It is in fact true that more 'spectators' rather than critics enjoyed it - over at Metacritic it has a user score of 2.8 (out of 10), as opposed to a Metascore (critics ratings) of 16 (out of 100). Could you let us know in which cinema people were 'banging on their seats with laughter'? We have a global audience of nearly a million film fans, someone else must have been there for that incredible event. Would love to hear from you.
I know it's seven years too late, but can I say that I and some friends had a "bad movie night" (another pre-lockdown thing that I miss) with this movie as the star attraction? I think that as a bad movie, it's quite overrated. I was expecting something spectacularly bad, and it's honestly not... although I felt my soul dying a little at the scenes with Chloe Moretz and Halle Berry. I'd rather see it a dozen times again than, say, "Bad Boys 2" (the action scenes in that were what I imagine strobe and white noise torture must be like), "Buried" (ninety minutes of being stuck in a coffin with a horrible a--hole, written by people who don't understand contracts, snakes, earth, air, fire, or human behavior in general, waiting for an explanation of why any of this is happening or a resolution to the story, both of which the movie fails to provide), or "My Bloody Valentine 3D" (there's one even remotely likeable character. Who is pregnant. And gets butchered.) I mean, I think it's "objectively" worse than any of those movies, but at the same time it's far less painful to watch. If you go in expecting Peter Farrelly's "auteur" project... in the same way that Pearl Harbor was Michael Bay's "auteur" project... I think you'll get what you came for.
A large cast of accomplished actors, plus 12 directors, 20 writers, 13 editors, and 9 cinematographers are credited as the geniuses in front and behind the cameras of "Movie 43", and yet the whole thing feels as if it was shot and slapped together by a threadbare crew of bored hacks. The performers are impaled by the camera setups. Richard Gere is so guarded he’s like a crustacean hiding under a rock.
I believe I heard somewhere that this movie was made over several years. It seemed to be filmed one scene at a time and then it was left alone until they got some other big names to be in another scene and so on. That would go on until they had an hour and 20 minute movie (or piece of film) that they could release. Then most of the cast would look at it and say what is that and when did I make that. Their agent would remind them they were filmed in a scene years earlier that is not part of the movie called Movie 43. Some actors and actresses really need to pay better attention to what they allow themselves to do on screen. Hugh Jackman made a huge error in judgement letting someone film him with a ball bag hanging from his chin. Kate Winslet also made a error in judgement (not as bad) by being in that same screen. One of the biggest offenders of taste int his is the scene with Naomi Watts and Liev Schriber who are married in real life playing a married couple where Watts is trying to have sex with her son. For the life of me I cannot fathom why oh why would they agree to be in this scene.
Guns were pointed and pens were given. The contracts were kept to be read, and actors were 'requested' to star in this movie. Notice how i pointed on the word requested.
You want to know why they are in the film? It's simple Mark, they're there for their huge paycheque. What other reason would they decide to star in this!
I think some of the sketches have real potential to be funny, and nobody asked themselves if it was worth putting in the extra 3% just to actually make them work.
It's not at all weird how critics hate it and 'some people' love it. The kind of people who love it probably couldn't do a decent review of any film. That is not snobbery - that is simply acknowledging that crass 'grossout' humour tends to appeal to younger, less educated & less sophisticated people. I think Kermode is very good at acknowledging good film-making, even if he is not a particular fan of the actual film, I also think that 3% on RT's tells us that this really IS a turkey.
Sad thing is that people are getting paid to be in this, while more unknown filmmakers and actors struggle to survive with much better products. Unfortunately exploiting the public isn't against the law in our free world.
Yeh, I remember watching another review thinking "What? thats not the storyline?", Over here it is about 2 teens lie to a kid saying movie 43 is the best most banned film ever to prank him and put viruses on his laptop. After they watch the random sketches they find out Movie 43 is real and allows you to see the future. When they find it they see that the world becomes a wasteland.
Movie 43 in the UK has a different story line than it does in here in the US. Over here, Dennis Quade is a homeless guys and tries to pitch different movies to a hollywood studio.
