On April 20, 2001, 20th Century Fox debuted a surreal comedy film across theaters in America. Freddy Got Fingered was the brainchild of Canadian actor and comedian Tom Green, who wrote, directed and starred in the movie.

Green, who at the time was in a relationship with Charlie's Angels star, Drew Barrymore, had spent the preceding six years or so as the headline act of The Tom Green Show on MTV. The show mostly featured sketches and stunts in line with Green's signature 'shock comedy style. One of such stunts included scenes depicting the comedian sucking a cow's udder in public.

His controversial style notwithstanding, Regency Enterprises studios still saw fit to invest a cool $14 million towards production for Green's Freddy Got Fingered script.

Met With General Disdain

The film synopsis for Freddy Got Fingered on Google reads, "Gord Brody (Tom Green) is a struggling cartoonist trying to pitch an animated show to Hollywood executives. When he fails, he returns to his hometown with no choice but to live with his parents and younger brother, Freddy (Eddie Kaye Thomas)."

"His father (Rip Torn) doesn't approve of Gord's career path, and pressures him to gain independence. As father and son exchange barbs, Gord comes up with a lie that changes everything: He claims his dad is molesting Freddy, leading to drastic consequences."

As soon as the film began screening in cinemas, it was met with general disdain, as audiences frowned upon the tropes that were featured in the story. Perhaps thanks to the shock value that came with it, a significant number of people still flocked to see for themselves. Thanks to this, the producers' losses were mitigated to a huge extent, as the movie grossed about $14.3 million from box office proceeds domestically and globally.

Freddy Got Fingered Poster
via: Joblo

The following year, the picture was nominated for eight Golden Raspberry awards, including for Worst Screenplay, Worst Picture, Worst Actor and Worst Director. RELATED: This Controversial Emma Roberts Movie Was Voted The Worst Indie Film Of All Time

Came Across In Really Bad Taste

Unlike most artists nominated for the infamous awards, Green turned up to collect his gongs in person, and injected some sarcasm into his acceptance speech. "When we set out to make this film we wanted to win a Razzie, so this is a dream come true for me," he said in jest. "It is a totally, very proud moment for me... I wore this tuxedo at my wedding so that gives you an indication of how much this means to me."

This was only the beginning of the negative reviews. At the front of the queue to pile on, was acclaimed film critic, Roger Ebert. "This movie doesn't scrape the bottom of the barrel," he wrote on his official website. "This movie isn't the bottom of the barrel. This movie isn't below the bottom of the barrel. This movie doesn't deserve to be mentioned in the same sentence with barrels."

Just as much as the fans were, Ebert was particularly disgusted by most of Green's stunts, which came across in really bad taste. "The film is a vomitorium consisting of 93 minutes of Tom Green doing things that a geek in a carnival sideshow would turn down. Six minutes into the film, his character leaps from his car to wag a horse penis. This is, we discover, a framing device--to be matched by a scene late in the film where he sprays his father with elephant semen, straight from the source." RELATED: The Truth About 'Sex And The City's' Most Shocking Episode

Audiences Began To Change Their Tune

Ebert's credibility over the years came from his ability to accept that no matter how strongly we feel about a piece of art, it still remains to be subjective. He accepted that other generations may see a film through a completely different lens from his.

Tom Green Freddy Got Fingered
via: Complex

He left this door open for Freddy Got Fingered, albeit with a disclaimer: "The day may come when Freddy Got Fingered is seen as a milestone of neo-surrealism. The day may never come when it is seen as funny."

As time passed, Ebert's hesitant prediction slowly but certainly started to come to fruition. As the film transitioned from theaters to the home release on DVD, its fortunes began to change. For starters, it raked in an impressive $24.3 million from DVD sales alone.

Audiences also began to change their tune. Reviews started to shift from grim, to - at the very worst, mixed. What most people find merely loathsome attacks a way of life that's all grim resentment and games of retaliation. Exaggerated nonsense, but it wrangles dark and significant laughs," one review on Rotten Tomatoes read.

Another one posited that it was in fact these extremities in the film that made it a worthwhile watch. "This movie is completely ridiculous and over the top and a lot of the humor is gut-bustingly funny." NEXT: Here's Why Fans Think 'Sleepless In Seattle' Is Still Worth Watching