Lionsgate’s Breaking Wind Parody to Go Straight to DVD

So this is just an interesting tale in light of the fact that Lionsgate now merged with Summit. Apparently Lionsgate is the studio behind this Breaking Wind parody, something that admittedly escaped our notice up until now, and would have continued to escape our notice if Twilight Quebec hadn’t tipped us off. In fairness to Lionsgate they started this project before the Summit merger, and it probably seemed like a perfectly harmless idea at the time. There’s just supreme level of irony that Lionsgate is now the studio behind the movie, and the most offensive parody of Twilight that we’ve ever seen.

This is the description of Breaking Wind obtained from Moviehole who had the exclusive Moviehole

Writer/director Craig Moss, best known for the recent spoof “The 41-Year-Old Virgin Who Knocked Up Sarah Marshall and Felt Superbad About It”, is sharpening his fangs, flipping up his black collar, ready to sink his teeth into a “Twilight” pisstake.

A film Moss planned to shoot back in the Summer of 2010, then known as “Fully Mooned”, has been set from pause to play. Only now, it’s got a new title. And a home.

Moss is directing “Breaking Wind”, a fun-poke at the hugely successful young teen movie series, for Stonebrook (“Pennhurst”, “Open House”). The title is of course taking the mickey itself; the latest “Twilight” flick is “Breaking Dawn”, released in November….The script for this one, penned by Moss, tells of a young woman named Stella who is forced to choose between ”egocentric” vampire Edward and ”horny” werewolf Jacob. Whichever boy can satisfying Stella’s more intimate needs gets the gig. Expect plenty of jokes that won’t be suitable for the younger of Taylor Lautner’s fans…”

Let’s back up to August when we first heard rumbling of a new Twilight parody. It seemed an odd project to us in that Vampires Suck (another parody) had recently come out, and it wasn’t a huge success. Fans who saw Vampires Suck thought it had some funny moments, but a lot of it was predictable. So we waited until we learned more.

Next, let’s jump ahead to December when a teaser was released and it was clear that this spoof was very R-Rated, and filled with humor that made The Hangover look like high-brow comedy. One of our commentators(who happens to be a straight male) said at the time, “I do have problems with bad parodies, and this has lame written all over it. Bathroom humor was funny when I was 13, but I’d much rather see intelligent parodies versus something that is just blantanty stupid…” Many, many of our readers (who do enjoy a parody suck as Vampire’s Suck, Jimmy Fallon in the tree, Hillywood, and others) were offended by the brief clip.

So today our friends over at Twilight Quebec tipped us off the the full trailer is out and the film (probably completely unsurprisingly) is going direct to DVD. The trailer is absolutely R-Rated (in fact it’s the first time I can ever recall seeing a trailer that is rated R) with graphic language and sexual suggestiveness. It would not be considered “work safe” at my place of business or at most educational institutions, so please be advised before playing the video if you so choose.

Comments

  1. thephantomcat says:

    So a straight man’s opinion is more valuable than a gay man’s? Also you’ve never heard of a Red Band trailer? Nice.

    • Twilight_News says:

      You are making leaps of logic and assuming things we have never said. I also didn’t quote any woman responders who make up the vast majority of the commentators on this site. That certainly doesn’t mean I value their responses any less either.

      Makers of films like Breaking Wind will says “oh well you weren’t our target audience that’s why you didn’t appreciate it.” I was showcasing the opinion from someone in their target talking about why their film was not appealing. Producers of films like Breaking Wind will tell you that their target market is males under 30 who are into the bathroom humor. I was citing the opinion from someone in that demographic who who posts here who was unhappy with the film, and he cited very specific reason as to why he wasn’t interested in Breaking Wind when films of that type are things that he does watch. I am not discounting anyone’s opinion outside that group. Anyone with any background can like anything. However when it comes to pitching any product there are the core demographic groups and that an item is aimed at, and THAT is what I was citing.

      As a demographic, the LGTB community as a generality is more quality art oriented, and whereas they may appreciate a The Hangover type of movie, films that push the envelope over the top to hard R bathroom humor, gore, and other similar genres have not had a strong demographic core LGTB following.

