« Michael Fleming Delivers The Mel Details | Main | Is It An Issue? »

July 26, 2005

Upcoming Weekend

So, here it comes... Stealth, Must Love Dogs, and Sky High...

Anyone planning on going to the movies?

Posted by poland at July 26, 2005 06:31 AM

Comments

Yes, yes, and yes. What? Am I supposed to avoid those films? After seeing the first ten minutes of Stealth; Im there. Dogs has Cusack. If I can set through America's Sweethearts in a theatre. This should not be that bad of an experience. Sky High takes me back to the fun of old school Kurt Russell Disney flicks. Plus, Dave Foley and Kevin McDonald, in the same film? THERE.

Posted by: Rory at July 26, 2005 07:24 AM

Yes, I'm totally there. They all look amazing. Hollywood should be proud of itself--3 original, amazing looking movies.

Posted by: Mr. Bloppy at July 26, 2005 07:25 AM

No

Posted by: Lota [TypeKey Profile Page] at July 26, 2005 07:29 AM

Sky High is actually pretty good. A sweet, pretty funny, tongue in cheek high school flick with an awesome cast.

Posted by: Wrecktum at July 26, 2005 07:33 AM

Diane Lane is sexy. If she was a closeted lesbian scientologist, I'd be happy to pretend we were married. Still won't go to her movie though.

Posted by: sky_capitan [TypeKey Profile Page] at July 26, 2005 07:36 AM

i might like to go to sky high but committed to a fest of thrillers etc

and

i just don't feel emotional prepared for Stealth or a rom com

Posted by: Lota [TypeKey Profile Page] at July 26, 2005 07:39 AM

Stealth, on a FX level on, has me excited. Easily one of the best first ten minutes sequences ever shown as an infomercial! Besides FX, Im always up for a Cusack movie. Especially where he can be charming and get the girl in the end. This film also has Diane Lane in it. Which has two charismatic leads that might make a weak premise. Transformer into a nice late July romcom.

Posted by: Rory at July 26, 2005 08:43 AM

Do people think these movies look lower-than-average for a typical Hollywood summer weekend? I think MLD will do well based on a lack of woman-appealing movies this summer.

Posted by: jeffmcm at July 26, 2005 09:04 AM

I said on another thread that Must Love Dogs will probably succeed for the exact same reason that Monster-in-Law succeeded in May and why a lot of rom-coms succeed. Lack of options.

While those polls that always seem to be mentioned on box office sites always say that women make up 50% of the box-office I think that a lot of those are of the drag-along type. So now there is actually a movie that they can get excited about.

Did that sound sexist? Cause it wasn't meant to be.

But, hell, I'll be seeing Must Love Dogs. Looks fun!

Sky High looks more like a DVD movie; however, it DOES have Shia LaBeouf so that's a very big positive.

The only thing I know about Stealth is that it's sort of like FireFox and people protested it while it was being made. Fun.

Posted by: KamikazeCamel at July 26, 2005 09:20 AM

Okay, so I confused Shia LaBeouf with some random called Michael Angarano. DVD it is...

Posted by: KamikazeCamel at July 26, 2005 09:21 AM

People protested Firefox or Stealth? And why?

Posted by: jeffmcm at July 26, 2005 09:24 AM

I think SKY HIGH is going to be a sleeper hit. It looks incredibly fun and there's not a lot of talk about it.

Posted by: Alan at July 26, 2005 12:37 PM

I will be going this weekend--to see Revenge of the Sith again, and The Island for the first time.

I had planned to see Stealth but probably will wait for the DVD. No to Sky High, or Must Love Dogs (even though I am the exact "target audience" for MLD--just doesn't interest me).

Posted by: nudel at July 26, 2005 01:01 PM

i'm guessing three bombs. stealth is doing it right though. selling biels hotness and foxx's comedy relief. it could actually surprise.

