler's, said yes—but also said he would not be available for more than a year. So Wessler waited him out, convinced his sketch was good. Gere eventually called Wessler and told him he was free to shoot, on just a couple of conditions: They had to do it in four days, and they needed to relocate the shoot from Los Angeles to New York.[6]

"They clearly wanted out!" judged Farrelly. "But we wouldn't let them. The strategy was simple: 'Wait for them. Shoot when they want to shoot. Guilt them to death.' It didn't work on everyone." Colin Farrell initially agreed to be in the Butler leprechaun sketch—as Butler's brother, also a leprechaun—but then he backed out and Gerard Butler did the sketch by himself. Farrelly said that when he approached George Clooney about playing himself in a sketch (the gag was that Clooney is bad at picking up women), Clooney told him "No fucking way."[6] There were to be two sketches written and directed by Bob Odenkirk; one that starred Anton Yelchin as a necrophiliac who worked at a morgue and had sex with the dead female bodies that was shown at a test screening of the film, and another starring Julianne Moore and Tony Shalhoub as a married couple being interviewed by a detective about their missing daughter. Both sketches were cut out of the final film.[10] Producer John Penotti said that the sketches would be seen on the DVD and Blu-ray Disc releases of the film.[6]

Because the filmmakers worked around the stars' schedules, the filming of the whole movie took several years. While so many A-list actors were on board, most were not completely aware of what other sketches would be included in the film, which features 13 vignettes tied together by a story of a mad screenwriter (Dennis Quaid) pitching ideas to a movie producer (Greg Kinnear). Penotti said many of the actors did not ask many questions about what else was going on in the film. "They were attracted to their script, and as long as that tickled their funnybone, that was enough," he revealed.[6][11]

the story of the making of the movie interests me SO much more than the movie itself

wondering if I would have wanted to watch it any more if the Zuckers and Parker/Stone were still on board (secret answer: YES)

almost half of these are up to the level of "snl sketch after weekend update" (fwiw) but the ratio feels even worse because of the bracketing story.