Skip to main content
Close

Movie 43: It Wants You to Know How Much It Sucks

By Riley Webster · January 28, 2013

I don't think I've had a more difficult time assessing and reviewing a movie before. How can you judge something that doesn't care about being judged? How can you describe something that tries desperately to be indescribable? Hell, how do you call a movie "terrible" when it's entire existence and point of reason is to be the most terrible film ever made? Indeed, Movie 43 (a collection of short skits starring dozens of A-list stars) is not a good flick. But that's the whole point. It doesn't simply want to be bad, it wants to be the WORST. Its desperate attempts to go past the bottom of the barrel are so shocking that it's almost admirable—rarely do so many talented people gather together to try and make something this horrible.

So let's all agree that, whether you've seen it or not, Movie 43 is awful. And bear with me here, I don't think that's necessarily a criticism. This is The Godfather of bad movies—something that will be watched as often and frequently as the greatest crap classics, such as BirdemicThe Room, and The Happening. It's like a stray puppy that keeps whining until you pet it; you have to give in, and start laughing, or you're in for the longest 90 minutes of your life. And because I have to be an honest reviewer (no matter how much film cred I may lose in the process) I have to admit that I laughed my ass off in Movie 43. Most of it failed as much as it succeeded, but let it be said that I was never once bored, was always in surprise, and was frequently laughing.

And that laughter is what saves Movie 43. Yes, it's just as horrible and class-less as, say, Freddy Got Fingered, which this film will frequently be compared to. But unlike that one, Movie 43 is redeemed by actually being funny, and occasionally, yes; kinda smart in its attempts at idiocy (any film with a joke about Isabella Rosselini's flatulence can't be THAT stupid…right?). I saw Freddy Got Fingered at a university party several drinks in, which I imagine is the only environment anyone has ever liked that flick, and I still found it painfully unfunny. But unlike Tom Green, Movie 43 made me cry from the hilarious badness. Critics that call Movie 43 one of the worst pieces of shit they've ever seen (and they may be correct) are simply agreeing with what every writer, director, and star attached to the picture already knows. Hell, the movie frequently has characters within the film talk about how dumb and disgusting it is. They're all in on the joke—Christ, at one point they call their own movie this generation's Howard the Duck

That's not to say every joke works—generally speaking, crude and rude comedies are at their best when the characters are implying nastiness, rather than showing. Movie 43 consists of about 10 short films, connected only with intermittent scenes of Dennis Quad pitching the script ideas to Greg Kinnear (these scenes start out hilarious, and progressively get worse). Some of these skits work, like the demented final one with a perverted animated cat terrorizing Elizabeth Banks, or Terence Howard as a basketball coach pointing out the racially obvious. But some are just god-awful, un-funny, surprisingly violent crap-fests, like the Brett Ratner (of course) directed segment where Gerard Butler stars as a psychotic leprechaun, or the one between Keiran Culkin and Emma Stone that has no build-up, no punch-line, and not even really a joke at all. Generally speaking, the less intensely disgusting, sexist, masochistic, scatological crap we're subjected to seeing, the easier it was to laugh.

Watching Anna Faris and Chris Pratt sit on a romantic picnic and discuss pooping on her neck is kinda funny. Seeing him scarf down burrito's and fart everywhere and then get hit by a car with diahhrea exploding everywhere is not funny. The film exists only to live in excess, this is true. But just because you can, doesn't mean you should, and point of fact the segments with the most restraint wound up being the funniest. Halfway through there's a skit about Robin and Batman (played perfectly by Justin Long and Jason Sudekis) in a speed dating convention, and it's truly a side-splitting 10 minutes. There's no nudity, no poop, no pubic hair, and yet…it's funny. It's crude, and very profane, but seeing Jason Sudekis describe Supergirl's vagina is far funnier than actually seeing it spray out on screen.

Take another scene that will surely go down in college-dorm-room history—Kate Winslet and Hugh Jackman go on a blind date, but he has large testicles hanging from his neck. In theory, it's a funny idea. And the first time they flop out, yes, I laughed, especially at Kate Winslet's reaction. But that's the thing; the funniest part of the scene was watching Winslet try and not look at those suckers. Every time we cut back to the (incredibly life-like) scrotum swinging around and dropping pubes in slow motion into their soup…it just became less and less funny. If the scene was in a movie with more subtlety (as in, any movie BUT this one), the testicles probably would've been blurred or covered up with a CENSORED bar or something. And actually, only being able to imagine the balls dangling off his face would be funnier than actually seeing them in all their high-def glory.

But, look at me go, complaining about a movie going too far, when all it wants to do is go too far. Sometimes you can't criticize a film too much for not being what you want it to be, but rather whether or not it met the goals it set out to achieve. Movie 43 had two missions in life; 1) to offend and shock everyone who sees it, and 2) make people laugh. That's it. The first goal has clearly been achieved—it's being ripped apart by critics, ignored by audiences, and seems to have become a new Litmus test for movie-goers of how much raunch and toilet humour they can endure. But I have to be completely honest in that, yes, I laughed. A lot. Most people won't, and frankly that's probably a good thing (I would hate it if EVERY movie comedy was as dumb and low-brow as Movie 43). But I did indeed laugh.

The creator himself, Peter Farrelly (one of the men behind There's Something About Mary, and director of one or two of the shorts in Movie 43) stated himself that the flick will probably get 13% on rottentomatoes.com and tank at the box office, but will become a huge cult classic in college dorm rooms everywhere. Well, so far the movie has bombed, and scored even lower than 13% on RT. But I think he's right that it'll become a university classic. With a bunch of drunk buddies and having it on in the background, Movie 43 might become the next big home video hit. And as a social experiment of just how far we can go in the realm of comedy, it's kinda fascinating. I can't recommend the flick, because every ounce of me is saying that it sucks. But it wants to suck, and it wants you to know how much it sucks. Again, I gotta ask…how the hell do you review a movie like this?