The Hot Blog

Man, Diary of the Dead got pwnd.

Klady's estimates have been coming in faster than most other sites lately.

you think fox will be happy with 30-35 million for Jumper over 4 days?

OK, I have to ask: If Juno gets any kind of Oscar love -- maybe not Best Picture, but Actress and/or Script -- could that be enough extra push for it to hit $200 million? Or will it top out at, say, $150 million? Just wondering.

I doubt it, Joe. That would mean tickets sales would have to jump significantly after the awards, and maintain that momentum for a few weeks, for it to hit that $200 million. I doubt there's many, amounting to $70 worth, who were putting off seeing it in the theater until it won an Oscar, or that many who would run out to see it again simply because it won an Oscar. Or if you were to split the figure between those two types ($35 million worth) I still doubt it. I even think it's a stretch to hit $150 million. I think it'll top out close to it, at probably around $140.

Way off topic, but related to a very old blog re Quentin Tarentino. Just saw Deathproof, and I must say....what was the fucking point? Any critic who gave this turd of a movie a pass is trying way too hard to be relevant and cool. Chicks who are way too cool, way too good looking, and way too talented to be in this shit, that is just a QT spankfest to tits and transmissions. What the fuck! I want my 113minutes back. I just had to get that off my chest. Carry on.

I think the Jumper number is nothing to sneeze at, I'm sure Fox is satisfied. $35 mill for a action film with no stars (Samuel L Jackson was very little in the marketing campaign), not a sequel, not a comic book, etc. - that's very good. It will still probably drop fast and squeak into the $70 mill/$80 mill range.

As for Juno, let's not keep raising the bar, here. Did ANYONE expect this film to have cleared $125 million? It could win Best Picture and end up doing American Beauty numbers, close to $140 million - nothing to sneeze at.

Death Proof is a terrific movie.

Geoff: No disrespect to Juno intended on my part. I think it's a terrific film, deserving of its success. And you're absolutely right: It has scored a much greater b.o. take than I think even its most enthusiastic admirers could have predicted. Just wondering how much higher The Little Movie That Could can climb.

You forget that the Jumper budget had to have been just out of control. Massive amounts of location shooting in several countries (US--both NYC and Ann Arbor, UK, Rome, Tokyo, Prague), the recasting of 2 of the 3 lead roles in the midst of shooting, several name script doctors, and Lane and Jackson probably demanded decent payday. Add to that the not-inconsiderable effects budget and the promotion, and they can't be thrilled with those U.S. numbers, though it'll probably do nicely internationally.

And we can look forward to Step Up 3 next Valentine's Day, I'm guessing. Movie's probably already in the black.

Dairy of the Dead opened a very little screens. You cannot get owned. If you are already at a disadvantage. Nevertheless; Joe, Juno should easily be the film to get all the love. Unless Michael Clayton represents. Juno has a shot at a few more sheckles.

Rosario Dawson is sort of bad in Death Proof. She has endearing moments, but she's always slightly lacking in conviction. Zoe Bell isn't too good either, but it's hard to blame her since she's not really an actress. I don't think Tracie Thoms performance is technically bad, but I could see how people would have problems with it. Mary Elizabeth Winstead is heaven in a skirt.

Count me in as a big fan of Death Proof. And I liked the perfs of Dawson and Bell. They actually looked like they were having fun and were enjoying what they were doing. And I don't care if Tarantino "should" be doing more important stuff, I liked it so I don't particularly care. I'd rather watch him do that than see yet another WWII movie (like Inglorious Bastards, although I'd be faaar more pumped for a Quentin war movie than pretty much anybody else's).

On the Jumper numbers, this movie could be waay bigger overseas so it's got that going for it. Plus, it is February after all. I imagine they're going to make more money now than they would have if they opened it during Summer.

Death Proof is less entertaining than having four wisdom teeth removed without going under full anesthesia.

I've subjected myself to both. I know.

And two were impacted.

Watching Nicol have four wisdom teeth removed sounds entertaining to me.

Hey-yo!

HD-DVD is dead. Long live HD-DVD. WOO!!!!!!!!!!!!!