Posted by: bicycle bob [TypeKey Profile Page] at July 26, 2005 02:20 PM

I'm having a hard time getting excited about any of them. And I stayed away from this past weekend's new offerings too. (But it looks like I wasn't alone in that).I did see the Constant Gardner last night, and it was incredible. It felt like the first real Oscar contender of the year. Between that and movies like Broken Flowers and Pretty Persuation it gives me hope that August will fall in line with past years where the late summer yeilds a lot of great indie sleepers, like a Garden State or an American Splendor, for example.

Posted by: patrick at July 26, 2005 02:25 PM

Why is Cusack wasting his time on movies like these? Does he like the paycheck and the easy work that much?

Posted by: Bruce at July 26, 2005 02:27 PM

I'll be catching up with Last Days, and maybe checking out the Aristocrats... but if I fit in a new release, it will definitely be (my expectations aren't) Sky High. It looks kinda cute, if chintzy (and clearly Robert Rodriguez should've made it... oh wait, he pretty much already did, three or four times). Plus, it's got that Foley/McDonald/Bruce Campbell supporting cast, although how much do you want to bet you'll come out of it wishing it had been about a superpowered school faculty, not the kids? You know, like dropping the first season of Boston Public into a vat of radioactive material, from which emerges... SUPER FACULTY! OK, maybe that's just me, but it's not a great sign that I'm way more excited about the supporting cast than the central premise (as it seems to knock off Incredibles, Spy Kids, etc.).

Patrick, have you seen Me & You & Everyone We Know? It's not quite American Splendor or Garden State, but it's a fine little "summer indie."

Posted by: jesse [TypeKey Profile Page] at July 26, 2005 02:30 PM

I'll be using this weekend to catch up on things I missed. These three are a no go. I just don't have any interest in a kids movie, a romantic comedy about internet dating and what looks to be like a bad action, XXX type rehash.

Posted by: Terence D [TypeKey Profile Page] at July 26, 2005 02:39 PM

This looks like a video weekend. Where all three would be better enjoyed. I don't know if I could live with myself if I actually paid to see any of these movies.

Posted by: BluStealer [TypeKey Profile Page] at July 26, 2005 02:57 PM

I'll be checking out "Charlie", and maybe marching along with the penguins.

Posted by: VGM at July 26, 2005 03:14 PM

Yeah, I saw Me, You and Everyone a while ago and it was great. Some of the indies that are coming out right now played at the Minneapolis/St. Paul International Film Festival back in April, so it seems weird to finally see them in real theatres. Murderball is another great choice for those of you who haven't seen it yet.

Posted by: patrick at July 26, 2005 03:16 PM

I'm going to see Stealth. I'll admit Jessica Biel in a bikini sold me. I'm an easy piece of the target market.

Posted by: Josh at July 26, 2005 03:27 PM

No, I'm not a woman or a child.

Posted by: Cryptic Ned at July 26, 2005 03:58 PM

Will def go see Charlie - again, and MLD. Stealth seems to be promoting Biel the most out of the leads, so maybe the male auds will show up, and Sky High looks to be fun for families.

Posted by: Jerri at July 26, 2005 04:02 PM

I'm seeing Sky High tonight, for free. Can't imagine paying to see Stealth or Must Love Dogs.

Posted by: Stella's Boy [TypeKey Profile Page] at July 26, 2005 04:17 PM

No, no, and maybe. Stealth looks terrible and full of cliche's. Cusack does well in these types of films and I loke Diane Lane but just not into Romatic Comedies. And Sky High looks interesting for a Disney film.

Posted by: teambanzai [TypeKey Profile Page] at July 26, 2005 04:34 PM

Harry Knowles claims that Stealth is as bad as House of the Dead. Not that I always agree with Knowles, but yikes.

Posted by: Stella's Boy [TypeKey Profile Page] at July 26, 2005 04:35 PM

Could Stealth be the next XXX: State of the Union, in terms of box office?