      So I would kindly appreciate that you stop jumping to conclusions regarding my opinion, and my interaction with the LGTB community.

      As for Red Band trailer I know exactly what it is. They are infrequently used as they can only be seen in front of R-rated, NC-17-rated, or unrated movies, and producers generally create their trailers even for R-rated films down to a PG-13 cut to give them greater exposure. An additional reason for this is that a film can be rated R for a variety of reasons from violence, to nudity, to mature themes. And someone watching the R-Rated The Girl with the Dragon Tattoo or Bridesmaids doesn’t want to see the R-rated trailer of another movie whereas they would watch a PG-13 cut

      • thephantomcat says:

        Thank you for that thorough explanation, but I can’t help but feel that it is desperately thorough like the elaborations of a bad liar. Methinks the lady doth protest too much? If you were really trying to illustrate the opinion of that particular demographic you would have said “who is a male under the age of thirty” not straight male which in no way indicates his age. And while I suppose it should be flattering that you hold the artistic taste of the LGBT community in high regard, it only goes to show your stereotypical view of us. As far as your “interaction” with LGBT’s is concerned, you must be familiar our appreciation of gross out humor. Or haven’t you heard of John Waters films? And if you’re so familiar with red band trailers, what was with the comment in your article? “Never heard of that before!”

        You would have done better to simply apologize even if it was a cop out like “I’m sorry you took it the wrong way.” By reacting defensively with anger you’re only showing how guilty you are. I’m sorry if that offends you. (See what I did there?)

        • Rachelle says:

          @thephantomcat This is getting ridiculous. Why are you being so condescending and overanalytic? It seems like you enjoy being difficult and trying to get a rise out of people, but it really is not necessary. The writer of the article was nice enough to even reply to your overreaction and it is laughable that you want some kind of fake apology over something that you are blowing out of proportion. I was not going to say anything, but you love to make your snarky comments and try to critique others. You accuse them of acting defensively, but you are the one who even made the comment in the first place like you wanted to stir the pot. Why can’t you just let it go and try to be more productive and positive in your comments?

          By the way, I apologize, even if I think you should be the one apologizing, if you took this message the wrong way. I hope you see what I did there.

          • thephantomcat says:

            My own words used against me! I have tasted of mine own medicine and it is bitter!

            Please. She brought orientation into the mix by needlessly mentioning it in the first place. It was uncalled for and it was thoughtlessly thrown in there because heaven forbid anyone should think the male she was referring to wasnt straight. Because that would be insulting to his masculinity and lessen his credibility. Oh, and I have to use the phrase “isn’t straight” because this website’s filter registers my lifestyle as a bad word and holds my comments for moderation. How’s that for interacting with the LGBT community?

        • Twilight_News says:

          Again you have zero idea who I am , who my friends are, who I hang out, who i work with, who my family is and what I put into practice every day of my life. If you wish to have an opinion based on unfounded conjecture that’s fine. The loss is yours. I know who I am and what I am proud to represent. I clarified and you decided to read it in the worst way possible. I have not made any jumps as to what you think or espouse. Perhaps one day if we meet in person you’ll form an entirely different opinion. As you seem hell bent on judging me whereas I haven’t done the same with you I am not going to take the conversation further as it is obviously unproductive as tone inflection and expression is lost on the Internet. Alas, you’re determined to think the worst of someone who you know nothing about and that is sad.

          As for why the word gay gets trapped in the filter and is held in moderation until someone releases it. It’s because ignorant people use it as a slur as in I hated that movie it’s so gay”. There are also other words that cause problems in the filter for example the word dyke is in there for the same reason. You’ll notice that lesbian isn’t in the filter because people don’t use it as a slur (at least not that we have experienced on this website). When used not used in the context of degrading someone lifestyle the comments are released.