I enjoyed Jumper, its not an epic scifi movie, more fistcuffs and vehicle combat situations. this is probably why critics hate it, they are probably used to the kitchen sink being thrown at them, but its fun, a 1hr 30min diversion. it would be a good rental. Hayden gets a hard time from critics and audience, he did fine here.

I may actually watch Death Proof since I found out it's available on watch instantly on netflix.

So Nicol, once again, I must ask: Is it safe?

Joe,

I...I don't know what you're talking about.

I really aaaahhhhhhhhhhhh!

Yes! Yes! It's safe! It's safe!

Another great Scheider movie!

Deathproof is a goddamn all-time classic compared to Planet Terror.

That said, I didn't really like Deathproof all that much.

Deathproof is so awful.

I don't even care if Tarantino never makes an important film, i'm just tired of him jerking off to the same influences for every fucking film.

It's like the guy doesn't have an idea that isn't based on some obscure film from the 60's or 70's.

He's like an artist stuck in the same period. There's no growth, there's no difference in perspective.

Pretty boring/predictable weekend all around.
"Spiderwick" did a bit less than anticipated--and "Step Up 2" a little better than expected--but no real surprises.
Hopefully "Definitely Maybe" will generate the sort of positive w.o.m. that translates into box office legs. (For what it's worth, I think it's as good as "When Harry Met Sally" or "Sleepless in Seattle.")
Next weekend looks like a bloodbath.
"Vantage Point" (a howlingly inept, downright insidious piece of crap) should clean up while the wonderful "Charlie Bartlett" (which deserves "Juno" crossover business) tanks.
And could someone please explain why Larry the Cable Guy continues making movies? Since neither "Delta Farce" or "Health Inspector" did anything theatrically, I'm assuming they must have done okay on DVD. Wouldn't a direct-to-video release have made more sense then?
New Line certainly isn't displaying much confidence in "Be Kind Rewind" with an 800-screen break. Too bad; it's a good film that deserves to find an audience.

So Charlie Bartlett isn't just another Wes Anderson ripoff?
Because that's certainly what it looks like, charming cast notwithstanding.

Jeff, it's exactly that. It's Rushmore meets Thumbsucker. It's not a bad film and is quite enjoyable in parts, but there's not a single original note in the entire movie.

i watched 'charlie bartlett' again last night with friends and everyone agreed that, while derivative, the cast made it work (robert downey, jr. again knocking it out of the park).....

movieman: i thought 'vantage point' was pretty good fun... because of it's structure i don't think anyone could watch it more than once but as a Saturday matinee popcorn movie i think it worked.....

Not having seen Charlie Bartlett, I will say that the trailers have been absolutely dreadful. The movie itself might be fine, but I can't imagine that the advertising is helping it any.

I can see why New Line is only putting 'Be Kind Rewind' on 800 screens. I thought, much like Jumper, this one had a terrific concept that was undone by horrible execution. It could have been so much better. The first 45 minutes are great but then it's just a downward spiral from then on.

I just saw IN BRUGES and it's excellent!! Probably the worst marketing ever for a funny, interesting and BLOODY as HELL movie. I highly recommend the flick...go see it now. Right now.

