« May 2006 | Main | July 2006 »
June 30, 2006
Very Amusing
So I'm reading the Guardian story on Bryan Singer and there is a quote from "some online bloggers" who felt the 1-sheet read as gay and the quote seemed awfully familiar.
"Some online bloggers, then still to see the film, were not convinced: "Gay director, gay outfit, gay Superman, and now GAY POSTER!" wrote one. "What teenage boy wants to see the movie attached to this poster?" jeered another."
One Google later, I had the answer... "TheManWho," who ironically was telling me just a day ago how out of touch I was with the mainstream, provided both quotes in one comment in the "Must Be A Full Moon" entry on May 17, 2006 01:21 AM
The full quote is, "It's an incredibly homoerotic subtext. What are WB thinking with this film? Folks have been going on about the heavy gay overtunes from the stills of this film for MONTHS now. True--it might only be the small internet audience. Nevertheless, this only heightens the whole "Gay director, gay outfit, gay Superman, and now GAY POSTER!" cheer from all over the net. Poland pretty much nailed it. What teenage boy wants to see the movie attached to this poster?"
I want to add, again, that the "gay Superman" issue in this blog and in my writing was never about the idea that Superman would be a gay character. It was always about the advertising and the lack of edge, which as I keep reminding people, I felt WB turned the corner on - as regarded appealing to young men - a few weeks ago.
Posted by poland at 10:50 PM | Comments (19)
Cirque du So What
I’ve been avoiding – subconsciously, for the most part – writing about Love, the new Beatles Cirque du Soleil show at The Mirage… because I hated it. And the friend who came to the show with me… hated it.
It’s late on Friday and I don’t feel inspired about writing this right now, but I’ll offer a little bit.
As soon as I committed to attending CineVegas, I got online to grab the best tickets possible to see Love while I would be in Vegas. I am a big Beatles fan. I have enjoyed almost every movie about the Fab Four. Along with Sinatra, Randy Newman, and Elvis Costello, Fatboy Slim, and Ella Fitzgerald, the Beatles are a dominant presence on my iPod. I have loved some of the Cirque shows… others not so much. But the higher the bar, the higher they seem to rise. So I was very excited.
The ticket takers all sport fake British accents in a sweet, play-along way. There is a big Beatles store next to the theater. The theater is spacious, even if the seats are a little tight.
The show starts…
It opens with four curtains separating the sections of the theater. These gray sheets become screens for footage of the band. Very, very clever. There is on-stage flopping about as the show establishes four clowns, who seem for a moment to represent the four band members. What are they doing? Look… a VW Beatle. Ha ha.
When the Shea Stadium concert really kicks off the music with a bang, it is electric! Amazing moment.
But then we are back to a mish-mosh of a soundtrack, created by George Martin, and more stuff that is interesting, but has no clear voice. Thing is, it’s not really A Cirque du Soleil show. It’s a modern dance show with a few Cirque elements and Beatles music that doesn’t run its full course with just a couple of exceptions.
The performers are spectacular, even if I couldn’t help but to laugh at my friend’s comment that this was the Cirque du Soleil for performers who were not good enough to be in the other, more demanding shows. And there are a half dozen moments that, like a marketing campaign for a movie that just misses the mark, offer the possibility of what this show could have been. It is not as groovy in those moments. But it is infinitely more fun and exciting.
The great moments include skaters who do amazing things with four ramps and a wild trampoline extravaganza and a group of four women who dance on a strings floating from the ceiling with perfect elegance and grace. But even in these cases, the showrunners seem overeager to fill all the space and crowd the stage with distractions that add nothing.
A major problem here is also that, unlike any other Cirque show, the musical beat is established and the performers have to adjust. And frankly, they just can’t do it most of the time. You can dance to a beat, but flying in the air and bouncing off a trampoline to a steady beat appears impossible. It’s exciting when the performers do hit the rhythm, but when they miss just seconds later, it’s frustrating
I read an interview with the show’s director that said they didn’t want to just choreograph Cirque gags to Beatles songs… “a Mamma Mia style show,” he scoffed. But by trying for something greater, they ended up with something distinctly inferior. The aspiration is great and it is a feast for the eyes… but it never quite connects with the heart or mind in the way it should have.
There will be a Gary Dretzka piece on MCN in the next week with more info on the show and Gary has already indicated that he liked it a lot more than me. But for my $218 for 2 tickets… frustrating. It’ll play for a while based on the massive love of The Beatles in the world. But I don’t foresee this being the kind of show people remember like they do Ka or O.
Posted by poland at 05:04 PM | Comments (4)
Saw III, Hand & Tooth
The US Saw III poster was on MCN (amongst many other places) today... but this one came in from Brazil's Cinema em Cena (for Braziilan release, far from the MPAA) this afternoon...
Posted by poland at 03:50 PM | Comments (16)
Superman v Thursday
Looks like Superman Returns did around $11.4 million on Thursday.
But here’s the rub. One box office service is reporting it already as 46% off of the Wednesday opening. But of course, the Wednesday opening was a Tuesday/Wednesday opening. So depending on what the Tuesday numbers actually were – no one has broken them out – the drop is probably not as severe as it seems.
The movie that SR was compared to yesterday was War of the Worlds, which dropped just 32% in its second day. For those on the Batman Begins tip, that film was off 40% on Thursday. Men In Black II was off just 11%.
I guess the real point here is that none of these films cracked $250 million domestic. Worldwide, WotW did best with $591 million, MiBII did $441 million and BB did $371 million.
But SR faces another obstacle internationally. The World Cup has pushed back their start in other territories, so it is now right on top of Pirates of the Caribbean: Dead Man’s Chest (first film $654m ww).
The history of superhero movies is not so great in the rest of the world, but those kinds of stats are always true until they change. The CG era changes the dynamic and Superman is not a from-the-ground-up sell overseas. But we’ll see.
Posted by poland at 10:52 AM | Comments (66)
June 29, 2006
Do YOU Miss The American Way?
MSNBC's Erik Lundegaard explains away the change of "Truth Justice & The American Way" to "Truth, Justice, And All That Stuff" in Superman Returns in the NYTimes Op-Ed Section.
And his point is well taken... to a point...
My feeling on it is still that the replacement of "the American way" with "and all that stuff" is much more of a concious choice than he wants to believe... and I don't have to be a right winger to think that. Had Singer & Harris & Dougherty just left it at "Truth & Justice," it wouldn't have bothered me, for many of the good reasons Erik brings up. But the glib "and all that stuff" reads to me like either an evasion for international sales reasons or a slap... but not as a new idea of how to approach the basics of Superman.
But i may be alone... what do you think?
Posted by poland at 10:42 PM | Comments (33)
Striking Colors
I don't know that I have ever seen a one-sheet with this depth of color. Somehow, Sony seems to have gotten a real sense of texture in these one-sheets, even when wall-sized. The image idea is ok, but the color really hit me...
Posted by poland at 03:40 PM | Comments (15)
20 Weeks 12
"Mr. Anti-Slump 2006 is here to tell you that the first seven weeks of this summer is the worst of the last five years."
and
"Next summer, May starts with Spider-Man 3, Shrek 3 two weeks later, and Pirates 3 a week after that. Are you scared of monsters?
The parade of sequels to $100 million hits continue in June with Ocean's Thirteen (a fourth third), Fantastic Four Two, and Evan "Not Bruce" Almighty.
Transformers shoots for July 4 while Harry Potter V returns to summer for the second time and The Simpsons hit the big screen.
But August makes July look a little slow with Bourne 3, AVP2 and Rush Hour 3 all arriving, along with Oscar nominee Amy Adams playing purebred to the Underdog.:
Holy Moley!
Posted by poland at 01:10 PM | Comments (38)
June 28, 2006
Roy Batty's Shout Out To Jerry Falwell
Jerry Falwell's June 25 Sermon offered this key passage:
"You know, you almost got to be a homosexual to be recognized in the entertainment industry anymore. Ellen [Degeneres], and all the rest. I love them, pray for their souls, but they're immoral. And the Hollywood scene -- five and eight and 10 marriages -- not something to be emulated."
I guess we need a new chant... "We Great... We Straight... Get Used To It!!!!"
Posted by poland at 04:33 PM | Comments (13)
The Basis For Superman 4.0:Superfamily United?
From Superdickery.com
Posted by poland at 12:12 PM | Comments (9)
All CG... Even The Eyes... Amazing...
Posted by poland at 01:24 AM | Comments (12)
The Super Thread
I figure we might as well have a place for people to come and spew as they see Superman Returns over the next week or so.
It's not a firm rule, but I think it best that we set this as a SPOILER area... so if you don't want to know, don't look at comments. And I think it best that opinions - questions are ok - be left to people who have actually seen the film, as opposed to fighting over assumptions.
That said... have at it.
Posted by poland at 12:36 AM | Comments (135)
June 27, 2006
Spider-Man Three-ser
Whaddya Think?
Posted by poland at 12:19 PM | Comments (54)
Unburying Hot Chicks
This already ran on MCN as part of my weekend review of the Los Angeles Film Fest, but the other stuff I covered seems to be getting a lot of attention and this doesn't. It's not the best film at the fest, but it is a wonderful project and Chick Tracts (I just bought the entire current collection for under 20 bucks and am looking forward to it arriving on my doorstep) are a great part of Americana. So....
Luke Y Thompson, New Times' tallest, most tattooed, most multi-color haired critic and he told me about the film he was most anticipating on the entire schedule… Hot Chicks.
Somehow, as I was jamming through the online catalog for the festival, I just went right past Hot Chicks. But had I been paying closer attention, I would have been almost as enthusiastic as Luke. The screening was of 9 short films, each based on one of what are known as Chick Tracts. They are those little cartoon booklets that you have probably had handed to you on the streets of some part of town where souls are in need of saving. These mini-comics were all written and drawn by Jack T. Chick. According to his website, over 500 million of these things have been sold to groups and distributed across the globe. 500 million!
