If you’re shopping for your dad, brother or other guys this holiday season, you can usually do well by picking out DVDs or Blu-rays that they’ll love. With the introduction of “The Three Stooges Ultimate Collection” on DVD earlier this year, you might just have the perfect gift for tons of guys.

We all love slapstick and stupid humor, and nobody does it better than the Three Stooges. Many of us grew up watching these nuts on TV, and now we can have their entire catalog in one DVD box set.

The Three Stooges were the longest-running comedy act in motion picture history. The team included Moe Howard, Larry Fine, Curly Howard, Shemp Howard, Joe Besser and Joe “Curly-Joe” DeRita. Most will agree that the best shorts include those with Curly or Shemp of course, with Curly probably being the most popular. Still, Shemp was always underrated.

This collection features over 60 hours content, with the entire Three Stooges Columbia shorts catalog spanning three decades and 190 shorts. It also includes three discs of rare and unreleased content. Extras include several of the Stooges work separately in solo shorts, 28 never-before-released short films starring Stooges actors Shemp Howard, Joe Besser, and Joe DeRita, as well as feature length films. This 20-disc set will be the ultimate gift for any Stooges fan.

Check out our Holiday Gift Guide for more gift ideas, and check out these classic Stooges scenes as well.

Bullz-Eye: Not that you haven’t been asked this more than a few times, but…what’s your very first memory of experiencing the Three Stooges?

Peter Farrelly: You know, the God’s honest truth…? I don’t remember it. Because they were always there. I’ve been watching the Stooges since I could turn on a TV. But I guess the thing I recall the most is, for some reason, I went through a period when I was, like, a freshman in high school where they were on every day from I think 4 – 5 PM, and I just remember it being the highlight of that winter. [Laughs.] Every day, because it was freezing out, you’d just get in the house and turn on the TV. Every kid in my school at that time was watching. For some reason, they were going through some sort of a renaissance. Everybody was watching them that year.

BE: Not that you guys have ever been afraid of testing boundaries, but it would seem to be pretty daunting to update the Three Stooges. I think the last time anyone tried it was with “The Three Robonic Stooges.“

PF: Yeah, we knew it wasn’t gonna be easy, but we love the Stooges and…the God’s honest truth is that we felt like they were going away. I had little kids…well, they’re 11 and 13 years old now, but the last few years, I asked their friends, and two-thirds of them did not know the Three Stooges. Or they had heard of them, but they didn’t really know who they were. And that bothered us, because we’re huge Stooges fans – they’ve given me more laughs than anybody – and we wanted to bring them back. But we knew that…you know, look, anytime you do anything like this… There was a huge, huge opportunity to fall on our faces, but I did believe that it should be done, the movie should be made, and I felt very confident that we could pull it off.

BE: Who came up with the idea of dividing the film into three Three Stooges shorts as a framing device?

PF: Um…that’s really one of those questions like, “Who came up with this joke?” I never remember, honestly, if somebody says, “Peter, who came up with that line?” Because you’re kind of bouncing things around. It was our call, Bobby’s and mine and Mike Ferrone’s, who we wrote it with. We had struggled with it for a long time. “How do you do this?” Because the Stooges were 18-minute shorts, so how do you turn it into a movie and make people not lose interest? So we thought, “Well, wait a minute, what if we break it into two shorts, and each one picks up where the last one left off, so it holds together as a movie?” And originally, by the way, we had four shorts. There were four of ‘em, and they were more like 18 minutes…just about that, actually…and the problem was that when you got to the fourth short, there was feeling of, “Are you shitting me? There’s another one?” [Laughs.] “Three’s plenty.” So we extended each one and broke it into thirds. And now it’s nice, because when you get to that third short…we have on the beginning where it says, “Final episode,” so you know this is it, but you’re only 55 minutes into the movie, you’re thinking, “Jesus, this thing’s wrapping up!” Psychologically, it makes people happy. [Laughs.]