          • thephantomcat says:

            The “you don’t know me!” argument? Classy. And so much for not judging me. I’m an object of pity? You can’t pretend to take the high road and take the low road at the same time. That’s called hypocrisy. You brought up sexuality in a forum when it had nothing to do with the subject. What is sad is that you can’t admit your little Freudian slip revealed an underlying prejudice in yourself. Own up to it. To err is human.

          • Twilight_News says:

            I’m not owning up to something I don’t have. If you want to argue I should have clarified why I cited that one user’s opinion and cited his background, I’ll grant you that. Again, I cited him because I was trying to show that a demographic that is A-typical to Twilight and Typical to the that specific parody market didn’t like the content. If you choose to read into that it was more than that,and not to believe it that is your prerogative.

            I don’t pity you. I have never once intimated that. What I pity is that inflection, tone, and intent is often obscured on the Internet and the opportunity for one-on-one with eye-contact and real time dialogue isn’t possible.

            I’m not judging you personally, I’m disagreeing with the conclusions that you are drawing about me personally when you don’t know me any more than I know you. I judge you as upset, and that is the end of my judgment. I’ll put this out there, I do any number of conventions and events around the country. If there is one in your neck of the woods, wherever that is, let me know. I’d love the opportunity to know you as a person and to discuss this and anything else one-on-one. Tell me when and where I’ll buy the drinks, the coffee, or the meal tab. The choice is yours.

          • thephantomcat says:

            Cool. I like that response allot. I don’t think you’re a hateful person, and I have to admit I did go a little crazy. I’m sorry I was so mean.

          • Twilight_News says:

            Awesome! Hit me up on facebook or our contact us and we’ll work it out! Seriously, no offense taken. Happy to have a conversation on a serious topic that matters.

    • Stereotypes exist because a large portion of any demographic due to their age, sex, race, religion ect, have a characteristic or quality that is common among them. You know what, it would not be unusual for a straight male under the age of 30 to be interested in a more crude type of humor. Do we assume that the stereotype for a gay male is that he prefers a more classy type of humor? Yes, some of us do. Does that mean we believe that every single person is going to fit that? No. However, due to that sort of stereotype that straight males under the age of 30 have given themselves by frequently showcasing their interest in that type of humor, it makes perfect sense to use an opinion in that demographic to show that this particular parody takes things a bit too far. Are people free to disagree? Of course. Are we made to feel like we shouldn’t like it? No. Did you see a woman taking offense because they used a man’s opinion instead? No. You’re take a single sentence and turning it into some sort of politically correct debate. They were not trying to offend anyone, I’m sure it never crossed their mind when they wrote it, and they never, ever said anything to the degree that anyone’s opinion was valued over another. It’s an opinion piece. When you write an opinion piece you use facts and references that support your stance on the situation. That’s what they did. They did nothing wrong, and you should be ashamed of yourself for accusing them of something so disgusting as discrimination. If you want to continue to be offended by every single person who doesn’t phrase their wording to your liking then prepare to be continuously disappointed, arguments like this are what keeps racism, sexism, and any form of discrimination alive and kicking. They should not be apologizing to you, you should be apologizing to them.

      • thephantomcat says:

        That stereotyping exists is not an argument for its justification. By that logic, racism is justified. And thank you for telling me to be ashamed of myself. That’s certainly something I haven’t been told religious leaders or close minded individuals in the past. That’s some fine company you’re in. Also, thank you for letting me know what to expect in life. All this time, I thought the world was filled with hugs and puppies! What a wake up call! I think the sun will shine a little bit brighter today! And no, identifying prejudice doesn’t cause prejudice anymore than diagnosing cancer causes cancer.

        You people keep insisting that singling out orientation is a practice when marketing movies to particular demographics. It has no place in marketing movies to the public and no place being mentioned in the article. We are 2-10% of the population. Orientation is not a factor. Prove me wrong. Post a link to a single exit poll or awareness poll conducted by a movie tracking firm that distinguishes its participants by orientation. They don’t. Only age and sex. That’s it. Now see that’s a fact. I eagerly await being proven wrong.