My memory is of getting these from Jews For Jesus followers. Others remember other religious groups handing them out. The clever thing is, they are so cheap to purchase (15 cents) that they make an impressive handout. And they are all stories of salvation that end with an admonition to accept Jesus into your life.
So I settled into my seat at The Crest to see the films and quickly found out that the folks who made the films were all friends and had all spurred each other on to make these films over the last 5 or 6 years. Each film has a distinctly different style, including two of the films that were made by the same team. One of these films by Rodney & Syd recreated the Chick Tract "Titanic" using the Jim Cameron film, Titanic. Their second film, based on the tract, Somebody Goofed, was one of my favorite of the nine. They essentially take the drawn images in the Chick Tract and bring them to life in very clever animation.
The films that stuck closest to the tracts were probably my favorites. All of the films adhered to the idea that Chick's words would be the script and that the tracts would serve, to some degree, as storyboards. But styles varied widely. What was fascinating was how each filmmaker (many are first time filmmakers) decided to do their interpretation. For instance, the first film, Bewitched? (by Tim Kirk - Chick Tract), used puppets to tell its story of how television infects the culture. One of the films, Wounded Children (by Todd Hughes - Chick Tract), is based on a tract that has been taken off the market because the morays around child abuse have changed. In that film, the victimized child is played by a mannequin while everyone around him is played by adults. Angels? (by Tommy! - Chick Tract), the story of a rock-n-roll dream attained and then destroying the dreamers, is done in a style best described as post-modern Super 8 by way of Kenneth Anger.
Cleo (by Bryce Ingman - Chick Tract) is a story about a lost dog who narrowly escapes a dog pound needle and somehow, amazingly, its owners see this as God's intervention and it moves them to being born again. Doom Town (by P. David Ebersole - Chick Tract) tells the story of Sodom & Gomorrah. And La Princesita (by Jamie Tolbert Franklin - Chick Tract) tells the story of a sick young girl who desperately wants to go trick-or-treating on Halloween and does and has her soul saved when one of the neighbors drops a Chick Tract into her candy bag.
My favorite of the films, probably because it is most precisely a Chick Tract come to life, was Party Girl, directed by Anonymous. Why anonymous? Because there is some fear that Jack Chick, who is still alive at 82, might get all litigious on their collective asses.
The filmmaker actually gave me permission - after some pleasant harassment - to publish her name. But after seeing how often the Chick Publications sends out cease and desists, I have decided to keep it to myself. She is an actress, remarkably beautiful, very sharp, surprisingly unflinching about the truth, terribly well married and, by amazing coincidence, did a guest spot on a Sunday night primetime TV show that I Tivo'd.
(In another odd showbiz small world coincidence, a guy playing in an old friend's charity poker tourney on Sunday was pitching a local stage show starring this woman's husband. And almost more oddly, I had dinner with this woman's ex-husband just a week ago - and I had never before met this woman or had any social conversation with this man until these two meetings. High school with money indeed!)
I don't know if she has a future as a director based on this short, satirical film but, like I said before… concept is everything on these and, to me, she got the inherent joke of Chick Tracts best of all, so much so that the film could really be seen as a positive and believing take on a Chick Tract if your beliefs went that way.
The bottom line is, this group has no interest in distributing their films for any revenue. (Fact is, very few of them could get clearances on their pre-recorded music or images from other media.) They aren't even posting their films to their website. They screened at LAFF and will show again at Outfest at midnight on July 8. From there, who knows.
Anyway… I am going to go out on a limb and post a short clip from Anonymous' film, Party Girl. It is four pieces from her work, slapped together shoddily via QT Pro. But it'll give you some idea… and it makes me smile like crazy. Here is the 3mg QT file…
Posted by poland at 10:33 AM | Comments (3)
June 26, 2006
Scientology Orientation Videos
I don't want to step on one of MCN's bloggers' feet, but Justine "Film Fatale" Elias sent me a link to one of series of Scientology recruitment videos posted on YouTube and I worry that - since they appear to be shot on video at a recruitment center - that they will be pulled off YouTube soon.
Justine actually sent them wondering if they were real. But it looks like a video camera job. And though there are a few things that really seem wacky, it would be awfully elaborate for a hoax with very little payoff.
I do not consider these pirated, in that the material is openingly available at no cost to everyone and there is no economic interest damaged by their posting. I consider them journalistic record. But, I don't know that You Tube's lawyers wil see it that way when they get the cease and desist. And YouTube is designed so we cannot download and keep any of this, so time may beof teh essense if you are interested. I know that I am.
Anyway, here is the link to the poster's homepage. Scientology Orientation Video is all he has posted, 9 of what seems ot be a series of 10.
I'll be interested in what people think of it.
Posted by poland at 12:15 PM | Comments (22)
June 25, 2006
Arrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrr
Like Superman Returns, Pirates 2 is too long by about 30 minutes. And the script tends to bog down every time the story gets a bit complex for its own good.
Oh yes… And Pirates of the Caribbean: Dead Man's Chest is easily the best studio confection of the year ... kicking ass, taking names, and reminding us all of the joy that going to a big summer movie is supposed to inspire in us.
Posted by poland at 11:01 PM | Comments (53)
The Weekend Box Office
Sunday
Looking at Adam Sandler history, the opening of Click tells us… nothing.
Well, it tells us that not much has changed for him. This is about his range. The question is, does this mean $120 million, $150 million or $180 million… and that is going to be up to word of mouth.
The biggest problem for Click is going to be The Devil Wears Prada. If a guy wants to get laid on his date in the next few weeks, he’ll be enthusiastically going to Prada with the girl. If a girl wants to get laid on her date, she’ll be going to Click with the guy. If the girl wants to get impregnated by the guy and then have him leave for five years (the good part… she won’t age), they’ll go to Superman Returns.
Rogue seems to have found their glass ceiling for urban movie at around $10 million. (Last year’s Unleashed was a little over… Waist Deep a little under.) I would guess that the real studio target for these films starts at $30 million domestic, so I wonder if they will keep swinging for that elusive, low-end fence.
Cars passed Over The Hedge this weekend and will pass Ice Age: The Meltdown soon enough. Of course, perception vs reality reigns. Cars will be perceived as disappointing at something right around $200 million and Ice Age 2 is a smash, “industry saving” hit. Go figure.
The Da Vinci Code is catching up with X3 in weekend numbers, but the $20 million of distance is probably too much to make up at these box office levels. But they will end up tight.
=====================
3-Day Estimates | Weekend | % Change | Cume
Click | 39.7 | - | 37.7
Cars | 22.9 | -32% | 156.2
Nacho Libre | 11.9 | -58% | 52.9
Waist Deep | 9.2 | - | 9.2
Fast & Furious: Tokyo Drift | 9.1 | -62% | 42.5
The Lake House | 8.3 | -39% | 29.3
The Break-Up | 6.1 | -38% | 103.7
Garfield 2 | 4.8 | -34% | 16.1
X-Men: Last Stand | 4.5 | -43% | 224.1
The Da Vinci Code | 3.9 | -25% | 205.5
Saturday
Sorry about the delay posting this entry. By the time you read this, Sunday estimates may have replaced the Friday estimates. In any case….
As Adam Sandler movies go, Click’s start was pretty average. It isn’t The Longest Yard, but that film was on Memorial Day Weekend. It will probably end up being in 50 First Dates/Anger Management territory. The question will be how strong the film plays on date night Saturday.
The lack of much else new bodes well for the rest of last weekend’s Top Ten. Nacho Libre took a hit, but it’s still looking at more than $60 million, which is a win for Paramount on that film. Cars’ 28% drop is decent for the one kids film in the market. The Da Vinci Code seems to be stabilizing at a relatively low number, but could ride that for a while for an extra ten or fifteen million.
Zzzzzzz….
Friday Estimates by Klady
Movie | Fri Gross| % Chg | Total
Click | 14.6 | 3749 | - | 14.6
Cars | 6.7 | 3949 | -28% | 148.0
Nacho Libre | 4.0 | 3083 | -60% | 44.5
Waist Deep | 3.3 | 1004 | - | 3.3
Fast/Furious: Tokyo Drift | 3.2 | 3030 | -67% | 36.5
The Lake House | 3.0 | 2645 | -41% | 24.0
The Break-Up | 1.9 | 3141 | -44% | 99.6
Garfield 2 | 1.5 | 2946 | -41% | 12.7
X-Men: Last Stand | 1.4 | 2812 | -37% | 221.1
The Da Vinci Code | 1.1 | 2413 | -21% | 202.7
Also Debuting
Road to Guantanamo | .018 | 15 | - | .018
Posted by poland at 12:43 AM | Comments (27)
June 23, 2006
The Future Of Sony
When Sony put the Jim Mangold western, 3:10 to Yuma, into turnaround with Russell Crowe attached, I started to wonder what was really going on over there. My first instinct was to make this part of the story about studios rebelling against first dollar gross players, which is what was sold to Variety and which is the latest hot story to sell to guileless veteran reporters. But then, I decided to look at the Sony schedule for 2007, which is where Yuma would have landed, likely in the summer…
The Messengers – horror – Pang Bros - An ominous darkness invades a seemingly serene sunflower farm in North Dakota, and the Solomon family is torn apart by suspicion, mayhem and murder. 1-19-07
Catch & Release - dramedy – Susannah Grant/Jennifer Garner - A woman struggles to accept the death of her husband and the secrets he kept from her as she rebuilds her life. 1-26-07
Ghost Rider – 2-16-07
Premonition – thriller - Sandra Bullock - A housewife is shocked when her husband dies in a car crash and reappears the next day. She realizes it was a premonition and tries to avoid the tragedy. 3-9-07
Perfect Stranger – thriller – Berry/Willis - As she goes undercover to crack the case of her friend's murder, a woman (Berry) gets caught up in the world of obsessive love online. 3-23-07
Spider-Man 3 – 5/4/07
Surf’s Up – 6/8/07 – animation - A behind-the-scenes look at the annual Penguin World Surfing Championship, and its newest participant, up-and-comer Cody Maverick.