Ooo well if the answer to everything is 42, according to the guide to the galaxy, I guess 43 is the nothing but the silly version of it, and they did not managed to pick that up...rules are not for everyone but than again the world does not exist in 42..o and btw that movie was for the earthlings from a a certain place and continent so bless them :)
I believe that Peter Farrelly wanted to make a film that is so gross out, revolting, outrageous and scandalous that it would make people get outraged and be apalled at what they were watching. However he also wanted them to think it was funny, a guilty pleasure that no one can admit to. However it failed in these respects because the film is intensely unfunny and more tiresome and crass than outrageous and gob smacking, it wanted to be known as a so terrible it's good film when it's a terrible
It's just one of those things that you have to watch. Like watching Embarrassing Bodies, you know you shouldn't and you want to turn away but there is something about it where you just want to see how sh*t it gets.
I totally agree with mark kermode this is an awful film - I only laughed at steve merchant & Halle berry scene All other scenes were totally uncormfortable viewing & yet all the stars are in this movie... Watch it only if u have toilet humour ie scary movie etc
Jaw dropingly unfunny & boring on an astronimical scale. I went to see out of sheer curiosity AFTER the Dr K review. Because I thought to myself "how bad can it be?, surely not that bad" I had VERY low expectations...the actual experience fell way below the very low expections. A truly miserable and baffling cinematic experience.
Nostalgia Critic finally reviewed this yesterday. I suspect he may have watched this review before he did.... (Hopefully, he can learn from a master... )
The reason why these actors are in this piece of useless dung is obviously because they had to show up for probably a few hours shoot. They received their massive pay check and went off to make their little independent production the next day.
the sad thing is that you cant just make a funny movie anymore. all of you take this a little too seriously. its the fact that you see these actors in such a light that you could never imagine them doing. laugh at a fart joke and get a bang out of the simple things in life!
I found it hilarious. I laughed throughout pretty much the entire thing. But I guess I have a thing for satirical comedy and I'm not easily offended at all. Like "MushroomFleet" said earlier, it's not much different from what I see in South Park and Family Guy almost daily.. not an award winning movie but pretty much a constant stream of bizarre and outrageous stuff. I loved it.
It was equally as funny as any of the scary movies or Hangover Sequels. I think it was a Risky Comedy and probably should have been a TV thing. This type of humour is seen regularly in South Park, Family Guy etc. maybe its just aimed at younger audiences. (15-25)
I think the reason critics hated this so much is because they over analyze everything. I agree with 8bitdiedie about how not all movies are deep, psychological thrillers. Some movies aren't meant to be thought about, just enjoyed or laughed at. You have always been wondering why films such as Transformers and Pirates of the Caribbean were such box office hits but critical failures, the reason is they're just dumb fun action movies that were meant to entertain, not challenge the mind.
Weird how reviewers are calling it a terrible movie and yet when I watched it, it was the first time that I heard the spectators banging on their seats with laughter and APPLAUDING at the film! Sure it's not for everyone but I'm sick of every reviewer expecting every movie to be a mature, serious psychological thriller! Tell your friend to see it and judge it by himself rather than these snobs!
It is not a movie for critics 😂 It was gross, crass, chopped together... it is not meant to be Citizen Kane. It is what it is. If you have childish humor like me, you'll lol at some scenes. Dont listen to the critics 😅
"Somebody somewhere has got something on you...because there's no other way of explaining your participation in the film."
XD
At my screening, there was 10 walkouts. Unfortunately, I wasn't one of them.
It is in fact true that more 'spectators' rather than critics enjoyed it - over at Metacritic it has a user score of 2.8 (out of 10), as opposed to a Metascore (critics ratings) of 16 (out of 100).
Could you let us know in which cinema people were 'banging on their seats with laughter'? We have a global audience of nearly a million film fans, someone else must have been there for that incredible event. Would love to hear from you.
I know it's seven years too late, but can I say that I and some friends had a "bad movie night" (another pre-lockdown thing that I miss) with this movie as the star attraction? I think that as a bad movie, it's quite overrated. I was expecting something spectacularly bad, and it's honestly not... although I felt my soul dying a little at the scenes with Chloe Moretz and Halle Berry. I'd rather see it a dozen times again than, say, "Bad Boys 2" (the action scenes in that were what I imagine strobe and white noise torture must be like), "Buried" (ninety minutes of being stuck in a coffin with a horrible a--hole, written by people who don't understand contracts, snakes, earth, air, fire, or human behavior in general, waiting for an explanation of why any of this is happening or a resolution to the story, both of which the movie fails to provide), or "My Bloody Valentine 3D" (there's one even remotely likeable character. Who is pregnant. And gets butchered.) I mean, I think it's "objectively" worse than any of those movies, but at the same time it's far less painful to watch. If you go in expecting Peter Farrelly's "auteur" project... in the same way that Pearl Harbor was Michael Bay's "auteur" project... I think you'll get what you came for.