BE: To say that the Stooges themselves went through a few different casting incarnations would be a bit of an understatement…

PF: Yeah.

BE: …but did it ever reach a point where you began to wonder if the thing was ever gonna get made?

PF: [Long pause.] Nah. There were many points when people said, “It’s not gonna get made,” and the studio said, “No, we’re not doing it,” but I always figured someone else would do it. I never thought, “Nah, it’s just not gonna happen. It’s not meant to be.” I couldn’t go there, because I’d worked on the script too long. We really put a lot of time into the script. I’m proud of that script because it’s original. They look the same, think the same, act the same, sound the same, and we have some of the hits, some of the moves, but the stories are original and Stooge-like. And they weren’t easy to do. They took a lot of work, because it’s not like writing a normal movie, where you can just go in any direction and it doesn’t matter, where as long as it’s working, it’s fine. With this, there were a lot of times where we came up with something that was funny, but we thought, “The Stooges wouldn’t do it. The Stooges wouldn’t do this. The Stooges wouldn’t do that.” So it took…it was a hard, hard script to write, and that’s why I was very reluctant to give up on it. Too much work was put into it. I just couldn’t see quitting on it.

BE: Not to cast any aspersions on the final three guys, but was there anyone from the process of casting the film who was a real heartbreaker when you couldn’t get them into the film?

PF: You know, I know this sounds like bullshit, but, Will, I’m telling you the truth: I take a very Zen view of casting, and I’ve never had my heart broken casting, because…with “Dumb & Dumber,” Jim Carrey was about the 150^th guy we offered that movie to. Everybody had passed. Every single person had passed, and finally we got Jim Carrey, and it worked out in a way that was just beautiful. You can’t imagine it any other way. So throughout our career, we’ve been passed on in just about every movie by lots of guys, and I just always tell ‘em, “It’s okay, man, you gotta do what you gotta do. I don’t want you to do a movie that…” Because, you know, I always try to talk ‘em into it. I give them the old hard-sell, why they should do it. But at the end of the day, if they say, “I dunno, man, I just don’t feel right about it,” I’m, like, “Great! No problem! I have more respect for you than ever!” [Laughs.] And then we move on. Because I do believe that if you get everything in this world that you could imagine, then it’s gonna be as good as you could imagine it. But if you don’t get everything that you want, then sometimes the universe opens up and it gives you things that are better than you could’ve even imagined. And that’s how it’s been. In this case, everybody passed, ultimately, but it finally allowed us to do what we had asked to do in the beginning, which was to cast the three best people. And when we did a worldwide casting call, I guarantee you there’s no actors out there that could’ve done better than these guys. These three were geniuses.

BE: For me, Chris Diamantopoulos was the greatest surprise. Somehow you don’t expect a guy who’s successfully played Sinatra (in “The Kennedys”) to be able to turn a performance as Moe Howard.

PF: He’s a…I’m telling you the truth that he’s maybe the most talented guy I’ve ever worked with. He’s Jim Carrey talented. He can do anything. And I’d never heard of him before! He just came in, and apparently he’s well known on Broadway and has done a lot of Broadway stuff. I’ve met people since then who work on Broadway and said, “Do you know Chris Diamantopoulous?” “Oh, yeah, yeah, yeah…” But I’d never heard of him. [Laughs.] But he blew us away. And not just his acting, but his total knowledge of the Stooges and of what we were trying to accomplish. It was sort of like having a third director on set, having him there, because he really did know about what Larry and Curly should be doing as well, and he would walk them through things. Everybody was great, but he was the guy who kind of made it all happen.

BE: How did Larry David find his way into the project? I figure he’d be someone who you’d either really have to twist his arm, or else he’d say, “Oh, yeah, I got a nun’s habit right here, I’ll be right over.”

PF: I think when he heard “Sister Mary Mengele,” he giggled and said, “Ah, okay, lemme look at it.” [Laughs.] And then with Larry, y’know, he’s an old friend. We’ve been working him for years trying to get him in a movie. I said, “C’mon, man, if you don’t do this one, you’re never gonna be in one.” So he said “yeah.”