Posted by: Stella's Boy [TypeKey Profile Page] at July 26, 2005 05:00 PM

You have to love Knowles' use of hyperbole. Of course he has made such statements that indicate he can understand Korean cinema without understanding the language or using subtitles. Such a truly whacky individual. Shouldnt someone mention the Blade 2 review?

Posted by: Rory at July 26, 2005 05:27 PM

He is a nutjob, and I disagree with him at least as often as I agree with him, but it's not hard for me to believe that Stealth is that bad.

Posted by: Stella's Boy [TypeKey Profile Page] at July 26, 2005 05:29 PM

Very true. Though as I have previously mentioned. The opening sequence in this film has some of the better FX I have seen in a film all year. Im curious to see if the People. Will go to see Stealth. If so, they might enjoy an short-circuit inspired action film more so than most.

Posted by: Rory at July 26, 2005 06:03 PM

harry has the worst taste in movies. if he doesn't get a free gift bag he'll bash a film.

Posted by: bicycle bob [TypeKey Profile Page] at July 26, 2005 06:27 PM

Poland wrote: So, here it comes... Stealth, Must Love Dogs, and Sky High...Anyone planning on going to the movies? >>>

Not to any of those. Stealth looks dreadful, and I would never see Sky High. I'm a fan of Cusack and Lane and so considered seeing Must Love Dogs, but a colleague of mine saw it two days ago and reported that it was dreadful. So, it'll be late catchup on Charlie.

Posted by: RP [TypeKey Profile Page] at July 26, 2005 06:32 PM

Why see Sky High when you can buy The Incredibles on dvd for under ten bucks?

Posted by: LesterFreed [TypeKey Profile Page] at July 26, 2005 06:34 PM

This is the movie Kurt Russell does? This is what we fans of Snake Plisken have to see now? It's Kurt Russell. He can't do Big Trouble in Little China 2 or something? Does he need the cash?

Cusack breaks my heart everytime he does one of these movies. Serendipity? Shoot me.

Posted by: Josh at July 26, 2005 06:41 PM

If Charlie falls off by 40%, and Wedding Crashers falls of only 30%, then Crashers will be the top film next weekend. And I don't think that is a stretch, everyone I've talked to has LOVED Wedding Crashers. The word of mouth is huge. Crashers could take the top spot next weekend if Stealth doesn't top $20 mill.

Stealth could be the next I, Robot or the next XXX:State of the Union. We'll have to see.

Posted by: Joe E at July 26, 2005 06:52 PM

SKy high sounds better after Dave's review. rather have Snake Plisken do one 'o these movies than another shitty Snake plisken sequel.

Posted by: Lota [TypeKey Profile Page] at July 26, 2005 07:24 PM

Any person that wants to see Snak do kiddie moves isn't a real fan. It is almost sacreligious. Then again in this room sacreligious is about 50% of you.

Posted by: Bruce at July 26, 2005 07:27 PM

What if it's actually a good movie?

Posted by: Stella's Boy [TypeKey Profile Page] at July 26, 2005 07:30 PM

What if The Devils Rejects wins an Oscar? A lot of if's in the world.

Posted by: Bruce at July 26, 2005 07:32 PM

Well Bruce I think very highly of actors who can do several genres well--Kurt Russell can do alot. It's no shame to be in a movie that the younger cinephiles can enjoy (Family genre), especially if it's good.

What's wrong with doing kids movies anyway? If Hollywood doesn't court the future how can they expect a child to choose a movie over a videogame? Beware of the future is about the best business advice for the movie industry becasue if they don;t keep the kids, they won't have them as adults in 10 years either. My youngest bro is a good example. Hwood lost him awhile back and he waits for DVD or does games.

Besides--kids movies are enormously profitable becasue there isn't much to choose from week to week. Look at Pixar, who have done many things right.

Posted by: Lota [TypeKey Profile Page] at July 26, 2005 07:36 PM

I'm an old school Kurt fan and I don't know why hes disappeared the past few years. He was on his way to becoming one of the best stars and then he did Soldier and the wheels fell off. This isn't his comeback movie. He starring with Kelly Preston. That makes this automatically subpar.