  2. Well that’s just nasty!

  3. thephantomcat says:

    Why is it so important you identity the male commenter as straight? Is there something wrong with commenters who aren’t? Also, this looks hilarious. I’ve seen The 41 Year Old Virgin and it was hit and miss, but the hilarious parts were incredibly funny. Some people enjoy gross out humor. I just might buy this.

    • I think they’re just pointing out that he’s not a woman, or gay, so people can’t point to that as a reason he wouldn’t like a Twilight parody.

      • thephantomcat says:

        Cause gay people don’t like parodies. We also cook gourmet meals, keep toy chihuahuas as substitutes for children, and do needle point. I can’t believe no one hear understands how offensive the stereotyping is? It was unnecessary to make it a point to identify the guy as straight. It buys into the stereotype that “Twilight is gay” mentality that haters of this franchise cling to. If we as fans can’t separate ourselves from stereotyping (which is what the writer of the article means when she says generality), then the rest of the world will continue to have that view of us.

    • Twilight_News says:

      No there’s nothing wrong with commentators who are not. I wanted to point out that someone who is the targeted demographic for this kind of humor, and who happens to post on this website was offended by it.

  4. Vampires Suck was interesting, though it didn’t get into it from a fan’s perspective as much as it should have, it didn’t manage to bridge together all of the humour but there were a few good moments. Some change in the cast would have been welcome, as they always seem to cast similar voices for background characters, but would be better if they had more of a likeness.

    A sequel to THAT parody would have been again, interesting, but this is totally unacceptable.

    Why not just leave out the middle-man Lionsgate, and just recycle the dvds in production?

  5. Disgusting.

    But I can’t help but be impressed at the set design, locations, wardrobe, and cinematography. Seriously spot-on! If it wasn’t so vulgar, I might have considered watching it. I love movie parodies, but this one went a bit too far…

  6. B. Ramirez says:

    This filmmaker needs a good editor (and needs to LISTEN to a good editory) in order to hone what is funny about some of these ideas and to revise, revise, revise. Good parody works when the humor relates closely to the original material, and is funny on BOTH a visual and intellectual level. Some of this trailor layers on potty humor as frosting in a way just panders and doesn’t seem related to Twilight (EX: mini-Edward???). Also, the same joke can only be played once. So parody-Jacob can have 1 premature ejaculation, but only 1.

    • thephantomcat says:

      Most of the humor is related to the source material. The only scene that has nothing to do with you Twilight is mini Edward, and the fact is injecting little people into a situation for humor is a traditional comedic devise. Also a joke can only be used once? It’s called a running gag. Perhaps you don’t know as much about comedy as you think.

      • B. Ramirez says:

        Yes, I suppose I have seen the running gag used effectively. This one I found funny Tue first time but the second time I just wanted to gag. Budump bump.

  7. ok, stupid question, but are those the same guys from vampires suck? cause they look familiar… or is this the sequel to vampires suck?

  8. looks pretty funny to me

  9. The only thing I found funny was Carlisle’s immaculate “self control.” The rest was… blech.

  10. radiowidow says:

    I think a few of my brain cells just died from watching that….

  11. The Hillywood Show makes good parodies and I miss the type of parodies that at least respected the original, but just wanted to poke fun at it. Nowadays, most parodies are just offensive and use random bathroom humor. Vampires Suck was not horrible like this parody is, but it was unoriginal and did not make any type of sense. I like parodies that actually put some thought behind what they are doing and do their homework on the original, not just lamely attempt to bash something they know nothing about. It is very ironic that Lionsgate made a film, if you can call it that, bashing Twilight and now are on board hoping it makes enough to keep them afloat. Having this go straight to DVD was the best thing to do with such a dismal display of a parody.

  12. Vampire-girl says:

    I find it a bit insulting that Lionsgate have taken the mick out of twilight, and yet now when Summit has made money and the twilight Saga almost over, all these companies decided they wanted to merge.
    I think Summit should have held their own if they were interested it should have been at the beginning not trying to jump on their success. I wonder if Summit knew about this trailer would they still have merged.
    It’s a bit disrespectful

  13. rosedahlia says:

    This parody is pathetic. Now Vampires Suck was hilarious. I wish they would make a sequel about Eclipse and Breaking Dawn.