Next – action/thriller – Cage/Julianne Moore/Lee Tamahori - A man who can see into his own future has to avoid capture by a government organization and win the love of a woman who will be the mother of his child. 9-28-07
The Waterhorse – family - A lonely boy discovers a mysterious egg that hatches a sea creature of Scottish legend. – 12/7/07
Hmmm….
Looks like Sony is getting out of the movie business.
Well, that comment depends a lot on the tone of voice used when saying it – which you can’t hear when reading – so allow me to re-state.
Looks like Sony is not interested in making any movies that are not Kids, Killers, or Comics. Right now, they have one greenlit movie on the 2007 schedule that isn’t in those categories and it is a chick flick from Amy Pascal’s newly shrunken list of women she will fund (now made up of Ms. Grant, Ms. Meyers, and perhaps Ms. Ephron, if push comes to shove).
And if I had to take a flyer, I would say that 3:10 To Yuma is a movie for adults, thrilling but not a thriller, and not perceived as an Oscar movie. (One also has to wonder whether if Fox had spent the money and gotten Walk The Line its Oscar nod, if this film would have been dumped anyway.) The budget is moderate and with Russell Crowe on board, even if it did exactly Cinderella Man business (and I think you could count on this film doing better overseas), it would be a profitable effort.
It is true that 3:10 To Yuma is pretty much exactly what studios aren’t making these days. A drama with a “middle” budget. It’s almost guaranteed to make money if it’s not a car wreck, but it is unlikely to make a lot of money. So studios are making two horror movies for that money. For $20 million, it’s a Tri-Star or Focus or Searchlight movie. At $60 million, it has to be big studio (unless, like Babel, the big studio hands it off to the indie arm).
With due respect to Sony, who is left in this part of the business? Well, if Fox is thrilled with their Crowe/Ridley romantic comedy, they could jump on (and force Mangold/Konrad to cut $10 million off the budget). This could be a DreamWorks project… if DW is going to go in that Staceyesque direction. Universal is working on being in business with Crowe in American Gangster, so the tenor of that negotiation could lead to a home for Yuma. WB might make it is Mangold dumped Crowe for Sandra Bullock (hardy har har), but otherwise, no. And after that… there is literally no company in town that could afford it.
Maybe if he changed the title to Take The 3:10 To Yuma and had Paris Hilton do a single changing the lyrics to Last Train To Clarksville… hmmmm….
Posted by poland at 12:39 PM | Comments (66)
June 22, 2006
Snakes Countdown
New Line put out the SoaP Fan Kit today...
Posted by poland at 04:47 PM | Comments (25)
Ozon In L.A.
François Ozon's brilliant film, Time To Leave is playing the L.A. Film Festival on Friday night at 7p before being released nationally by Strand.
This is the kind of film critics say they want and then tend to shy away from, telling the story of a young man who has to try to face his unexpectedly imminent death.
Ozon remains one of the most fascinating directors to watch in the world. Best known here from Swimming Pool and Eight Women, he maintains a Soderberghesque one-film-a-year pace and just keeps getting better.
We had a chance to talk about his next film, Angel, his first film in English, shot in England with a bigger budget than he's ever before worked with. "It was a weight on me," he offered, "We had to finish in a day here, two days there. The money took away some of the spontaneity." (Time To Leave was shot for under $1 million.) The film is in post now and will be ready in 2007, exact launch time unknown. "I'll see how things go."
The movie stars Romola Garai, best known for Dirty Dancing: Havana Nights, but also a co-star in Woody Allen’s Scoop, in the title role. Ozon regular Charlotte Rampling turns up in a small role, with Sam Neill, Lucy Russell and up-n-coming Michael Fassbender (300, Hex) in support.
Ozon really has no idea what’s next. He waits until he finishes one film before considering his next step. “I am a different person, I hope, than when I was making this film. Different things interest me.”
And your audience.
Posted by poland at 04:08 PM | Comments (7)
Toronto Moves Into The Future
This last January, Sundance finally took the step of reconfirming festival regulars rather than forcing us to fill out a full application every year.
MPRM seems to have moved towards this idea this year as well as the Los Angeles Film Festival, which launched tonight with a screening of The Devil Wears Prada on Meryl Streep’s birthday.
Yesterday, an e-mail Toronto International Film Festival offered online re-accreditation for the first time. Make any changes… add any missing info… change photos, or not… click a button… done.
I am particularly pleased because about the only use for a fax machine that I still have is festival applications and submitting coverage from film festivals.
I know this may seem like a meaningless issue to some of you, but for journalists, it is one less aggravation to deal with and it makes festivals feel more like a family you have a reunion with each year and not a faceless other that doesn't even acknowlege how much each of us invests in them.
Posted by poland at 01:35 PM | Comments (2)
The Most Recent 10 Superman Returns E-Mails
Mr. Poland,
It's wildly amusing to your review of this film alongside the raves from reviewers with some clout and significance.
Maybe you'll grow up to be a true critic, but for now you'll surely enjoy your rebellious, rip-it-to-shreds-is-cool phase...I just doubt that anyone else will.
As for this excited movie-goers' friends and co-workers - we'll go regardless of reviews, but it's nice to see that Variety, Newsweek and Time (and soon countless others) assuring us that we're on the right path.
Good (lol) Job!
===========================================
So, as someone who reviews movies in xxx and just got out of the screening I wanted to check rottentomatoes to see if I was the only one who hated it.
Apparently it was you *and* me!
I was so bored I'm still wiping off the drool from my chin.
===========================================
Your review of Superman Returns was by far the worst review I have ever tried to read. I could not get through the whole review because you whined so much. How does a person get a job with Movie City News. Do you go into the bosses office and say, "I hate this movie more then life itself" and your boss gives you a web page. I will never read you again.
One more thing loser. Kids do have sex at 23 and get pregnant at 18. It happens all the time. Also, I know a Pulitzer winner and he is 24. So it does happen. You will defiantly never see one.
===========================================
I find your reviews and your web site pure rubbish. I even feel contrite for having spent as much time as I have reading your work. You aren't Peter Travers or Roger Ebert so quit taking yourself so seriously.
===========================================
Thank you for writing your review on Superman Returns. I'm glad someone isn't drooling over Singer's latest stunt.
I'm a Superman fan through and through. I have Asperger's and he's my thing I have an encyclopedic knowledge of. And this movie looks like a big slap in the face. I mean, the costume looks terrible (I lost my costume, but the Teen Titans lent me some scuba gear), Kate Bosthworth is only two days older than me (honestly, we have problems when the cast of SMALLVILLE is older than the cast of SUPERMAN), and I don't know about you, but Superman having a love child is uncomfortable and depressing.
I haven't seen the movie, but I heard that about it and I'm guessing that might be what offended you cuz it sure the hell offended me.
The rest of your colleagues seem to be eating it up. So do so-called fans who don't see the problem with Superman having a son and saying "you will never be alone... well, I'll leave you alone for right now."
Having a son means responsibilities which in this case should include telling Lois that Clark Kent isn't just a casual friend at work. I tell this to people, they think I'm a prude.
I think finally, we're told that just because Bryan Singer makes a bunch of references to the first Superman (this may be the world's only $260 million love letter) that he "understands" the character.
He doesn't understand this: it may appear outwardly that the crystals of the Fortress of Solitude and the theme music (don't get me wrong, it's great) and Lex Luthor being aided by bumbling morons is a huge part of the Superman legend, but the character was around for 40 years before it came out. It's not like Donner used the music from the classic TV series. In fact, as much as I love George Reeves, one of the great things about Christopher Reeve was how DIFFERENT he was and how far they knew they could take it from the man most people were familiar with. In this case, Singer went to the lab and cloned him.
Eh. I'm sorry. I didn't even see it. I'm just glad someone out there isn't falling for X-boy's little stunt.
===========================================
I've seen the movie and I'd like to congratulate you on the sale of your soul. I hope you got a good price.
===========================================
go fuck yourself! you suck as a movie critic. Get a new job. Your work place should hire me
===========================================
nobody gives a shit about your stupid review of superman so shove it prick.
===========================================
just read your review in tomatoes on superman, and i must confess that i had not the strength nor the patience to continue beyond the passage where you correlated the performers' chronological ages with the ages of their onscreen persona.
please, my dear fellow, i implore you as would all your peers...
GET A CLUE.
superman is a fable, and as with all fables time is only PERCEIVED and therefore IRRELEVANT (you must have had one helluva time sitting through blade runner wondering if and when the night would ever end...)
looking forward to your next review.
===========================================
Excellent review of "Superman Returns" and "Nacho Libre," thank you very much. It hurts to see these to fall into mediocrity.
Just a note on Jack Black. Peter Jackson is already filming two more King Kong sequels ("Son of Kong" and the third as yet untitled). The "Tenacious D" movie will go forward regardless of what Libre does at the box office. Black, at this point, can do no wrong.
"Miami Vice" I grew up with (probably like yourself) and will go see regardless of the reviews. "World Trade Center" I expect to be schlock, because Oliver Stone is Oliver Stone. The sleeper hit of the summer will be "Snakes on a Plane." "A Scanner Darkly" has some potential to be memorable.
Posted by poland at 01:18 PM | Comments (67)
Does Anyone Know Anything?
It's an NKA world. Or is it?
If anyone thinks they know anything, it's the people reading this blog.