Posted by: Terence D [TypeKey Profile Page] at July 26, 2005 07:36 PM

By the way--with the gray list and all, people like Kurt are not going to get offered the prime-cut action roles. If a studio has a choice they'll get Will smith first, and I am sure many studly dudes are on the list ahead of Kurt.

IF Kurt's movie does really well (same for Preston) they'll get offered better stuff but not the best.

Posted by: Lota [TypeKey Profile Page] at July 26, 2005 07:40 PM

Kurt is not going to get any action roles. At least the prime ones. His chance was 5 yrs ago. Now he is a second banana. A bad guy. Which isn't bad. He was talking with The Punisher people about the role Travolta took.

Posted by: Josh at July 26, 2005 07:44 PM

Who is the audience for this movie? Kids under 12? I can't see it doing well.

Posted by: BluStealer [TypeKey Profile Page] at July 26, 2005 08:09 PM

Kurt Russell did get his start as a Disney kid. I guess its full circle now. Look at what being in a hit kids movie did for Antonio Banderas' career. He is scorching hot.

Posted by: Bruce at July 26, 2005 08:10 PM

I know I won't be seeing him in these kiddie films. Not my cup of tea. The only role in the past few years I recall him in was Vanilla Sky. That was a supporting role.

Posted by: LesterFreed [TypeKey Profile Page] at July 26, 2005 08:18 PM

I did like him in Dark Blue. That's the kind of role I like Kurt in. Dark. Violent. When he really gets to show his chops. But I can avoid the 3000 Miles to Gracelands. Otherwise you know he comes to play when he goes to work.

Posted by: Bruce at July 26, 2005 08:27 PM

I thought he was excellent in Dark Blue.

Posted by: Stella's Boy [TypeKey Profile Page] at July 26, 2005 08:36 PM

kurt was on a great strong of movies there. breakdown, executive decision, stargate, tombstone, backdraft, tango and cash, the hits just keep on coming. i wonder why he got lazy in the new decade. only role of note was miracle.

Posted by: bicycle bob [TypeKey Profile Page] at July 26, 2005 08:36 PM

i will see Stealth....have no expectations going into it...hope it's a fun ride...but i am preparing for a majorly stupid movie...sky high (from the director of Surving Christmas and Deuce Bigalow) looks retarded to me...while Diane Lane is hottter than hot and Cusack is always cool, rom-coms don't generally do it for me. there is nothing "good" coming out till Constant Gardner it appears...I hope 40 Year old Virgin is funny...

Posted by: cullen at July 26, 2005 08:42 PM

He is right. The director of Sky High has on his resume Surviving Christmas and Deuce Bigalow. This is going to be good?

Posted by: Bruce at July 26, 2005 08:43 PM

Every tv spot I see on the 40 yr old Virgin really makes me crack up. I am definately looking forward to that one.

Posted by: Terence D [TypeKey Profile Page] at July 26, 2005 08:53 PM

Steve Carell is going to the next comic star. Even bigger than Will Ferrel. You heard it here first. Give this gal some credit when it happens or when you tell your friends.

Posted by: BluStealer [TypeKey Profile Page] at July 26, 2005 09:04 PM

Never seen Surviving Christmas. From all I hear I should be thankful of that. I think Sky High is going to join the club.

Posted by: LesterFreed [TypeKey Profile Page] at July 26, 2005 09:22 PM

Carpenter and Russel really both want to make a Big Trouble in Little China 2. But that property is tied up in rights hell. So that is why it's not happening, it has nothing to do with a lack of desire on the creative peoples part.

Posted by: GdB at July 26, 2005 09:54 PM

I'd much rather see a movie like that than Sky High. Jack Burton needs to have a sequel.

Posted by: Mark at July 26, 2005 10:25 PM

We may be staring at the worst weekend during a Summer in a long, long, long time. Charlie and Crashers picked great times to come out.