BE: Has the Catholic Church had any official response to Kate Upton’s performance in the film?

PF: There was some response, actually. The Catholic League came out, and they criticized her, and they criticized Larry David and his portrayal of Sister Mary Mengele. But, y’know, it wasn’t a…it didn’t pick up any steam. But the day the movie opened, there were a couple of press releases.

BE: Did you take any hits for the “Jersey Shore” cast potentially dating the film in the long haul?

PF: You know, the truth is, I don’t read reviews. [Laughs.] So I’m not exactly sure. And I also stay off the internet. Because I’ve gone on the internet enough for my friends to see that if they’re saying that about them, what are they saying about me? I don’t wanna know! Like, I went on for Seth MacFarlane, I was looking at some of his reviews for Ted, which I loved, and I couldn’t believe the amount of hatred and anger. Anyway, I avoid that kind of stuff, so I’m not exactly sure. I haven’t heard too much backlash. I had one guy…I did an interview with a radio guy up in Chicago, Mancow, and he said, “Look, I loved this movie, it blew my mind, I couldn’t believe how good it was, I wasn’t expecting it, but the fucking ‘Jersey Shore’ ruined it for me! As soon as they came on, I was, like, ‘Goddammit, why’d they have to do that?” And, you know, my argument is, well, if you don’t like “Jersey Shore,” that’s who you should want in that role, given that we just beat the shit out of them for the whole time that they’re on there. [Laughs.] Didn’t that give you some satisfaction?

BE: A bit, yes. [Laughs.]

PF: By the way, I do have to say this about the “Jersey Shore” people: when they were coming, we were bracing ourselves for the worst, because, y’know, you read things about how horrible they are, how annoying, they seem like a lot of work, but they showed up on time, worked their butts off, and couldn’t have been more easy-going. No problems, no whining, did everything we asked. I really liked them. I’m probably the first person in the world to say that. [Laughs.]

BE: Over the years, do you have a favorite project that you’ve worked on that didn’t get the love you thought it deserved?

PF: Wow. Ah, boy, that’s really… [Long pause.] Yeah. Y’know, it’s funny, people ask me, “Well, what are your favorite movies?” And you’d expect it to be, like, “(There’s Something About) Mary” or “Dumb & Dumber,” and I love them, but…making movies is sort of like having kids. You feel closer and more protective of the kid who never made it than the kid who went off to Harvard Medical School. That kid’s gonna do fine. But you worry about the other kid who, for whatever reason, didn’t do as well. And you tried just as hard on that one, but…so, yeah, “Kingpin” was a crusher when that came out. It did nothing. Well, it did $25 million, but that was…I went into a dark place after that. I felt that “Stuck On You” could’ve done a lot better, too. I really liked “Stuck on You.” You know, those two come to mind. And I wish “The Three Stooges” had been released in the summer. It was a terrible time to release this movie. They released it in mid-April, and the kids weren’t even off on Spring Break. They were all done with Spring Break, and…on the weekend, it opened great, but in the week, it did zero, because kids were in school. And it did okay, but I believe that if they’d released it June, July, or August, it would’ve been double. But on the other hand, you can’t control the world, you can’t control everything, and, y’know, maybe nothing mattered. Maybe it could’ve been released at the best time ever and nothing would’ve changed. But, yeah, you do feel like some of them deserved better.

BE: How was the “Unhitched” experience for you? Would you go back to the small screen after the way that series was received on Fox?

PF: Well, I didn’t…you know, “Unhitched” was something that we executive-produced, and, honestly, it wasn’t my baby. It was friends of mine who I really admire and like, and they did it, and I helped them get it made, and they went off with it, so…it didn’t leave at all a bad taste in my mouth. Yeah, I would still consider going off and doing a show. I’ve never really done a show on a day-to-day basis. I’ve never really created a show and then worked on that show. That’s something that I could see myself doing in the future, without question. But, no, “Unhitched,” I thought it was a valiant effort. I loved the guys who did it, Chris Pappas and Mike Bernier and Kevin Barnett. They’re sensational guys and sensational writers. It was fun. I believe if they’d given the show a little more time it might’ve done better. Who knows? But I have no bad feelings about it.

