LogFAQs > #975716228

I still love the Hannibal Buress wasn't actually in "Tag" meme:

Are we sure Hannibal Buress was actually in "Tag"?

I watched "Tag". I liked it a lot. A couple of my friends recently told me their conspiracy theory that Hannibal Buress wasn't actually in "Tag". They sold me.
Here's the gist. They are completely convinced that the entire movie had been shot without Hannibal Buress. Their guess is that early studio reactions and test audience screenings were poor, because of lack of diversity and not enough humor - so they hired Hannibal Buress and shoehorned him into the movie after the fact using a mixture of greenscreen, standalone reaction shots, and a few reshoots featuring the entire cast.
In watching the movie, they couldn't help but notice that Hannibal often isn't in the mix with the rest of the cast or is off to the side in some shots almost like he's been digitally added. The movie frequently cuts away to him to give off-kilter one-liners seemingly tagged on after the fact. It almost seems like his character serves no real purpose to the plot as it mostly revolves around Jeremy Renner, Jake Johnson, Ed Helms and Jon Hamm.
Granted, Hannibal is probably the best part of the movie so if this mischief actually took place, it was worth it.
I've reached out to Hannibal for comment on Twitter and thus far have received no response.
TL;DR: Hannibal Buress isn't actually in "Tag"

https://www.reddit.com/r/movies/comments/97o6f8/are_we_sure_hannibal_buress_was_actually_in_tag/