Posted by: Angelus21 [TypeKey Profile Page] at July 26, 2005 10:54 PM

What I can't find is a quality studio product coming out this year in late July or August...someone seriously, correct me if I'm wrong. In summers past at least we had Collateral, Seabiscuit (late July), and heck, even Open Range was decent. Why did the studios front load everything in the first half of summer?

Posted by: Sandy at July 27, 2005 12:28 AM

Oh god, Surviving Christmas... I didn't believe that could be as bad as people said. I was wrong.

Posted by: PastePotPete [TypeKey Profile Page] at July 27, 2005 12:30 AM

It's pretty safe to say that the Surviving Christmas is one of the worst movies of the past 5 years. And that director needs to repent for his sins.

Posted by: joefitz84 [TypeKey Profile Page] at July 27, 2005 01:37 AM

Just got back from seeing Sky High. Poland is right. I can't believe how much I enjoyed it. Not as good as The Incredibles, and definitely not perfect, but overall it's pretty damn enjoyable. There are a lot of clever, amusing moments and I laughed quite a bit. Gets very predictable and routine at the end, but for the most part it's fun.

Posted by: Stella's Boy [TypeKey Profile Page] at July 27, 2005 04:10 AM

You can tell me SKy High is going to win awards and I still ain't seeing it.

Posted by: Sanchez at July 27, 2005 04:13 AM

Good for you. I might have said the same thing if I hadn't seen it, but I'm glad I did.

Posted by: Stella's Boy [TypeKey Profile Page] at July 27, 2005 04:14 AM

because Bruce Campbell is in Sky High, I'll see it.

Posted by: Lota [TypeKey Profile Page] at July 27, 2005 04:35 AM

Could they have picked a better title for Sky High?
One that doesn't sound like it could be mistaken for a movie about illicit drug use? I really think they could have come up with something better.

I'm waiting for some organization to say the title promotes drug use to chilcren and teens, and that it's part of a hideous plot for liberal hollywood to corrupt America's youth.

Posted by: sky_capitan [TypeKey Profile Page] at July 27, 2005 05:58 AM

I'll be seeing Charlie, and maybe Batman again.

Warner Bros. has me by the ***z this summer.

Posted by: Arc at July 27, 2005 06:52 AM

Why compare The Incredibles to Sky High? It just seems like a faulty start to a comparison.

Posted by: Rory at July 27, 2005 08:38 AM

LesterFreed it's perfectly fine for you to not want to see kids movies but maybe (and it's a wacky thought) Kurt Russell wanted to make this movie. Maybe he thought he just wanted to make a fun superhero movie that kids could see?

JUST A HUNCH

And I COULD NOT let this one slide:

"I don't know if I could live with myself if I actually paid to see any of these movies."

Giving all new life to the term "hyperbole" there blustealer. So if you ever ended up giving any money to see any of these three movies (2 of which look perfectly servicable for their genre) you would grab a gun and shoot yourself? Or maybe poisoning yourself is the way to go? Hmmm...

"Why did the studios front load everything in the first half of summer?"

The Island.

And to paraphrase somebody on the IMDb forums, what would you prefer Sky High to be called? Kid goes to a superhero school in the sky and then must save the planet from the evil villain?

Or how about Super School? School of Superheros? School in the Sky?

Anybody who has seen a trailer, an advert, a poster, anything for Sky High knows it is not a stoner movie.

and on one last note, I suppose Steve Carrol is funny to people who find the rest of those guys funny, but I don't see it. Just like Will and Ben and for the most part Vince (although he IS likable I didn't think he "saved" Mr & Mrs Smith or anything like that)

Posted by: KamikazeCamel at July 27, 2005 02:03 PM

lets be honest. kurt russel did this movie for the easy paycheck. nothing more.

Posted by: bicycle bob [TypeKey Profile Page] at July 27, 2005 02:47 PM

You can't compare this movie to The Incredibles. No matter how good some people say this really is.