BE: To kind of bring this full circle by bringing up Larry David again, Wikipedia suggests that you guys wrote “Seinfeld” episode “The Virgin,” but IMDb says you just wrote the story.

PF: Yeah, we didn’t actually write the script. We pitched the idea and sold it. We went into a room and pitched it to Larry and Jerry (Seinfeld) and Larry Charles, and they bought the idea. We were given story credit, and they wrote it. So it was… At the time, we were trying to get in and wanted to get on staff with “Seinfeld,” but they didn’t hire us for that, but they bought that. When we look back in retrospect, if we’d ever been hired as writers, we would never have been able to go off and make “Dumb & Dumber” and those things. So it all worked out.

BE: Is there anything that you would’ve changed about the way “The Virgin” came out? Anything that veered way away from what you’d envisioned when you pitched the story?

PF: Nah. I thought it was great. Again, we had very little to do with it beyond the idea of…our idea was, “What happens when you go out with a woman who’s a virgin nowadays?” If the ‘50s, that was a great thing, but now, it’s, like, “What?” It raises so many questions. Why is she a virgin? Does she not like sex? Is it a religious thing? Is she nuts? I mean, what’s going on here? [Laughs.] It was the idea of taking it from the other angle and being horrified about having a virgin in your life and not knowing how to deal with it. And, of course, that led them into the next week, which was the masturbation episode. So I think it all worked out for the best for everybody.

BE: So what do you guys have on your plate for the future?

PF: Well, we’re hoping to do “Dumb & Dumber 2” next, but right now the studio and Jim Carrey are having…uh, they’re having some negotiating issues. [Laughs.] Basically, what happened is that New Line had released the original “Dumb & Dumber,” and when we got together to do “Dumb & Dumber 2”…and, by the way, as a reminder, we had nothing to do with “Dumb & Dumberer.” We never wanted to do that with young guys. We only wanted to do it with these guys. So, anyway, when everybody got together and we said, “Let’s do it,” we went off to write, and New Line cut deals for all of us. And then we gave the script to New Line, they loved it, they gave it to Warner Brothers, and Warner Brothers said, “Great, but what’s with these deals? We don’t like these deals!” And that caused a problem, because they started renegotiating deals. But I hope and think it’s going to all be resolved. But right now we’re sort of in a holding pattern, waiting to see what happens there.

BE: I’ll keep my fingers crossed. I write for the Onion AV Club, and I talked to Jeff (Daniels) right before “The Newsroom” premiered – in fact, I was talking about the range it takes to jump from “Gettysburg” into “Dumb & Dumber” – and when I asked about the status of the sequel, he said, “Oh, I’ve read the script, it’s funnier than hell, and as far as I know, we’re just working out a deal.” And then two days later, Jim Carrey said, “Sequel’s off, we’re not doing it.”

PF: Yeah, well, I think it could all be fixed. They’re still talking. Right now, as we speak, it is off. But that could change any day.

With the summer movie season just around the corner, Hollywood is gearing up for what promises to be its most exciting slate of films in a long time by heading into the blockbuster-filled madness of May on a high note. This month has something for just about everyone, including several promising comedies, an innovative horror film with “Scream”-sized potential, and a new movie from action guru Luc Besson. It may not compare to what this summer has to offer, but it’s better than the doldrums of winter.

