The Three Stooges-attachment0

The Three Stooges

Movie Information

The Story: Three imposter Stooges go out into the world in an attempt to save their orphanage from foreclosure. The Lowdown: It may have the mechanics of the Three Stooges down, but this attempt to bring the Stooges back to the movies is utterly devoid of the charm and feel of the real thing.
Genre: Comedy
Director: Bobby and Peter Farrelly
Starring: Sean Hayes, Will Sasso, Chris Diamantopoulos, Jane Lynch, Sofía Vergara, Jennifer Hudson
Rated: PG

Before getting down to the Farrelly Brothers’ well-intended, misbegotten The Three Stooges, I feel the need to correct a downright weird misperception about the actual Three Stooges films that seems to be positively epidemic with fans of the three and even some critics (who really ought to know better). Folks, you may have seen those 200 short films the Stooges made for Columbia Pictures between 1934 and 1959 on TV—in fact, you probably did—but they were not TV episodes. They were 20-minute short films—called two-reelers, because movies originally came on 1,000-foot reels running about 10 minutes each. (Now, in the waning days of 35mm, films come on 2,000-foot reels and have for some considerable time.) They were meant to be shown—and originally were shown—in theaters before the feature picture. Like most old movies, they ended up on TV for the simple reason that they were cheap. But they were not made for TV.

Now, about this new film. The Three Stooges is to movies what a tribute band is to music—an attempt to replicate the real thing. It was made by two guys—Peter and Bobby Farrelly—who obviously love the Three Stooges, and have an apparently encyclopedic knowledge of their short films judging by the inclusion of old gags and bits of dialogue in the course of the film. They’ve also managed to find three guys who kind of look like the originals—at least in make-up—and who can effectively mimic their moves and voices. At its best, the results are about on a par with a really lively (maybe too lively) wax museum. It kind of looks like the Stooges, and it kind of looks like a Stooges movie, but it feels artificial—much in the way a bowl of wax fruit looks like real fruit.

Like most people of my generation, I grew up on the short films—mostly on TV, though I may easily have seen some of the last-gasp shorts in a theater—but I couldn’t be called a fan. My taste in short films ran more toward Laurel and Hardy and the Little Rascals. The Three Stooges were a little too frenetic for me, and my patience with them hitting, slapping and poking each other was (and is) limited. But I have a good working knowledge of the boys in their prime (which is what’s being attempted here), and I appreciate the casual surrealism of those films. The idea of the trio disguising themselves in Santa Claus outfits and arriving in a sleigh to get inside an Arab palace (1938’s Wee Wee Monsieur) is just too weird not to like. Unfortunately, this is exactly the sort of thing that the Farrelly Brothers’ The Three Stooges does not have.

It’s not that the Three Stooges originals are dated (though some of the topical gags have), it’s that the boys always inhabited their own world that was only vaguely like the real one. In a real Stooges film you were likely to find them encountering mad scientists, witch doctors, Egyptian mummies, snooty dowagers—you name it. The new film has none of this. What it has instead is a sappy plot about saving a Catholic orphanage (stolen from 1980’s The Blues Brothers), a duel involving peeing babies (no, I’m not making that up), and the intrusion of the supremely untalented cast of The Jersey Shore. Oh, yes, and there’s a Stooges origin story. (Comic book movies have much to answer for.) The best idea in the film was probably casting Larry David as a nun called Sister Mary-Mengele, but the inspiration goes no further than the casting and the name. Apart from recognizing the bits and pieces lifted from the old shorts, I found no joy in any of this.

I suppose the film may hold some appeal to young children and to diehard Stooge fans, but they’d all be better served by revisiting the short films on DVD rather than this ill-advised simulacrum. Rated PG for slapstick action violence, some rude and suggestive humor including language.


About Ken Hanke
Head film critic for Mountain Xpress from December 2000 until his death in June 2016. Author of books "Ken Russell's Films," "Charlie Chan at the Movies," "A Critical Guide to Horror Film Series," "Tim Burton: An Unauthorized Biography of the Filmmaker."

Before you comment

The comments section is here to provide a platform for civil dialogue on the issues we face together as a local community. Xpress is committed to offering this platform for all voices, but when the tone of the discussion gets nasty or strays off topic, we believe many people choose not to participate. Xpress editors are determined to moderate comments to ensure a constructive interchange is maintained. All comments judged not to be in keeping with the spirit of civil discourse will be removed and repeat violators will be banned. See here for our terms of service. Thank you for being part of this effort to promote respectful discussion.

7 thoughts on “The Three Stooges

  1. Dionysis

    I saw a couple of trailers for this film, which I assume contained some of the ‘funnier’ moments. Problem was, I couldn’t muster a hint of a smile, much less anything like a laugh. In fact, I just put my head in hands and groaned while shaking my head.

    And I was never a big fan of The Stooges either.

  2. Ken Hanke

    I must say that at least a portion of the audience did seem to like some of it. Granted, they were mostly around the age of 10.

  3. Edwin Arnaudin

    It feels false to have the Stooges take part in anything that resembles a traditional story arc. Part of their charm is their randomness and, though their films’ run-time essentially discouraged it, adhering to a typical storytelling pattern. The Stooges don’t need “rising and falling action” and seeing the inevitable “have it out” scene where they share their feelings was just plain wrong.

    What also struck me was how singular a comedic entity the original Curly is. Will Sasso’s portrayal is mere mimicry, and when he makes Curly’s classic noises and gestures, it’s sad and not funny. Moe and Larry’s comedy is more straightforward and adapts more successfully to a contemporary setting and script, but they’re still not very funny.

    Benicio del Toro (Moe), Sean Penn (Larry), and Jim Carrey (Curly) were the rumored cast when the project was first announced about 10 years ago. I don’t know if they would have been better than this cast, but there may have been an added layer of watching big names as Stooges.

  4. Ken Hanke

    I think what they were being considered for was a film about the Three Stooges rather a film that attempted to be a Three Stooges movie. That might have been of some interest.

    • Edwin Arnaudin

      Mel Gibson produced a behind-the-Stooges film for ABC in the late ’90s that was good. Michael Chiklis starred.

Leave a Reply

To leave a reply you may Login with your Mountain Xpress account, connect socially or enter your name and e-mail. Your e-mail address will not be published. All fields are required.