This week's 20 Weeks of Summer
Posted by poland at 10:39 AM | Comments (31)
June 21, 2006
Nice Pirates
Just saw a TV spot for Pirates of the Caribbean: Dead Man's Chest on The View – a show watched mostly by women and thus, mothers – that emphasizes the “Walt Disney Pictures presents” tag. The WD name is on all ads and it is up front here, but then it is repeated again and with a big, gold, old-fashioned Walt Disney Pictures logo. I’m pretty sure I haven’t seen that on the other materials.
Also, the spot shows none of the “monsters” in the film, not even the key player, Davy Jones.
And it suggests, smartly and subtly, that Disney is making sure that parents feel the movie is safe for the kids. It’s a critical distinction as that market on its own could be worth $100 million or more for this title in America alone.
Posted by poland at 12:23 PM | Comments (36)
June 20, 2006
A Rather Remarkable Site
This one is not for everyone. The site is called Gomorrahy, which is a fancy word for many bad sexual behaviors. The gist of the site is that it offers insight into the government censorship in Canada and does what it can to thumb its nose at those choices. This means offering video and photos from many of the banned films and books. They also offer records of all the books and movies and music that go before the Canadian censorship board.
Now of course, a lot of this stuff is detail like Max Hardcore, Hardcore School Girls #6 being banned while Max Hardcore, Hardcore School Girls #5 is permitted.
The way I found it was through a site called Twitch, which is great for laying out the world of genre films, particularly from the rest of the world. There was a film that whose distrubing trailer was on Gomorrahy.
Anyway... if you are interested, here is a link to the Gomorrahy homepage, which is also where you can fin links to Canadian censorship decisions, which include things like banning all of racist David Duke's books and videos or American Dissident Voices, The Best Case Scenario, Texas and Gaza: Land and Race, not just porno. And here is a link to their trailer subsite.
Posted by poland at 08:47 PM | Comments (14)
Figgis Goes To Cannes
Your New Bond Girl
Mike Figgis is, in my view, a genius... even when I don't like his output. But the work he did at Cannes, displayed at SHOWStudio is pretty terrrific all around... especially his Gallery, which is where the photo of poor, sad, ugly Eva Green comes from.
Posted by poland at 05:12 PM | Comments (8)
Critical Pass
OKay... there is no question that Variety, Hollywood Reporter, Time & Newsweek raved about Superman Returns (and how they got Reuters to do an unbylined story about 4 reviews, I will never know)... but looking on the Rotten Tomato page that still has my e-mail inbox ringing, I ran into a negative pull quote from Emanuel Levy's review... which is list as a "B" by him, which earns a ripe tomato... but read his actual review and tell me where it is positive at all... except for "the more feminist viewers" and Emauel's delight at potentially pissed off right wingers offended by unwed, single parenting.
I can't blame Rotten Tomatoes for the B rating.. but does this read like a B review?
P.S. Here is an alleged ad that was sent to me... maybe it was laid out before the major started coming in... though Thumbs Up from Richard Roeper would certainly fit right in this group after Saturday....
Posted by poland at 12:42 PM | Comments (48)
What We Really Want?
Would this (or a much better variation on this) be the Miami Vice trailer you would prefer?
Do you think anyone would be scared off by a little trip down memory lane?
Posted by poland at 01:40 AM | Comments (24)
June 19, 2006
Keeping Superman's Returns In Perspective
The phrase, "It won't be another King Kong" seems to be floating around these days regarding Superman Returns.
Putting my negative review of Superman Returns aside for a moment (is that possible?), let's really look at this.
King Kong made $218,080,025 domestic and $331,136,871 internationally for a worldwide total of $549,216,896, making it #34 all time and the 22nd highest grosser of this millennium.
Why keep beating on King Kong? No one is stupid enough to make the "it'll beat Titanic" comments we heard last December, which were a big part of why KK was so disappointing.
$600 million worldwide would be a big number for Supeman Returns – or any other launch - to hit, even with a built-in audience and some earlier series holdover. And if the tracking continues to give the studio fits, unable to figure out how to grab girls without turning off boys and boys without turning off girls, the opening will be lower than I once thought – the critical tussle means NOTHING in that regard – and if this movie opens to, say, $90 million over five days, it will have a very hard time getting to that $600 million. $250m domestic/$350m international would be, after that start, a best case scenario.
The biggest question, which also haunted King Kong, is whether little kids will be up for multiple looks… with this be their Finding Nemo or Charlie & The Chocolate Factory… or will it be too long and not enough action? “Good” and “bad” are not the key. Opening weekend is not the key. Getting to the really big big box office numbers, past $300 million, is about more than the first blush.
When you look at the 21 films in all history that have passed $300 million domestic, Titanic, Forrest Gump, and The Passion of The Christ are the freaks. Looking at the 30 films over $600 million worldwide, you can add The Da Vinci Code to that group. Aside from them, when you look at the numbers, you see a lot of kids and families. A lot.
You also see that the only film to do that $600 million ww kind of business since the less internationally oriented days of E.T. and Star Wars that did less than 50% of its business overseas was The Passion of The Christ. Only franchises Star Wars, Shrek, Spider-Man, Pirates, and the standalone The Incredibles did it with less than 60% (which represent 7 of the 20 films in this club this decade).
So what will be the returns on Superman Returns? I don’t know. But I would caution that seeing $550 million worldwide as terribly disappointing is setting a bar so high that it is pretty unreasonable.
Posted by poland at 04:25 PM | Comments (54)
June 18, 2006
Sunday Estmates by Klady
Cars managed to drop almost 50% and still win the weekend. Still, the weekend was up from last year as three new entries split almost than $65 million between them.
Nacho Libre's $27.5 is a solid success for Paramount and don’t let anyone tell you otherwise. It’s one of those things where “we” get excited and see materials and the movie is challenging – if flawed – which turns on real movie lovers like crazy. But this opening bests the previous Jack Black opener, Shallow Hal ($22.5m), which was much higher concept and had the Farrellys behind it. JB seems to have a real glass ceiling and while he can have a great career generating high teens/low twenties openings, the enthusiasm many of us have for him is not breaking through to the big mainstream. The real danger is for the next Jared Hess movie, which is also likely to be under an even lower ceiling and which may trick the distributor into expecting too much.
Tokyo Drift’s success is a kind of “ha ha” for Universal, where they were able to parlay a brand without much more to sell. The downside is that this is easily the lowest opener in the series. The upside is that $23.9 probably means near $70 million for the domestic total and the film is clearly designed to cash in around the world more than at home... which the other two films didn’t do so much of. 2Fast did better in that regard than the launcher. But this film is about something other than America. On the flip side, with a $75 million budget, they better do some serious business overseas.
The Lake House is in the now annual tradition of a WB movie for women that isn’t quite a hit and isn’t quite a flop. Must Love Dogs ($44m), A Cinderella Story ($51m), Divine Secrets of the Ya-Ya Sisterhood ($70m) were all in that range. Is $40 million for a Bullock/Reeves movie okay? Well, it would be better than Murder By Numbers, 28 Days, or Practical Magic.
Garfield: A Tale of Two Kitties was a tale of too shitty a date. The vanity of opening a week after the new Pixar movie is almost shocking. There isn’t a single kids-only movie between now and Ant Bully in the last weekend of July (Monster House the weekend before)... and none of the other have built-in franchise recognition. That’s not to say that G2 would kick any of their asses. But it would have certainly had a real shot at doubling this opening.
And looking at the previous big openings with summer, X-Men: The Last Stand passed X2 this weekend and is chugging towards $225 domestic, while The Da Vinci Code is looking at a little more than $210 million, assuming they can keep screens after this week. Da Vinci’s worldwide is around $660 million, which is much more impressive, though when looking big picture at the studio game and realizing that Ice Age 2 will be way more profitable than Da Vinci, you realize why studios prefer simple stuff. The X-Men franchise, for all the massive opening numbers, is still under a glass ceiling worldwide of just over $400 million... not a bad ceiling, but a ceiling nonetheless.
===================================
Cars | 31.5 | -48% | 114.8
Nacho Libre | 27.5 | - | 27.5
Fast & Furious: Tokyo Drift | 23.9 | - | 23.9
The Lake House | 13.8 | - | 13.8
The Break Up | 9.6 | -53% | 92.0
Garfield: Tale of Two Kitties | 7.2 | - | 7.2
X-Men: The Last Stand | 7.0 | -56% | 215.4
The Omen | 5.2 | -67% | 46.8
The Da Vinci Code | 5.0 | -52% | 198.5
Over the Hedge | 4.0 | -61% | 138.7
Posted by poland at 10:22 AM | Comments (105)
June 17, 2006
Friday Estimates by Klady
Even with a near $2 million lead for Friday, look for Cars to pass Nacho Libre (and The Fast & The Furious: Tokyo Drift) to win the weekend by a small margin thanks to a strong Saturday upsurge of kids. The real good new for Cars is that Garfield: A Tale Of Two Kitties, is opening with a lame paw.
You almost never see two openings doing this well on the same weekend. The real question on Monday is likely to be, what were Nacho and 3Fast doing on the same weekend when they are after – in largest part – the same demographic?
The second F&F saga opened to $50 million in 2003. Could it have come pretty close to that number with some open space here? Could Nacho Libre have managed a $40 million opening?
As for Garfield 2, it simply got lost in the Cars sauce.
And The Lake House isn’t a complete disaster. (It’s not pretty either.) It could be a bit leggier than it probably deserves (I haven’t see it, but I have heard less than kind responses) because it is in a unique niche in this season. But the good folks at WB have one thing on their mind right now... and it’s not The Lake House.
Nacho Libre | 10.9 | 3070 | - | 10.9
Fast & Furious 3 | 9.3 | 3026 | - | 9.3
Cars | 9.0 | 3988 | -54% | 92.3
The Lake House | 5.1 | 2645 | - | 5.1
The Break-Up | 3.3 | 3141 | -52% | 85.7
Garfield 2 | 2.4 | 2946 | - | 2.4
X-Men: Last Stand | 2.2 | 2812 | -56% | 210.6
The Omen | 1.8 | 2723 | -68% | 43.4
The Da Vinci Code | 1.5 | 2413 | -50% | 195
Over the Hedge | 1.3 | 2606 | -56% | 136
Posted by poland at 10:24 AM | Comments (31)
June 16, 2006
The Dead Horse... Beaten
I guess leaving unwell enough alone would make sense... but I’m not a terribly sensible guy.