  14. I’ll stick with the Hillywood parodies. This one didn’t even make me smile, just groan thinking they’ll make money off of this. No thanks…

  15. I have to admit, I found the part with the bottle caps to be giggle inducing. But that’s it. I love a good parody as much as the next person. Hell, I make fun of certain aspects/scenes/lines while I’m watching the films. But this is just horrible. I don’t even think the first Scary Movie flick was as grotesque as this looks. And that’s only from the trailer.

  16. This movie seems so stupid and gross.

  17. Yep,that’s probably the worst Twi-parody I’ve ever seen. At least the Hillywood Show is consistent in their storytelling,when they do their parodies. This is just gross-out humor simply for that sake only. Thumbs down.

  18. Okay, I enjoy twilight parodys a lot, but this one is just awful. Like a huge waste of money awful. It’s one thing to just make a short video parody of it, but doing a whole movie of this? No. From what I saw in the trailer, this is just a really gross and disturbing movie. I felt like I was going to throw up. :P

  19. Thank you all for your comments. You have saved me from wasting my time on this preview or the feature. To Lionsgate(/Summit), talk about biting the hand that feeds you!

    I hope the Lexicon doesn’t mind me giving a shout out to a couple of sister fansites: Letters to Twilight and Letters to Rob. Anyone interested in some good natured parody flavored humor might want to check these out instead.

  20. I must say that yes this movie looks really really bad, its like they couldn;t think of anything good and just went with all toilet humor and vulgerness and cramed it all into a movie and hoped it would be funny. But that being said I did laugh near the end of the trailer where she thinks she is pregnant but just turns out to have had eaten some bad food, and some toilet humor can be funny if done the right way and not done all the time through out a movie, because its like a comedian telling the same joke over and over and over again.

    And I feel that dwindiling demographics for a movie down to gender is a bit much because it can become very black and white,and create unessesary dividing lines (And i know thats not what the articles intension was at all, what i am saying is just a general observation when it comes to toilet humor or any kind of grose comedy in movies). And everyones sense of humor is all over the spectrum. BUT for anyone who used to enjoy toilet humor at the age of 13 to out right say that this movie is really really bad too much toilet humor ect, just shows how bad this movie really is. So those are my thoughs on this rather interesting little article

  21. Well….my husband thought it was funny. LOL

    • Yeah, mine did too… I giggled a couple times, but I just couldn’t get past how….. Just plain gross most of the scenes were. It seems very elementary school humor, and I myself left elementary school behind years ago. I like a good spoof as much as anyone, but I feel this one took it too far….. ……

  22. Do people who hate The Twilight Series make these STUPID and INSULTING movies like Vampires Suck and so on and now – Breaking Wind???? What the f****** hell is there problem? If they think its funny then here is the truth – IT’S NOT! Stop creating these kind of movies and get ‘Midnight Sun’ book finished & published and ‘Breaking Dawn Pt.2′ released first please!
    I can’t wait when Stephenie Meyer finishes Midnight Sun and decides to publish it!!! Please finish it fast and Please get it published or something!! And also I can’t wait for Breaking Dawn Pt.2 to release!!!

    LOVE THE TWILIGHT SAGA FOREVER!
    TEAM EDWARD!

  23. orange tang says:

    Lol, the cover picture is hilarious! I love a good spoof movie. Nowadays people are too serious, this movie looks like a good laugh. My co-worker at DISH seen it and I can’t wait to watch it. I ran across it on Blockbuster @Home so I ordered it! I plan on watching it asap.

  24. thephantomcat says:

    Saw this on Redbox the other day. It was horrible. Bad lighting, bad production value, bad editing, bad music and sound, bad delivery of the dialouge, bad use of little people, badly timed fart jokes, and its more of a parody of Eclipse than Breaking Dawn. No redeeming value at all. I laughed once.

Leave a Comment

*