One entered Peter Farrelly's 'Movie 43' with low expectations, it hadn't been press screened and early reviews suggested a disaster but with a cast of Hugh Jackman, Gerard Butler, Richard Gere, Jason Sudeikis, Liev Schreiber, Seth McFarlane, Kate Winslet, Kate Bosworth, Halle Berry, Naomi Watts, Emma Stone, Uma Thurman and Anna Faris, surely it couldn't be that bad?
It could and it is. This is usually the point in a bad review where your scribe explains why the film fails on its on terms, that it hasn't even reached the lowest common denominator, and that gross out humour can be funny but is overdone and offensive in 'Movie 43', but really doing that would dignify the film with a cognitive depth that it so clearly lacks.
Halle Berry looks like she means business (Wenn)
There are poorly constructed poo and urine gags, period inspired humour (men don't get menstruation!) and a conceit that makes less sense than why all the big Hollywood names got involved, namely that some kids search on the internet for a mythically dangerous movie and somehow come across a collection of potty humour skits that have been a staple of Youtube since 2005.
Deconstructing why it's so bad, even on its own terms would be easy but misses the point: Those who've paid the £10 should sue under the trade descriptions act because it isn't even a film in any recognisable sense.
No, it's just a collection of bad ideas that range from the boring and well worn to those that are offensive not in the way they are intended but because they don't credit the human race with the ability to put the disgusting in any context other than bodily fluids being funny.
Bodily fluids are funny, but no one needs to pay £10 to discover this, and no one needed to spend years making a 'movie' exploring this. It's not edgy, dangerous or offensive to anyone who's had a passing interest in popular culture over the past 30 years. 'Movie 43' wants us to think it is all these things but the film's opening joke, that Hugh Jackman has testicles on his chin was done by South Park 10 years ago, and then was actually thought through and funny.
As such it should've been thrown into a volcano long before it reached cinemas, but a word of advice to those tempted to be trolled by the movie and see if they can hack its 'edgy' humour: Don't.
Doing so would reward film making so idiotic that it thinks its audience are stupid enough to shell out hard earned money on a film that can't even turn easy laughs like potty humour into something that even illicits a chuckle.
One just hopes that none of its respected stars ever wanders into a screening, or the new hot hangout for Hollywood agents could be the dole queue.
Further criticism is pretty much redundant, but those tempted to go and watch it should have something more constructive and less painful to spend one and a half hours doing, and this is a movie so bad that those things could include performing keyhole surgery on yourself with a rusty spoon, or smearing yourself in jam and bathing in a collection of wasps' nests.