I actually think the discussion around the Superman Returns review is worth a different conversation. (I will queasy when I see “you always do X” responses, but I’m asking for a conversation, so I will have to live with them.)
The reason I am interested is the ferocity of response.
I wrote a tough semi-review. I barely got into any details. Really, the review could easily have been 2500 words. But it wasn’t. I did everything I could to offer some fairly positive – and completely honest - business context... with six quality disappointments this summer so far, it only ranked behind X3 for me... I suggested an opening 5-day opening of over $100 million... I offered that I could imagine Anne Thompson’s enthusiasm translating into a female interest in the movie that I simply can’t see... and I said that I expected kind reviews of the film from most critics (“kind” can be read many ways).
What else could I have done, other than like the movie more than I did?
Is my only good answer to have left the Seattle Film Festival to see the first screening so I could be “First!”? Have we really gotten to that point? If Jeff Wells – who hates 90% of action movies and 98% of broad comedy – loves it and Anne Thompson – who has never really positioned herself as a critic in print, though she clearly has opinions - likes it pretty well, is anything I write a response to them?
I mean, look, if I am one voice in one hundred that doesn’t like this film very much, I can live with that. As people love to point out, there have been many examples of me against the tide before. As people point out less often, I have been the “first” to rip the Band-Aid off of some very mediocre movies – which many people still love – while the junket screenings are producing raves.
And let me tell you something... it sucks to be in that position. There is an adrenaline rush, but it also creates some real discomfort for me and people I have to deal with, in ways direct and indirect, every week of my professional life. After a decade doing this, on and off line, there is no movie that is worth that aggravation and there is no one movie that is going to do anything to change my level of fame or power. I would be better off loving everything. But that is not my reality.
I am hardly perfect. And there is no such thing as perfect in criticism. It’s opinion, not fact. Even people who agree with me most of the time run into films on a regular basis that we do not agree about. And there are reasonable people who disagree with most of what I think. People who think that I think I am “the ultimate arbiter” of anything are misguided. I am the ultimate arbiter of nothing. Audiences define success and failure of films on a business level. Events like The Oscars define success and failure for many people regarding quality, even though the inherent nature of that event and so many others assures that there will be obvious missteps year after year. The Tomato-Meter seems to be the arbiter of opinion lately, which is borderline madness.
I am the ultimate arbiter of my opinion. I think I am intelligent. I do listen to every voice I can. I can be stubborn. I can be too flexible. I can be an arrogant ass or a pushover.
To be completely honest, I do have theories about the reviews of certain writers sometimes. I tend to keep them private, within my circle of friends, because they are not relevant to anything but my urge to gossip. Now and again, I will feel a group wave amongst critics and get really crazy (see: Kill Bill or Sin City). But I don’t feel that way about Superman Returns and I have not indicated in any way that I did.
I am uncomfortable with people boxing me in and not allowing me to have an opinion that is mine. I am aware of responsive reviewing and I work hard to avoid it – most often by trying to be in that first group to see the movie, even if I hold my review until release or even never reviewing if I dislike a film and don’t feel like contributing any negative energy (see: A Prairie Home Companion).
But really, this is about more than me, because the reality is that I am more often in the opposite position, setting the bar and finding that people measure other writers by it... which is equally wrong, though not nearly as uncomfortable.
You are welcome to kick or kiss me on this, but really, I am interested in how you all see this craziness. Critics are enraged by not seeing The Benchwarmers while Owen Gleiberman - who works for the most facile and glib publication in this game... “The Real Story Behind Superman Returns” (brought to you by the corporation that made and is selling Superman Returns) and is still somehow one of the most internal, audience-disconnected critics at any major - is saying, “Stop whining.” Meanwhile, junketeers are getting very nervous about how much longer the junket system will continue as it had. (Hint: It’s already well into its next evolution.)
I will not speak for anyone else, but I have no personal or professional rivalry with anyone that affects what I write. You can choose to disbelieve me, but you would be wrong. Moreover, most of the people who seem to consider themselves rivals are, in my eyes, so inconsistent and off the reservation that for me to try to work around them in any way would be nothing less than self-destructive. (The ones I respect I consider colleagues, not rivals, even if they have jobs at big publications.) As so many of you point out with daily examples, what I write and what MCN publishes has a long memory and shadows everything I do. I don’t see how I have the option of whimsy. It’s too expensive.
I do think that Traditional Media has suffered from a sudden and shock-inducing realization that institutional memory has become internet memory. Accountability is a bitch. And while I was more of a cowboy early in my web life, I have done my damnedest to attack people for their actions or their articles for errors or omission or commission and not to make it personal. But for most of us, all criticism is personal.
Okay... two more paragraphs in, it may be more personal for me than I want to admit. And I fear the responses that will come from this entry. Some will be hurtful. And as I said on top, if I’m asking for it, I better be prepared to eat it.
But I really am wanting a bigger conversation. In a world of immediacy, does being the second opinion mean waiting until the whole critical cycle spins out – journalists and the public – before your “righteousness” becomes measurable?
Is it only people who work for papers with a circulation over 500,000 that are entitled to their opinion?
How much does disappointment or excitement and the public urge for it contribute to this kind of debate? (As in, “I was so excited after Review X and you sunk my battleship, you bastard!”)
Is there any code of conduct left to consider? Or is the book still at the editor’s, being rewritten?
Have at it...
Posted by poland at 10:03 AM | Comments (53)
Question Of The Day
I want to thank Drew McWeeny for inspiring this question.
After a decade of test screening reviews appearing on the web, has this break in traditional ettiquette helped make the moviemaking process better in any way?
My take is that it's made it worse. But I'm asking the question hoping for your answers.
Posted by poland at 03:14 AM | Comments (40)
June 15, 2006
Did Ya Hear About The Guy Who Wore Blue Tights?
From 20 Weeks Of Summer - Week 10
"On the Shitty Summer Movie Scale, I would rate the major films that I have seen (leaving out any negative I might feel towards Cars or Over The Hedge) so far:
1. Poseidon
2. The Da Vinci Code
3. Mission: Impossible II
4. The Break-Up
5. Superman Returns
6. X-Men 3"
And
"On a much smaller scale of disappointment is Nacho Libre, which fulfills the promise of the commercials, trailers, and video confessionals for about one act… and then does nothing but vamp for another hour or so. ("You Will Believe A Man Can Fart!")"
Posted by poland at 10:06 AM | Comments (106)
Preparing For The MPAA
This is a small view of the whole memo...
And here is the close-up, which you hopefully will be able to read...
Posted by poland at 02:02 AM | Comments (13)
June 14, 2006
When Harry Met Paramount
But which one is which?
Slow blogging day... insane schedule... but there will plenty of meat to chew tomorrow...
Posted by poland at 02:48 PM | Comments (38)
June 13, 2006
Super BIG!
We got a new image of Superman Returns IMAX today. You don't really get the 3D feel, but we posted it here in full size because it really does give you some sense of how big the image is in the theater if you scroll around a bit.
And after you take a look, click again and try to figure out just what this guy in the lower right hand corner is trying to measure with his fingers.
Posted by poland at 05:14 PM | Comments (26)
June 12, 2006
Gong Li In The Dark
I've never seen anything quite like this standee. Besides the odd, kind of sideways reference to another NBC/Universal TV show, I have never seen a standee with one of the stars - here given third but near-equal position - is left completely in the dark.
I kind of dig it. But I'm not really sure that I'm the one they need to be selling on this movie. If paying $100 to see a new Michael Mann film was the only option, I would pay.
Posted by poland at 09:53 PM | Comments (55)
Lots Of Success... Too Many Sloppy Kisses
Tom Rothman & Jim Gianopulos deserve a lot of respect on a business level. Under their leadership, Fox has delivered a record (until Sony breaks it this year) six $20 million openings in one year in 2004, a powerful five $100 million movies in one year in 2005 and this year, their two $190 million-plus domestic releases so far will generate over $1 billion in theatrical revenues alone worldwide.
There is no question that they deserve a lot of praise for that success.
There is also no question that Tom Rothman has a lot of people out there who talk shit about him, much of which is reasonable. But no studio chief is liked by everyone. Many of the arguments now made about Rothman’s hands-on style are about him saying, “no.” And sometimes those choices are wrong. But even if you remove the Star Wars films from the equation – they are paid for and produced by LucasFilm and for Fox, they are “just” release & marketing deals that were set up by Tom Sherak and Bill Mechanic back in the late 90s – the studio has averaged more than three $100 million domestic movies a year under R&G and even with their share of flops, they have not shepherded any major (read: losing more than $50 million) disasters into this world.
X:Men: The Last Stand is, ironically, the most expensive film made by the studio under R&G, and though it is very successful, will not be a huge cash cow because of that. Laura Holson’s NYT brown nose story today manages to miss this reality or any discussion of the budget in general or in specific, the cost of Rothman’s unwillingness to budge off the Memorial Day weekend date. Obviously, the marketing of an X-Men movie can be done on any schedule and succeeded. But if an X-Men film that cost under $150 million had opened this way, it would have been in profit in theatrical. As is, this film might generate $50 million in profit all in, which is nice, but one of Fox’s least successful stories of milking a movie. X3 is not a disaster by any means. But it does represent an opportunity that was lessened by Rothman’s dogged nature, not improved.
(Let’s not even discuss how Hugh Jackman, who is the only X-Man with a continuing contractual interest in their X-Man character, is put front and center of the story to tell a warm, “isn’t he special?” anecdote about Tom Rothman that might as well have been written up by David Lux and printed verbatim.)