Posted by: BluStealer [TypeKey Profile Page] at July 27, 2005 03:04 PM

First of all, I said it wasn't as good as The Incredibles. Got that everyone. Not as good as The Incredibles. And if you haven't seen it, then how in the hell do you know how good it is?

Posted by: Stella's Boy [TypeKey Profile Page] at July 27, 2005 03:10 PM

It's really obvious isn't it? It's like saying that Casino is The Godfather. While Casino may be good its not in the league of The Godfather.

Posted by: BluStealer [TypeKey Profile Page] at July 27, 2005 03:18 PM

I can't see this movie being even a modest hit. The advertising for it has been god awful early on. I don't think many people even know its coming out.

Now I bet dollars to donuts that Stealth falls on its face.

Posted by: Bruce at July 27, 2005 03:21 PM

I agree Bruce. This just smells like it will be a really slow weekend with low numbers for the new releases.

Posted by: Stella's Boy [TypeKey Profile Page] at July 27, 2005 03:23 PM

Good news for Charlies and Wedding Crashers and even Fantastic Four with the way that has been holding up.

Posted by: Bruce at July 27, 2005 03:26 PM

charlie keeps on chugging along. turning into a pretty big hit. #1 three weeks in a row during the prime summer season its impressive.

Posted by: bicycle bob [TypeKey Profile Page] at July 27, 2005 03:44 PM

Thanks Kamikaze Camel for giving me permission to see whatever movie I want to see with my money. Thank the Lord for your permission. Now I can avoid this movie and not feel bad about it.

Posted by: LesterFreed [TypeKey Profile Page] at July 27, 2005 03:56 PM

"Stealth" is pro-war propaganda that Columbia is pushing hard. "Sky High" is another "Bad News Bears" -- very little promotion until a few days before release.

I'd love to see "Happy Endings" but Lions Gate won't expand it beyond the arthouse ghetto. The megaplexes may need that pic in August given the product coming out.

Also, Fox Searchlight was to have opened Russian thriller "Night Watch" this week in NYC but has delayed it indefinitely (due to the London bombings?)

Posted by: Chucky in Jersey at July 28, 2005 12:53 AM

Pro War propoganda? How is fantasy land this time of year? Hot? Humid?

Posted by: Mark at July 28, 2005 01:00 AM

Stella's Boy is right: "Sky High" is delightful. The ads don't do it justice. The writing is genuinely clever. And it's very easy to see why Kurt Russell wanted to play the super-heroic father: He gives a sly, self-mocking performance that probably demanded a lot more skill and thought than is readily apparent, and he makes it look almost too easy.

Russell, I think, belongs in a very select group of actors in a specific age group -- along with Dennis Quaid and Jeff Bridges. Real grown-ups. Guys we take for granted, dependable professionals who rarely get their proper props. Every few years, they do something absolutely amazing -- like, Bridges with "Fearless," Quaid with "The Rookie" or "Flesh and Bone," and Russell with "Miracle" -- to remind you just how great they really are.

Posted by: Joe Leydon [TypeKey Profile Page] at July 28, 2005 01:33 AM

Well then there;s something(SKY HIGH) to look forward to. I just got out of a screening of LAST DAYS so I have to try to banish the notion that I want cut my numbed self to make sure I am still alive. AHHHHHH! Well the movie wasn't that bad, but to some people I suppose it was as a number of people got up and left.

No wonder Saint Lota never used drugs. I wished death upon every character in that movie(LAST DAYS).

Sure was documentary like though. There will be an extremely narrow audience for this. It would have been better made 6-7 years ago.

Posted by: Lota [TypeKey Profile Page] at July 28, 2005 03:28 AM

Mark and Chucky, have either of you actually seen Stealth?
I haven't either, but I am open to the possibility that, like no small number of movies, it's pro-war.

Posted by: jeffmcm at July 28, 2005 06:06 AM

Screw these, I'm seeing HUSTLE & FLOW on Friday.