Who: Jason Biggs, Alyson Hannigan, Seann William Scott and Eugene Levy
What: The gang is reunited in East Great Falls, Michigan for their high school reunion.
When: April 6th
Why: I’ve been a fan of the “American Pie” series (not including those terrible direct-to-DVD spinoffs, of course) since the original film was released back in 1999. It’s a purely generational thing; when the characters are having the same major life experiences as most people your age, it makes them easy to relate to. The movies also happen to be pretty entertaining in a guilty pleasure kind of way, and it’ll be great to see the whole cast reunited for the first time since they all went their separate ways to become big movie stars. Though that didn’t exactly work out for any of them (Alyson Hannigan and Seann William Scott are arguably the most successful of the bunch), as long as their chemistry is still intact, “American Reunion” should be a fun trip down memory lane.

Who: Chuck Rozanski, Holly Conrad, Eric Henson, Anthony Calderon and Skip Harvey
What: A behind-the-scenes look at the fans who gather by the thousands each year in San Diego, California to attend Comic-Con.
When: April 6th
Why: It’s actually quite surprising that no one has thought to make a documentary about Comic-Con until now, because although it’s not really a hard-hitting subject matter, it already has a built-in audience that continues to grow every year. Morgan Spurlock isn’t the first person you’d think of to direct a documentary about the popular geek Mecca, but he’s wisely chosen to stay out of the spotlight this time around, instead opting to focus on the lives of five attendees (including a toy collector, an aspiring artist and a costume designer) who have traveled to the annual convention for various reasons. And with guys like Stan Lee, Joss Whedon and Kevin Smith all involved in some form, Spurlock’s latest doc has the makings to be the perfect love letter to comic book geeks everywhere.

Who: Kristen Connolly, Chris Hemsworth, Richard Jenkins and Bradley Whitford
What: Five friends head to a remote cabin in the woods for the weekend where they get more than they bargained for.
When: April 13th
Why: I’ve had the good fortune to see Drew Goddard’s “The Cabin in the Woods” twice now, and it’s every bit as original and entertaining as you’d expect for a movie co-written by Joss Whedon. This is one of those films that you need to go into knowing as little as possible, so while the trailer has been provided below, I’d recommend that you don’t watch it in order to avoid spoiling anything. It may look like just your average slasher flick on paper, but the movie has a few tricks up its sleeves. Fueled by a great script that not only defies most horror conventions, but does so with tongue firmly planted in cheek, “The Cabin in the Woods” is either going to be the movie that everyone can’t stop talking about, or that no one goes to see. Do your part and make sure it’s the former.

Who: Chris Diamantopoulos, Will Sasso, Sean Hayes and Jane Lynch
What: While trying to save their childhood orphanage, Moe, Larry and Curly inadvertently stumble into a murder plot and wind up starring in a reality TV show.
When: April 13th
Why: I’ve never really understood the appeal of “The Three Stooges,” so I’m not too surprised that the Farrelly brothers’ big screen adaptation looks as terrible as it does. Despite my personal feelings on the Stooges, however, it’s strange to see their fans showing so much animosity towards the film, because it looks like the Farrellys have absolutely nailed the slapstick brand of comedy that the bumbling trio is known for. Though the movie has been in development for years (with Sean Penn, Jim Carrey and Benicio del Toro all involved in the project at some point), it no longer has the star-studded cast it once did, although that may be for the best. Then again, the Farrellys haven’t made a good movie in almost 15 years, so there’s definitely cause for concern.

Who: Guy Pearce, Maggie Grace, Joseph Gilgun, Peter Stormare and Lennie James
What: A wrongly convicted man is offered his freedom if he can rescue the president’s daughter from an outer space prison taken over by violent inmates.
When: April 13th
Why: When the first trailer for “Lockout” was released, there were some people who jokingly referred to it as “‘Taken’ in space,” and to be honest, they weren’t too far off. Writer/producer Luc Besson (who also co-wrote the Liam Neeson action thriller) has essentially been making the same movie for the last 20 years, and although most of his Euro-trash action films haven’t been as successful as “Taken,” they’re always a lot of fun to watch. Plus, this marks the first time that Besson has dabbled in sci-fi since “The Fifth Element,” and we all know how that turned out. Maggie Grace must be thrilled that she has more to do this time around, but it’s the pitch-perfect casting of Guy Pearce that could prove to be the real coup behind turning “Lockout” into this month’s breakout hit.