Ice Age 2 is by far the bigger success story for Fox. Given that animation (Anastasia/Titan AE) was a big part of Bill Mechanic’s demise at the studio and that even the crappy Robots did enough business to make Fox’s animation business on par with DreamWorks Animation (Ice Age 2 will gross $50 million more than Shrek did worldwide), that is the story. But it is not as current and it is not as glammy. Unfortunately, it is more realistic. (And the first Ice Age probably started under Mechanic, though it came to live and credit for its handling deservedly goes to R&G.)
Likewise, The Farrellys are held up as a cog in the R&G wheel when, in fact, it was Bill Mechanic’s Fox that released There’s Something About Mary – though Tom & Jim were working on high levels at the company – and since they took over, the brothers have been marginalized. Their only film in the last five years to gross over $50 million domestic has been 2001’s Shallow Hal ($141 million worldwide). #2 on their list, Fever Pitch, was one of their more expensive films and grossed just $51 million worldwide. So Holson throws in Mary, like a publicist would… and only a publicist should.
One of the most profitable movies of the R&G era is Dodgeball: A True Underdog Story, a $20 million movie that grossed $167 million worldwide, is huge on DVD, and launched the current Vince Vaughn heat. Yet the film is unmentioned. Why? Could it be that the studio is wrestling with Ben Stiller and has no sequel or next film from Rawson Marshall Thurber underway?
Mr & Mrs Smith ($478m worldwide), another problem movie, will be much more profitable than X-Men: The Last Stand. No mention.
And I guess Fantastic Four suffers the same fate… more profitable, but not as hot to discuss.
Let’s not even discuss the fact that Bryan Singer was banned from the lot… and then was quickly unbanned not because things were patched up, but because he is exec producer of House, which is in production on the lot, which makes it kind of hard to banish Bryan to Burbank.
Still, let me be clear, I have no Rothman or Gianopulos problems. I see the studio chief job as one that generates both friends and enemies. The bottom line is the bottom line and there is not a single other studio in town that would not be happier with Fox’s five year track record than their own… especially when you include Fox Searchlight, which Peter Rice is not shy about acknowledging is connected to R&G in more than a flow chart hierarchy kind of way.
But personally, I expect a New York Times business reporter to report the whole story and not to write a V-Life piece about how great the boys are, which is what this was.
Posted by poland at 12:53 PM | Comments (15)
June 10, 2006
Friday Estimates by Klady
Finding Nemo’s opening Friday, $20.2 million. Klady’s estimate of Cars’ opening, $19.2m.
Finding Nemo’s 2nd place all-time opening weekend? $70.3 million. Cars? Probably about $68 million, which would make it competitive for the fourth best animation opening ever, pushing Ice Age 2’s $68.003 million launch. (#3 is only a little higher, $70.47 million for The Incredibles.)
Of course, the final domestic gross is wild varied amongst those three existing openings that are within $2.3 million of one another, from $192m to $340m. Cars faces one thing that no other CG hit has ever had, competition coming (Monster House) and going (Over The Hedge). So there is no Inertia Benefit here. Cars has to earn its way. But no one can say that Disney has done anything less than success masterfully in launching this non-sequel, which will be the #3 opening of the summer so far.
The Break Up held okay, but still looks like it will still stay under $100 million with just one more weekend before crashing into Click.
The Omen’s $5.5 million is fine, considering they drained the main vein on Tuesday. $50 million should make them happy here, though you wonder what at least one box office star and a better director might have lead to for this title.
X3 will likely report as hitting $200,000,666 at the end of the weekend and Da Vinci Code now looks like it could end up catching up with the title domestically, but not pass it by more than $5 million by the end of the summer.
Nice opening for A Prairie Home Companion, which will be a big DVD success... and might be a one-weekend wonder in theaters.
Film | Friday | Screens | % Change | Cume
Cars | 19.2 | 3985 | - | 19.2
The Break-Up | 6.9 | 3073 | -51% | 60.5
The Omen | 5.5 | 2723 | - | 25.8
X-Men: Last Stand | 4.8 | 3680 | -54% | 191
DaVinci Code | 5.4 | 3319 | -39% | 181.9
Over the Hedge | 3.0 | 3527 | -44% | 123
Prairie Home Companion | 1.3 | 760 | - | 1.3
Mission: Impossible III | 0.9 | 1908 | -32% | 125.4
Poseidon | 0.55 | 1724 | -47% | 53.6
RV | 0.5 | 1622 | -40% | 63.5
Posted by poland at 10:49 AM | Comments (66)
June 09, 2006
Greetings From The Home Of Starbucks
I'm in Seattle for a bit of the film festival. I saw three somewhat dissapointing films in theaters today, so I am settling in with some DVDs of films that have come and gone in tihs 25 day long festival.
Anyway, I will try to get some box office conversation tomorrow morning and will update as things come up. Feel free to use this entry as a place for open, reader-driven conversation.
Posted by poland at 10:34 PM | Comments (121)
June 08, 2006
20 Weeks... Up, Up & Away
"What got me rolling into this column was not the future of this summer, but the past. For all of the endless talk about Mission:Impossible 3, the truth is, there have only been two real wide-release flops in these first six weeks of summer; Just My Luck ($16 million) and Poseidon (should top out at about $60 million domestic).
There has only been one summer with as many as three $70 million-plus openings (there have been 13 such summer openings in all movie history) and we have two already. There is little doubt that we should expect at least two more, breaking the record."
The Chart
http://www.moviecitynews.com/columnists/poland/2006/060608_chart.html
Posted by poland at 10:46 AM | Comments (42)
June 07, 2006
Best Copy Lines Of The Year?
Here are the finalists for the Key Art Awards this year. Did they miss any?
* The 40 Year-Old Virgin: "The longer you wait, the harder it gets."
(Created by Crew Creative Advertising)
* Crash: "Moving at the speed of life, we are bound to collide with each other."
(Created by Mark Woollen & Associates)
* Saw II: "Oh yes, there will be blood."
(Created by Lions Gate Entertainment)
* Tim Burton's Corpse Bride: "There's been a grave misunderstanding."
(Created by BLT & Associates, Inc.)
* Wedding Crashers: "Life's a party. Crash it."
(Created by Dawn Patrol)
Posted by poland at 03:34 PM | Comments (27)
Is This A Topic That Interests Y'all?
PROJECT 880 (formerly Untitled James Cameron) Feature Film FOX
Director: James Cameron
Casting Director: Margery Simkin
Casting Associate: Justine Hempe
Casting Assistant: Ashley Slater
Start Date: November 2006…some roles in February 2007
Location: Los Angeles
Apparently, it's a hot topic on other blogs...here is more
My biggest "mistake" was leaving off the address for Margery Simkins office... lots of e-mails asking for it today... oy!
Posted by poland at 01:01 PM | Comments (10)
$12, 633, 666
How impressive is it to you?
Posted by poland at 12:35 PM | Comments (33)
June 06, 2006
Superman Returns... Businesswise
Well, besides coming onto tracking like a big summer bully, I'm beginning to get the gut feeling that Superman Returns – which starts screening for junket press and others on Thursday - has turned the corner. Of course, many of you would just say, “of course, you idiot.” But in this summer of media/business disconnects, a movie that the geeks and the gossips and those of us in between have been a bit worried about where things were going, you can feel the movie being taken one step more seriously.
The difference between a problem opening and a superstar opening is a $90 million 5-day vs. a $130 million 5-day. The difference between those openings to the eventual domestic bottom line is, in a conservative estimate, the difference between a $240 million total and a $320 million total. No small distinction.
Warner Bros has made more changes to this campaign on the fly (no pun intended) than one tends to see on a movie this big. And that is to be admired, as it was when Paramount turned the corner on Failure To Launch. No guts, no glory. And Dawn Taubin has shown her guts big time these last few weeks. Hear all the guff and just keep moving, find the real target.
The movie will become the central story by the weekend, as some will sneak reviews to AICN and others while some will just talk to everyone they know. But the dam is about to break.
As I have forever said, opening has nothing to do with the quality of the movie. But if the movie, which is said to be anywhere between 2:25 and 2:35 (that disparity could be credits), is good, watch the issues of hiding Brandon Routh and whether he and Lex Luthor have a crush on one another go away.
Posted by poland at 11:55 PM | Comments (57)
The First World Exclusive In Hours
We're little worried sbout a lawsuit. But we've decided that this picture of Shiloh is something you may never see anywhere else and heck, freedom of the press is freedom of the press. Besides, getting it was a bitch.
I'm putting it after the fold because I am just so nervous about it. But here it is...
Can't you see the resemblence in the eyes?
Posted by poland at 08:48 PM | Comments (5)
Brotherhood
We at MCN have virtually zero interest in the birth of the Jolie/Pitt spawn, it's name, or the amount of money paid for images of it. We have a lot of interest in freedom of speech and the absurd idea that news (well, kinda news) photo exclusives can be maintained anymore, much less in one country over another.
And so, aware that Gawker is getting pushed around by Time-Warner thanks to Anne Thompson...
And by the way... that body part that looks like a baby arm.. not a baby arm. Her lips, his....
Posted by poland at 04:13 PM | Comments (8)
666
"The time to hesitate is through
No time to wallow in the mire
Try now we can only lose
And our blog become a funeral pyre "
Happy Global Warming By Satan Day.
Here are some of my signs of the Apocalypse…
Edward Norton comes up with a way of fixing the script to Chinatown … plans a remake.
Drew "Moriarty" McWeeny goes hunting with Tom Rothman.
Tom Cruise gets back on his meds.
MGM is sold to the Chinese, Liosngate is sold to Sam Walton, and the DreamWorks' library is sold to the U.S. government for $1.2 billion in one of GW Bush's last acts in office.
The temperature is going up and Al Gore is getting popular again.
