O
ou1980
Posts: 877
Jan 28, 2013 9:01pm
Is being reviewed by critics as the worst movie of all time...
"The "Citizen Kane" of awful movies"
-Richard Roeper
"If you mashed-up the worst parts of the infamous Howard the Duck, Gigli, Ishtar and every other awful movie I've seen since I started reviewing professionally in 1981, it wouldn't begin to approach the sheer soul-sucking badness of [Movie 43]."
-New York Post
"The "Citizen Kane" of awful movies"
-Richard Roeper
"If you mashed-up the worst parts of the infamous Howard the Duck, Gigli, Ishtar and every other awful movie I've seen since I started reviewing professionally in 1981, it wouldn't begin to approach the sheer soul-sucking badness of [Movie 43]."
-New York Post
jordo212000
Posts: 10,664
Jan 28, 2013 9:05pm
Yeah I mean the preview itself looked horrible. Not surprised it is getting panned.
M
MontyBrunswick
Jan 28, 2013 9:20pm
Movies like these are a quick-buck for producers. The cost to produce is fairly low, and they almost always recoup their investment + a few million.
O
ou1980
Posts: 877
Jan 28, 2013 9:38pm
Budget was only $5 million, and started shooting in March 2010???
ernest_t_bass
Posts: 24,984
Jan 28, 2013 10:05pm
Synopsis?
ernest_t_bass
Posts: 24,984
Jan 28, 2013 10:50pm
ccrunner609;1376537 wrote:these movies prey on the lowest common denominator of our society......stupid teens. They will make millions
Teens and Jim teechers
gorocks99
Posts: 10,760
Jan 29, 2013 8:41am
My big question is, how the hell did they get this cast??
Kate Winslet
Hugh Jackman
Naomi Watts
Emma Stone
Jason Sudeikis
Justin Long
Uma Thurman
Halle Barry
Gerard Butler
Richard Gere
Terrence Howard
I mean, everyone must be in on the joke, right??
Kate Winslet
Hugh Jackman
Naomi Watts
Emma Stone
Jason Sudeikis
Justin Long
Uma Thurman
Halle Barry
Gerard Butler
Richard Gere
Terrence Howard
I mean, everyone must be in on the joke, right??
wes_mantooth
Posts: 17,977
Jan 29, 2013 8:43am
Just a huge money grab for everyone.gorocks99;1376684 wrote:My big question is, how the hell did they get this cast??
Kate Winslet
Hugh Jackman
Naomi Watts
Emma Stone
Jason Sudeikis
Justin Long
Uma Thurman
Halle Barry
Gerard Butler
Richard Gere
Terrence Howard
I mean, everyone must be in on the joke, right??
S
Sonofanump
Jan 29, 2013 8:47am
I'll wait for MartyIrish's review before I make my decision.
Rotinaj
Posts: 7,699
Jan 29, 2013 9:58am
Reminds me of the cast of Mars Attacks. Even though I thought that movie was a funny horrible.gorocks99;1376684 wrote:My big question is, how the hell did they get this cast??
Kate Winslet
Hugh Jackman
Naomi Watts
Emma Stone
Jason Sudeikis
Justin Long
Uma Thurman
Halle Barry
Gerard Butler
Richard Gere
Terrence Howard
I mean, everyone must be in on the joke, right??
gorocks99
Posts: 10,760
Jan 29, 2013 9:59am
Mars Attacks! is awesome. You don't speak ill of that masterpiece.Rotinaj;1376727 wrote:Reminds me of the cast of Mars Attacks. Even though I thought that movie was a funny horrible.
SportsAndLady
Posts: 35,632
Jan 29, 2013 10:13am
Mars attacks! was so awesome
FatHobbit
Posts: 8,651
Jan 29, 2013 10:24am
How is it a money grab for everyone if their budget was only $5 million? (I honestly have no idea how they were able to get that cast.)wes_mantooth;1376686 wrote:Just a huge money grab for everyone.
BORIStheCrusher
Posts: 1,893
Jan 29, 2013 10:34am
I'm actually slightly interested in seeing this. It has a great cast, and the unedited trailer is much better than the tv preview.
NSFW
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6VneW1vtcWY
NSFW
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6VneW1vtcWY
O
ou1980
Posts: 877
Jan 29, 2013 10:36am
Read about the production of movie 43...the film is only comprised of 11 different very raunchy skits. They would sometimes go 3-6 months between shooting each skit, hence the 3 year shoot, and used 11 different directors for the film. Wikipedias page for the movie describes each of the 11 scenes in detail, and it's disgusting.
wes_mantooth
Posts: 17,977
Jan 29, 2013 10:38am
I am sure they get % of the profits...and they probably each had a day or two on set.FatHobbit;1376742 wrote:How is it a money grab for everyone if their budget was only $5 million? (I honestly have no idea how they were able to get that cast.)
FatHobbit
Posts: 8,651
Jan 29, 2013 11:00am
That makes sense. Thankswes_mantooth;1376752 wrote:I am sure they get % of the profits...and they probably each had a day or two on set.
TedSheckler
Posts: 3,974
Jan 29, 2013 11:06am
It's about people who are too lazy to Google.ernest_t_bass;1376532 wrote:Synopsis?