Who: Jason Segel, Emily Blunt, Chris Pratt, Alison Brie and Rhys Ifans
What: A comedy that charts the ups and downs of an engaged couple’s relationship.
When: April 27th
Why: There are a number of great comedy writing teams in Hollywood, but perhaps one of the most underrated is Jason Segel and Nicholas Stoller, who already have a pair of terrific films to their names in “Forgetting Sarah Marshall” and “The Muppets.” Those are both difficult movies to outshine, but Stoller’s third trip behind the camera (having previously directed “Sarah Marshall” and its quasi-sequel “Get Him to the Greek”) promises to be his funniest yet. Not only is it an interesting twist on the rom-com genre, but it’s loaded with tons of comedic talent, including Segel and fellow TV stars Chris Pratt and Alison Brie. Nevertheless, it’s the involvement of Emily Blunt that has me most excited, because the actress doesn’t get nearly enough opportunities to show off her comedic chops. And believe it or not, she might just be the funniest one of the bunch.

Who: John Cusack, Luke Evans, Alice Eve and Brendan Gleeson
What: When a madman begins committing murders inspired by Edgar Allan Poe’s stories, a young detective joins forces with Poe to stop any more from coming true.
When: April 27th
Why: In what can only be described as a half-hearted attempt at cashing in on the success of the “Sherlock Holmes” films, James McTeigue’s “The Raven” re-imagines American poet Edgar Allen Poe as a sort of makeshift action hero who solves crimes. It’s the latest in a line of projects driven by Hollywood’s new fascination with revisionist history, but is Poe really that popular of a literary figure that people will care? Don’t get me wrong: the idea of someone performing copycat murders based on an author’s work of fiction has potential (even if it’s been done before, most recently in the pilot for the TV drama “Castle”), but there’s nothing in the trailer that suggests the film will be anything other than a generic whodunit. John Cusack deserves much better than this.

Who: Hugh Grant, Salma Hayek, Jeremy Piven, Brendan Gleeson and Imelda Staunton
What: Pirate Captain sets out on a mission to defeat his rivals Black Bellamy and Cutlass Liz for the Pirate of the Year award.
When: April 27th
Why: Considering how long it takes to make a stop-motion animated film, “The Pirates! Band of Misfits” likely went into production way back when pirate movies were still in the midst of a mini-renaissance. Of course, now that the subgenre has been exhausted by the very same franchise that brought it back to life (please stand up, “Pirates of the Caribbean”), it’s hard to tell whether moviegoers will be in the mood for another pirate adventure so soon. But if there’s anyone that can make it worthwhile, it’s the guys at Aardman Animation, best known for their witty and charming “Wallace & Gromit” shorts. And between its excellent voice cast (led by an unrecognizable Hugh Grant) and the involvement of Aardman co-founder Peter Lord, the movie couldn’t be in better hands.

Who: Jason Statham, Catherine Chan, Chris Sarandon, Anson Mount and James Hong
What: A former cop must protect a Chinese girl who’s been entrusted with the combination to a safe that every criminal organization in town is after.
When: April 27th
Why: The fact that Lionsgate has already pushed back the movie’s release date several times doesn’t exactly exude confidence on the part of the studio, but I’m still cautiously optimistic about director Boaz Yakin’s first foray into the action genre. Although “Safe” looks eerily similar to just about every film to come out of the Jason Statham Factory of Ass-Kicking since the original “Transporter,” at least his movies are rarely dull, and that has a lot to do with Statham’s seemingly endless supply of charisma. He’s probably the most entertaining action star working today, even though he’s a good enough actor that he doesn’t need to rely on his fists so much. But regardless of how bad the movie may actually be, I’d gladly watch Statham kick ass and take names any day of the week.