A large cast of accomplished actors, plus 12 directors, 20 writers, 13 editors, and 9 cinematographers are credited as the geniuses in front and behind the cameras of "Movie 43", and yet the whole thing feels as if it was shot and slapped together by a threadbare crew of bored hacks. The performers are impaled by the camera setups. Richard Gere is so guarded he’s like a crustacean hiding under a rock.
It's the youtube channel of the radio show.
Can we quote you on that ?
i don’t believe you
I believe I heard somewhere that this movie was made over several years. It seemed to be filmed one scene at a time and then it was left alone until they got some other big names to be in another scene and so on. That would go on until they had an hour and 20 minute movie (or piece of film) that they could release. Then most of the cast would look at it and say what is that and when did I make that. Their agent would remind them they were filmed in a scene years earlier that is not part of the movie called Movie 43. Some actors and actresses really need to pay better attention to what they allow themselves to do on screen. Hugh Jackman made a huge error in judgement letting someone film him with a ball bag hanging from his chin. Kate Winslet also made a error in judgement (not as bad) by being in that same screen. One of the biggest offenders of taste int his is the scene with Naomi Watts and Liev Schriber who are married in real life playing a married couple where Watts is trying to have sex with her son. For the life of me I cannot fathom why oh why would they agree to be in this scene.
Mark's body language at the very beginning of the film says it all lol.
Did we ever find out why they took part?
Guns were pointed and pens were given. The contracts were kept to be read, and actors were 'requested' to star in this movie.
Notice how i pointed on the word requested.
Classic Kermode!
You want to know why they are in the film? It's simple Mark, they're there for their huge paycheque. What other reason would they decide to star in this!
Thank god for Kermode Uncut; otherwise I might've been tempted to see it just to find out what it involves.
In the same position, went to see it at Cineworld in High Wycombe and everyone was in hysterics for the most part.
I love Mark's noise at 2:30
I think some of the sketches have real potential to be funny, and nobody asked themselves if it was worth putting in the extra 3% just to actually make them work.
My friend was about to see this but I made him watch this review and he changed his mind :)
It's not at all weird how critics hate it and 'some people' love it. The kind of people who love it probably couldn't do a decent review of any film. That is not snobbery - that is simply acknowledging that crass 'grossout' humour tends to appeal to younger, less educated & less sophisticated people. I think Kermode is very good at acknowledging good film-making, even if he is not a particular fan of the actual film, I also think that 3% on RT's tells us that this really IS a turkey.
By the way, the US version of this movie has a different plot.
This is the End might be the funnier movie this year.
The illuminate made them do it.
only laughed at the sketch with Chris Mintz Plasse (Red Mist) and Chloe Grace Moretz (Hit Girl) in it
there was laughter in my cinema in UK..some people find it funny which i did myself..even if it was not that good of a film
Would this be worse then A Good Day to Die Hard?
Sad thing is that people are getting paid to be in this, while more unknown filmmakers and actors struggle to survive with much better products. Unfortunately exploiting the public isn't against the law in our free world.
Yeh, I remember watching another review thinking "What? thats not the storyline?", Over here it is about 2 teens lie to a kid saying movie 43 is the best most banned film ever to prank him and put viruses on his laptop. After they watch the random sketches they find out Movie 43 is real and allows you to see the future. When they find it they see that the world becomes a wasteland.
"Take him to Detroit."
Not in the screening I saw in Cardiff
Movie 43 in the UK has a different story line than it does in here in the US. Over here, Dennis Quade is a homeless guys and tries to pitch different movies to a hollywood studio.
The skits with Naomi Watts and Halle Berry look funny. That's it, though.
Everything else seems like it doesn't have a punch line.
Ooo well if the answer to everything is 42, according to the guide to the galaxy, I guess 43 is the nothing but the silly version of it, and they did not managed to pick that up...rules are not for everyone but than again the world does not exist in 42..o and btw that movie was for the earthlings from a a certain place and continent so bless them :)
I love Movie 43
I think the trailer was enough for me.