Some are real, some are not, and here are more….
What are your signs?
Posted by poland at 10:25 AM | Comments (34)
June 05, 2006
New Super Art
Not real... via Worth1000's contest placing comic characters in clasic art
Posted by poland at 01:57 PM | Comments (1)
A Sad Day
There will never be a “Protection of Marriage” Constitutional Amendment in this country.
Still, I am sickened by the idea of a nation plunged further into any discussion that involves removing the freedoms of any class of citizen on some sort of ephemeral sense of personal morality.
(Added, 2:03p, 6/5 - For clarity's sake, I am not suggesting that personal morality is ephemeral or that the personal morality of people who feel gay marriage should not exist is ephemeral, but rather the specific arguments about how gay marriage devalues marriage seem to be all emotion and little, if any, rational argument.)
There are many complex arguments to be had about the issue and the value of marriage in a society that breaks marriage vows in more than half of legally sanctioned marriages. If marriage is under assault, it is by the people who are currently marrying in all 50 states.
Marriage is a legal and economic pact, ahead of any moral significance. Just as anyone who has been through a divorce.
And while I am willing to get into that discussion, I am disgusted based on the big picture.
"Give me your tired, your poor,
Your huddled masses yearning to breathe free,
The wretched refuse of your teeming shore.
Send these, the homeless, tempest-tossed to me.
I lift my lamp beside the golden door."
Any time we fight for others in our nation to breathe less free, we are all lessened… even if the discussion, which has manifested itself all to dramatically on a state level, is going nowhere. I am exhausted by the endless picking of nits these days, which only distract from bigger issues that truly affect millions of Americans in a direct way.
Excuse the politics… or not. Don't care. Sometimes, silence is unacceptable. And you know there will be plenty of movie chatter in the hours, days, weeks, months, and years to come.
There is nothing more important on the docket right now. It’s like a big bumper sticker from sea to shining sea reading, “Why We Hate Ourselves,” because embrace them or not, Gay America is a part of America, much as any creed, race, or religion.
Sad day.
Posted by poland at 01:24 PM | Comments (199)
Costarring Paris Hilton!
INteresting ads on Sunday night for a Tuesday release of an "UNRATED" version of the Mr & Mrs Smith DVD.
Clearly, Fox Home Entertainment is hoping that folks will expect some video from the delivery room as part of the package. But really, do you want to see a Cesarian?
Posted by poland at 01:23 AM | Comments (1)
June 04, 2006
Stay Away From The Peninsula!!!
(And a terrible photo of the Italian outdoor...)
Posted by poland at 05:31 PM | Comments (5)
Sunday Estimates
Box Office Mojo is amusingly reporting X3's second weekend drop as 66.6%. Klady just has it as 67% One wonders whether this is Fox's idea of a promotional event.
The drop isn’t the worst ever, even for bigger films, but it is in the company of films such as Hulk, The Village, Matrix Revolutions, and Alien vs Predator.
The Break Up opened a little better than I expected, but not much. It’s amusing how the negative energy in some press about Jennifer Aniston has now led to “Jen is back” stories, when I suspect that the real story here is - and always has been - Vince Vaughn WC hangover. Still, cracking $100 million may still be a problem as people start talking about the film. My 10-day-old MCN estimate of $74 million for the film would rise back up to about $95 million after this opening.
This was the last easy weekend for Over The Hedge, though it will be interesting to see whether Cars kills the movie or simply destroys it for a weekend and then the business starts to seep back in if OTH is a better movie for younger kids.
The Da Vinci Code is on its way to just cracking $200 million and ("I am told") grossing more than double that internationally.
Liberal guilt movie of the year, An Inconvenient Truth (and by that I mean, it is the kind of movie that allows people to come to the theater in their SUVs and feel like they participated by paying for a ticket and talking about buying a hybrid on the way home to their heavily air conditioned multi-thousand square foot homes), I must acknowledge, rung up an estimated $1.3 million for the weekend on 77 screens. $5 million or $6 million is looking realistic now. A great job of accurate publicity and deceptive marketing.
The question is, how many millions has Paramount Vaintage spent on that gross? Don't expect the media to ask the question too hard because the movie is so "important." And fo course, expect anyone who doesn't much like the movie to be branded a rightie, even if they (I) completely agree with the argument and wish all this effort was focused on action, not ticket sales.
And btw, read Roger Ebert's review of the film and you know everything you learn in the movie. You can send me the $8 his review will save you too... he doesn't need the money.
The Break Up | 38.9 | - | 38.9
X-Men: The Last Stand | 34.4 | -67% | 175.7
Over the Hedge | 20.9 | -23% | 112.6
The DaVinci Code | 18.7 | -45% | 172.1
Mission: Impossible III | 4.6 | -34% | 122.6
Posted by poland at 11:06 AM | Comments (99)
June 03, 2006
Friday Estimates By Klady
Well… so much for tracking…
The Break-Up is got going to rage out of control on multiples, but an opening weekend in the mid-30s is going to make a lot of nervous people very happy. And a lot of gossips who are busy writing off Ms. Aniston are going to have to deal with a few more starring roles. She did what many won’t. She looked into the face of what she was clearly being told was a failure and just kept working, doing TV appearances through the entire week. Same with Vince Vaughn.
Meanwhile, a 74% drop for X3, which will surely be in the 60s for the weekend, is still eye-popping. Shouldn't be. This is the nature of the giant wave numbers. The "look at that second weekend drop" is really a non-issue for $70 million+ openings. However, it does remind us that X3 will not be doing $350 million. More intersting is Da Vinci Code not making it to $200 million domestic.
Movie | Friday | Screens | % Change | Cume
The Break Up | 14.1 | 3070 | - | 14.1
X-Men: Last Stand | 10.6 | 3714 | -74% | 151.9
The Da Vinci Code | 5.4 | 3757 | -48% | 158.8
Over the Hedge | 5.3 | 3993 | -29% | 97.0
Mission: Impossible III | 1.3 | 2667 | -35% | 119.3
Poseidon | 1.0 | 2720 | -41% | 49.4
RV | 0.85 | 2181 | -23% | 59.4
See No Evil | 0.6 | 1270 | -3% | 11.0
An Inconvenient Truth | 0.4 | 77 | 387% | 1.0
Just My Luck | 0.25 | 958 | -61% | 15.0
Posted by poland at 10:48 AM | Comments (50)
June 02, 2006
Critical Mass..acre
Anne Thompson's latest , on the devaluation of film critics, kinda tries to have it both ways.
"As a generation of top critics move into their 50s and 60s, newspapers are chasing the same young demographic as advertisers and studios. Just as film distribution and marketing are adapting to the rise of digital delivery, the Internet is altering the face of film criticism."
Yes and no. Newspapers are dying and they want to save money. 20-year veterans are expensive and often difficult to manage. 20-year-old newbies are cheap and flexible. The internet has little to do with killing Traditioanl Media criticsm... TM is doing that for themselves very effectively.
Anne knows this, writing: "Daily newspapers are losing circulation, Hollywood advertising and their influence over moviegoers. As publishers struggle to hang on to their readers via online content, blogs and podcasts, some are replacing experienced critics -- many of whom, like Ebert, have built loyal local followings -- with younger, less expensive models." But it's farther down in the piece.
"Studio publicists know, Morgenstern says, 'that many of their superiors would rather not show films to critics at all. Especially to print critics, who offer more potential loss than gain.'"
In my experience, Joe is not a particularly pretentious or arrogant man. But separating out print critics is a laugher. Daily newspapers tend to have far more access than any internet outlets, especially long lead screenings that editors insist are required for features...and not just for the writer, but for the editors as well. Deals are made at all print outlets for coverage every week. And the critic has become maginalized by their very own papers, either rmisused as feature writers with critical subtexts that will be quoted or simply by being one small part of the hype puzzle. Studios don't care much about what happens on Friday, except for the fallout from talent... but even then, early reviews are much more troubling, as talent is still in the marketing cycle. The web's ascendance has not been about quality - except in a small niche - but because of the timing and repetition.
This is why the trades are so rabid about being first. Being first has overwhelmed the power of being best.
"in Los Angeles and New York, top critics also have the power to push certain films into Golden Globe and Oscar consideration."
Rarely. People show up late in the cycle have the power to confirm what is already in play. But there has not been a single case in my memory of one of those "power players' turning up late to the dance and changing anything. Roger E. didn't jump on the Crash bandwagon, but in spite of the denial of BBM supporters, the wagon was rolling long before he came out in February.
"When audiences lose faith in a paper," says SPC's Bernard, "they end up doing something else." He contends that theater attendance has dropped in such specialty film markets as Boston, Seattle and Miami that have lost popular critics."
Interesting, but I know a little about two of the markets. In Boston, James Verniere, Gerald Peary, Ty Burr, Peter Keough, Chris Fujiwara, and the deposed Jay Carr are all members of the august and elitist National Society of Film Critics, making Boston by far the city that contributes the most critics outside of NY and LA to the group. In Miami, the beloved veteran of decades, Bill Cosford, died. So one can hardly complain that he was replaced, though it is a red flag that the Herald’s film critic has lived in New York for most of his tenure and not in his hometown of Miami.
“To date, the New York Times has resisted such pressures. Its lead critics, A.O. Scott and Manohla Dargis, have yet to establish the kind of bulkhead that Canby and Maslin had during their tenure at the Times, but that is partly because neither Scott nor Dargis has a particularly mainstream sensibility. Both are canny careerists, though, as well as elegant writers who often seem more interested in crafting arcane intellectual arguments than reaching out to their readers. Thus when Scott or Dargis champions a small movie such as "Gunner Palace" or "The Notorious Bettie Page," it has little impact.
Canny careerists? Wouldn’t that suggest that they would try to be more mainstream, not less?