Posted by: Goulet at July 28, 2005 06:15 AM

Stealth is really bad...but it's worth seeing on the big screen just to get the full effect of all that money being thrown away. (It's a shame that Cohen didn't rehire the puppeteer from Team America for this thematic sequel.)

Posted by: EDouglas [TypeKey Profile Page] at July 28, 2005 12:59 PM

Stealth seems openly pro-war. The fact that the main human characters are against a technological development that could save thousands of lives purely because they ENJOY flying around seems pretty ludicrous. I wouldn't call it propaganda though.

But, i dunno. I'd have to see the movie first and I have no intention of doing so until DVD.

Can we stop talking about OLD GRIZZLY MALES not getting enough movie roles? How about the women? Sigourney Weaver? Joan Cusack? Goldie Hawn? ELLEN BURSTYN? et cetera, et cetera...

Posted by: KamikazeCamel at July 28, 2005 03:15 PM

Ebert gave Stealth 1.5

eep.

Posted by: KamikazeCamel at July 28, 2005 03:20 PM

Of the three new (wide) releases this week, Sky High is the pick of the crop -- by a long shot.

What a pleasant little surprise THIS was. I fully expected it to be Thunderbirds-ish. Flick had me chuckling throughout. And every single grown-up in the movie gets laughs. Even Lynda Carter!

Posted by: Scott Weinberg at July 28, 2005 11:29 PM

Has anyone noticed the rating for "Sky High" on Rotten Tomatoes? Like, 81 freakin' percent POSITIVE? And even the NY Times has nice things to say about it? Wonder if it could wind up as a surprise No. 1 for the weekend?

Posted by: Joe Leydon [TypeKey Profile Page] at July 29, 2005 03:35 AM

Rog was being too kind... maybe he gave half a star to each cheek and another half for the boobs.

Posted by: David Poland [TypeKey Profile Page] at July 29, 2005 06:45 AM

Joe, that's probably because the film is actually good but people here can't seem to fathom the thought that a movie predominantly aimed at kids is actually good. It could get anywhere from $10mil open to Spy Kids like numbers if parents see the reviews.

I have no idea what the advertising has been like because we won't be getting it til September (just like Charlie)

damn school holidays. Why do they have to be in September?

Posted by: KamikazeCamel at July 29, 2005 09:07 AM

Sky High is cute, but anyone making it seem like the next Spider-Man should get their head examined. It's pretty much kid-friendly fluff with a plot taken right from Saved by the Bell and the effects are about as bad as Shark Boy and Lava Girl. The only reason it's not as painful is that it doesn't have George Lopez making bad puns. The only reason it's getting positive reviews is that it's not as bad as it could have been. It's not good..it's passable.

(I'm willing to bet that any of the critics who gave it a Fresh review were offered the chance to see the movie again for free..without kids...they'd pass)

Posted by: EDouglas [TypeKey Profile Page] at July 29, 2005 12:27 PM

I expected Sky High to be passable at best, and was shocked to see how enjoyable it really is. I saw it without kids the first time, and I'd see it again if the opportunity presented itself. It's a good time.

Posted by: Stella's Boy [TypeKey Profile Page] at July 29, 2005 03:47 PM

Wedding Crashers was number one on Friday with $6 million. Charlie made $5.2 million. Stealth made $5 million, Sky High $4.8 million and Must Love Dogs $4.4 million.

Posted by: Stella's Boy [TypeKey Profile Page] at July 30, 2005 05:44 PM

Based on those numbers that Stella just posted, it's possible (I won't say "likely") for "Sky High" to wind up as #1 for the weekend. Remember how "Madagascar" gained enormous traction over the course of its opening weekend? Family films often do much better on Saturdays and even sometimes Sundays than Fridays.

Posted by: Chester at July 30, 2005 07:38 PM

Post a comment

Thanks for signing in, . Now you can comment. (sign out)

(If you haven't left a comment here before, you may need to be approved by the site owner before your comment will appear. Until then, it won't appear on the entry. Thanks for waiting.)


Remember me?