I believe that Peter Farrelly wanted to make a film that is so gross out, revolting, outrageous and scandalous that it would make people get outraged and be apalled at what they were watching. However he also wanted them to think it was funny, a guilty pleasure that no one can admit to. However it failed in these respects because the film is intensely unfunny and more tiresome and crass than outrageous and gob smacking, it wanted to be known as a so terrible it's good film when it's a terrible
I described some scenes to my 16yo and it didn't make him want to see it. Not all young people have no taste.
It's just one of those things that you have to watch. Like watching Embarrassing Bodies, you know you shouldn't and you want to turn away but there is something about it where you just want to see how sh*t it gets.
yeah just seen the trailer. was enough for me to start hating the film and everybody in it.
The reason why they are in it is because they probably owe someone a favor.
Huge Action XD
The film takes all the elements of A decent comedy & its thrown into A big pile of confusion, boredom. (11%) (1/5 stars) (negative)
No, they just want it to be a good film.
I thought it was supposed to be a guy pitching all these sketch ideas to an executive.
I forgot I had watched this until I saw this. It's *the* worst.
Movie 43 was worst than 'The Room' which was terrible.
I totally agree with mark kermode this is an awful film - I only laughed at steve merchant & Halle berry scene All other scenes were totally uncormfortable viewing & yet all the stars are in this movie... Watch it only if u have toilet humour ie scary movie etc
Jaw dropingly unfunny & boring on an astronimical scale. I went to see out of sheer curiosity AFTER the Dr K review. Because I thought to myself "how bad can it be?, surely not that bad" I had VERY low expectations...the actual experience fell way below the very low expections. A truly miserable and baffling cinematic experience.
You saw it so I didn't have to...
Nostalgia Critic finally reviewed this yesterday.
I suspect he may have watched this review before he did....
(Hopefully, he can learn from a master... )
The reason why these actors are in this piece of useless dung is obviously because they had to show up for probably a few hours shoot. They received their massive pay check and went off to make their little independent production the next day.
Damn it i wanna watch how bad it is.
Movie 43. One of the best movies I've ever seen. Thanks to everybody involved.
Money
is this really marks youtube? haha
I think there may be some kind of unknown reason behind why all these people are in this awful film
A movie with no redeeming features.
Less jokes.
Movie 43 is quite possibly the worst thing I've ever seen.
It really is not that bad... it all depends on one's opinion
I liked the movie, I laughed out loud more than a couple of times, I dont understand why people are beeing so stuck up about it.
The movie was horrible and not funny... I wanted to leave after 30 minutes. The actors in this move should be embarrassed.
because it's a terrible film.
the sad thing is that you cant just make a funny movie anymore. all of you take this a little too seriously. its the fact that you see these actors in such a light that you could never imagine them doing. laugh at a fart joke and get a bang out of the simple things in life!
It seems the US version has a guy pitching movie ideas to link the skits but the version in Europe is kids on the internet linking the skits
I found it hilarious. I laughed throughout pretty much the entire thing. But I guess I have a thing for satirical comedy and I'm not easily offended at all. Like "MushroomFleet" said earlier, it's not much different from what I see in South Park and Family Guy almost daily.. not an award winning movie but pretty much a constant stream of bizarre and outrageous stuff. I loved it.
It was equally as funny as any of the scary movies or Hangover Sequels. I think it was a Risky Comedy and probably should have been a TV thing. This type of humour is seen regularly in South Park, Family Guy etc. maybe its just aimed at younger audiences. (15-25)
I loved Movie 43.
I think the reason critics hated this so much is because they over analyze everything. I agree with 8bitdiedie about how not all movies are deep, psychological thrillers. Some movies aren't meant to be thought about, just enjoyed or laughed at. You have always been wondering why films such as Transformers and Pirates of the Caribbean were such box office hits but critical failures, the reason is they're just dumb fun action movies that were meant to entertain, not challenge the mind.
Weird how reviewers are calling it a terrible movie and yet when I watched it, it was the first time that I heard the spectators banging on their seats with laughter and APPLAUDING at the film! Sure it's not for everyone but I'm sick of every reviewer expecting every movie to be a mature, serious psychological thriller! Tell your friend to see it and judge it by himself rather than these snobs!
It is not a movie for critics 😂 It was gross, crass, chopped together... it is not meant to be Citizen Kane. It is what it is. If you have childish humor like me, you'll lol at some scenes. Dont listen to the critics 😅