With due respect to Roger, decades of television are why he is The King. And he seems to have reached out more in recent years… to great mockery from people who care about criticism… and him. Is Anne suggesting that Canby or Maslin could get movies from third-tier distributors or lower (studios, some dependents, Lionsgate, other dependents, all other indies) seen more widely? This is somewhat rhetorical, because the business has changed so much. But has anyone had that power in the last 15 years?
Anne continues: “At least Scott and Dargis are encouraged to discourse intelligently about movies.”
Yes. And that is the point, isn’t it? High-minded writing is not for everyone. But shouldn’t it be what the New York Times is about? And it is not nearly as arcane as the hardcore critics who publiush in alt weeklies, including Ms. Dargis’ mentor, J Hoberman, Chicago’s Jon Rosenbaum, New York’s Armond White and Los Angeles’ Scott Foundas.
Every once in a while, one of the NYTers will go off the deep end. And it took a while for Scott – who was not long ago, one of those inappropriate replacements – to focus primarily on film. (Anthony Lane, who is a horror show, since he doesn’t care about movies… at least, by what he writes.) And I am still miffed about Manohla dubbing V for Vendetta fans “thumbsuckers.” But I think you will find that TonyOhla’s bat swings far harder than KenIna TurAno’s and that more people choose to access their work.
The truth is, the art house world is driven by reviews because they can’t afford ads. The New York Times owns New York (in spite of the quality work – which is still not arthouse heavy - of Jack Mathews at the Daily News) and Roger can drive enough business to fill an arthouse for a couple of weekends in Chicago and the publicist of Los Angeles feel abandoned by the LA Times because they fired Kevin Thomas, who was a difficult egomaniac who also worked hard to sell indies. But nationally, I don't think there is a critic who ever sells as many as 20,000 tickets… ever. And even that (about $150,00 box office) would be a real rarity.
Anne does a nice job on Dave Kehr and Jami Bernard situation, but she has somehow had her brain sucked out and is a new fan of “FilmFreakCentral.net's Walter Chaw, who writes with a refreshing candor that you would never find in the print world. In his recent review of "X3," for example, Chaw calls director Brett Ratner "a homophobic, misogynistic, misanthropic moron."
Not candor. Abuse. Calling names may be refreshing, but it is not an argument. If this is where critcism is heading, I'll be busy watching sports, thanks.
Anne does finish with strong: “The critic of the future is still being forged. Big-city newspapers are in the midst of making the inevitable transition to the Internet. Small newspapers will probably lose their local voices. But now there are many cyber critics, amateur and professional, more than happy to fill the gap.”
I think Anne is one of a lot of people who are simply trying to find an excuse for critics and entertainment journalists to be employed in the numbers and paid in the amounts we have in the last 20 years. And unfortunately, the argument for criticism is the same as it was 50 years ago… to serve the greater good, not to sell tickets. And in that, many see the end of criticism as we’ve known it.
Posted by poland at 03:28 PM | Comments (25)
Who Says Superman Wasn't In Cannes?
The Kazakhstani-Only One-Sheet
Posted by poland at 02:36 PM | Comments (13)
Just Say It!
The Los Angeles Times, probably by mistake, kind of walked into being a classic example of the good reason Traditional Media is dying. (The bad reason is to go faster, faster, faster and to lower the bar for journalistic standards.)
The story by John Horn about Superman Returns' "Gay Problem" is incredibly late... it does nothing but piggyback on what has been bouncing around the web and the gay media for months... but mostly, it can't seem to spit it out.
Bryan Singer is an active part of the gay community who won't go on record as being gay, yet infuses everything he does with gay subtext.
Warner Bros is shit scared of people turning Superman Returns into a "gay movie" since it could easily cut the box office for the MEFE (Most Expensive Film Ever) by scores of millions of dollars.
The Straight World's attitude about it, since the film itself is surely not as overtly queeny as, say, the third and fourth Batman movies, is nothing to be proud of... some of my smart ass comments fitting into that group.
Warner Bros carries a lot of weight for creating their own problem here. Many of the ads have been very soft, even though these materials have not appeared to be chasing the women's audience. Many of us can tell the difference. These are not “get behind the romance” pieces, though those may come up eventually. As shown in the posting Key Art Bizarre, the Taiwan poster has butched up Routh’s expression with paint. And the German character campaign may or may not have been stopped here by concerns over tone.
But that is the story I expected from John Horn. What is the studio doing? What is the history of homophobia hurting movies? (The two Schumacher Batman movies – the second of which was ironically the first $200 million movie ever - suffered from a lot more than the nipple suits.) Where is Pat Goldstein’s vaunted Teens on Kool-Aid crew when we need them… what do teen boys think of BulgeMan?
Of course, no Traditional Media outlet has ever done the story about how Focus played the gay press last year on Brokeback Mountain, holding back the movie from the presumed core until a few weeks before release, in spite of many festival screenings in August and September. The situation improved and I am not accusing Focus of anything like homophobia, but there was an intentional and not biased – since it was exactly how strategy is used for all press on all movies - marketing manipulation in the handling of The Community.
But the LA Times can’t just say it.
And by hinting and skirting, they become part of the problem, not the solution. Now the story, as one Hot Blog commenter noted before this piece even went up, is reduced to the LAT as a rep of Traditional Media breaking the TM hymen on this story. Yawn.
LAT could have – should have - led the way by really doing the story and not being so intimidated by Defamer as a voice of authority. There is a legitimate news story here. And if after months, the LAT dips a little toe in the pool, and all we get is this, there is no hope for the future of TM. They have to get back to what they really do… and they have to do it more intensively and more professionally than ever… or the stories will continue to be driven by Defamer, by MCN, and even by the mouthbreathers.
And for all of my criticism, never misunderstand, I want Traditional Media on that wall… I NEED Traditional Media on that wall! Defamer is not reporting. Defamer is, by its own acknowledgment, gossip. Do any of us really want all the news to be about whether fake relationships are over and about who hates who? And can we afford for the discourse to be reduced to nothing but that? You think movies suck? The degradation in media is far more pronounced, as crappy movies have always been dominant, but the style the web aspires to historically is The Algonquin Roundtable, The New Yorker, and Winchell. And for the most part, not even close.
John Horn has been, through most of his career, the very best of us. Dump the Kryptonite, whatever it is, John. We need you.
P.S. The tool to fix this, by the way, is to screen the movie for a handful of people that the studio trusts to live by embargo agreements, and to get the story to be the movie and not the froo-froo. The Da Vinci Code survived one giant attack three days before the opening. Three weeks of smears is much more dangerous as momentum shifts. WB has to shift the story to the movie... unless they hate the movie. (This is not to be confused with "show the movie or it must suck." This is an alternate strategy in light of a specific problem.)
Posted by poland at 12:00 PM | Comments (35)
June 01, 2006
Duh!
I was staying away from Kim Masters rather gossipy (and rather dumb) spin on the future of the Da Vinci Code sequel on Slate, but Anne Thompson's blog wondering "Why doesn't Slate's Kim Masters believe her?" drew me in.
Kim is not anything less than well connected and smart... but this piece is pretty much crap.
There is ZERO chance that Imagine Entertainment won't be involved with sequel to its biggest film ever and Sony's third biggest worldwide hit ever (likely to stay behind both Spider-Mans and nothing else).
The only reason Ron Howard might not do a sequel is because he's never done a sequel. But there is ZERO chance that he will not be pursued by the studio for the deal. Hollywood is too superstitious about its money to do anything else. If they went for someone else (and even bringing up Spielberg's name is absurd) and not Howard and the second film did, say, half the money, Amy Pascal would be on the firing line... even if it cost half as much to make.
As for Hanks, the same pretty much applies. Or, How Many Millions Did It Cost Not To Have Jake Gyllenhaal Be Spider-Man?
"Some informed speculation?" You mean someone who has thought about it a lot more than Sony has? The movie opened 13 days ago.
This is not The Day After Tomorrow, folks. It may have dropped in the second weekend, but the audience is not abandoning it like they got tricked.
Here's a stat you might want to consider... there are a lot of sequels and second films in franchises that have grossed over $200 million worldwide. Now, guess how many went into that second film without the star and the director? Answer: One. (Please see correction below... the real answer is Zero.) Clear & Present Danger. $216 million worldwide. And the star they switched to was one of the biggest in the world at the time. (Maybe informed speculators think that they are going to put Cruise or Smith on the case... hardy, har, har.)
Without the star? Still, just that one case.
Without the same director, but with the star? That's been done.
I count 32 examples of second films that have grossed over $200 million worldwide. Seven were made by different directors (Die Hard 2, Hannibal, American Pie 2, Bourne Supremacy, Rambo, and M:I2). Even the second James Bond film was directed by Terence Young and starred Sean Connery, like the first.
The only director with anything like Howard’s clout in the group above? Jon Demme… who as I recall was not interested in turning his Oscar nominee into a Grand Guignol freak show killer comedy.
And yes, it will be stupid expensive to get the gang back together. But history tells us that not doing it is extremely unlikely... and extremely dangerous. Amy Pascal is a lot of things, but she is neither dumb nor dumberer.
ADD - Friday, 12:56p - Commenter PastePotPete corrects my error... "I believe you mean Patriot Games, not Clear & Present Danger. Patriot Games was the first Harrison Ford Jack Ryan movie, C&PD the second. Philip Noyce directed both btw.
Actually if you use Patriot Games it even strengthens your point, it grossed $178mil worldwide according to boxofficemojo. Gets rid of even that one exception to the rule."
Excellent.
Posted by poland at 10:23 PM | Comments (18)
Summer By Studio
Conclusion -
Here is a broadly estimated guess at what the summer leaderboard will look like in the end…
Sony - $700 million
Disney - $575 million
Warner Bros - $475 million
Paramount - $470 million (inc OTH)
Fox - $450 million
Universal - $350 million
NL - $85 million
Posted by poland at 09:16 AM | Comments (32)