I saw "Charlie" last July (when it was originally scheudled to open in early August) and enoyed it immensely: it felt like a real breath of fresh air in that "trequel" summer. It's beautifully acted by the entire cast, and the writing is consistently smart and funny. MGM's marketing problem (and this is probably why they kept monkeying around with the release date) is that it's a movie about teenagers pitched at an adult audience. Speaking as a grown up, that wasn't a problem for me. But of course, I don't work in the MGM ad/pub department, lol.
Scooter: If David Mamet has forgotten how to write dialogue and abandoned all pretense of rudimentary story construction, the result would be "Vantage Point." I found it to be ineptly directed, atrociously written and acted and downright insidious in how it preys on post-9/11 fears and paranoia in the service of a ridiculously contrived and convoluted gimmick-plot.
The kitchen sink approach (a little bit of "Crash"'s we-are-the-world folderol; a dash of "24"; and a pinch of the "Bourne" movies' hyper-kineticism) further muddies an already incoherent script.
By the time the 7th--or was it 8th?--"vantage point"
rolls around I didn't know whether to laugh or throw Goobers at the screen.
Judging by the high "wanna see" factor (it's the one movie people have been asking me about for weeks), I'm expecting a boffo opening. I truly hope that it turns out to be a one-weekend wonder, though. The thought of "Vantage Point 2" (the further adventures of Dennis Quaid's kamikaze secret service agent and Bill Burt's knuckle-headed U.S. prez!) is very scary indeed.
Botner: While I agree that "Rewind" doesn't entirely deliver on its nifty premise--and is Gondry's weakest film to date (including the underrated "Human Nature" and his splendid Chappelle concert doc)--it's still better than 95% of the movies released so far this year. New Line should have at least given it as wide a launch as they did (the even less ostensibly commercial) "Tenacious D."
Petaluma: I don't think the "Bruges" marketing campaign is that bad, and it seems to be finding its (niche-ish) audience. I do, however, agree with your assessment of the film. Good stuff.

****...that prevous post should have read: "If David Mamet HAD forgotten...."

yikes..and please excuse the typo that resulted in the misspelling of "scheduled" in the post before last....!
TV note: has anyone else been watching HBO's "In Treatment"?
The structure is schematic as hell, but the acting and writing are typically first-rate/HBO.
I've gotten into the habit of watching all five weekday episodes back to back on Sunday afternoons...and I can't wait for "John Adams"!

I personally love the Paul & Laura and Paul & Gina sessions. Pretty intense stuff.

Re: the first post on here.
Kind of surprising how not even the geek squad turned out in sizable numbers for the Romero flick this weekend. I'm guessing that a wide release is pretty much out of the question now.
It might be heresy to say this, but I don't think Romero has made a truly satisfying movie since "Dawn of the Dead" thirty years ago. And "Diary"--while moderately clever--is pretty half-baked as well.

Nick: I like those eps as well, but my favorites are the Wednesday sessions with the fucked-up teen gymnast (the superb young actress reminds me of "My So-Called Life"-era Claire Danes) and Thursdays with the acrimonious yuppie couple (it's great seeing Josh "Crossing the Bridge" Charles again!)

Today's geeks are, I would say, post-Romero, and Diary was barely marketed. It doesn't help that it's a very small-scale movie and I can see how word-of-mouth would be unsatisfying (but I liked it).

jeeze, milan, it's one thing to disagree and quite another to lecture...really, slow down on the red bull.......
re: 'in treatment'......i've watched the thirty five eps sent by hbo and can say that, by the end, it becomes a bit tedious.....

oh, and since we're talking hbo: the joe louis doc airing next week-end is pretty wonderful... 'joe louis, america's hero...betrayed'....some great footage and very informative.....

I saw "In Bruges" this weekend as well. I liked it a whole lot. VERY funny, and very entertaining.

The funny thing about the experience was seeing the trailer to "Funny Games" before it played. The packed house booed and hissed at the end of the trailer. I never saw the masses boo during a movie, let alone at a trailer. Is it because they found the original that sacred, or did they just hate the idea of the film? I was so shocked I wanted to take a poll as people walked out.

interesting....'funny games' is a pretty reprehensible but popular cult movie..... so the reason for booing could be anything.... i'm looking forward to it despite how disturbing i found the original....there's one scene in particular that will get me in the theater.......and it's a great cast.....

Maybe it's because the trailer is creepy and nasty.

I saw IN BRUGES at the local art house thater which attracts like....80% OLD people...and they too were extremely uncomfortable with the FUNNY GAMES trailer. I've seen the trailer 4-5 times in theaters and it usually just kind of goes on by. Today there was some tension.

Speaking of trailers...
Have people always done a little grunt of approval or a pishaw of disapproval after every trailer? Today I really noticed it as the guy in front of me grunted his approval (you know, that intrigued kind of "humpff" people give when it's something they want to see...and want everyone to know that they want to see it) but then he REPEATED the grunt as some music had kind of drowned it out the first time. It's really annoying. Or, maybe I picked the wrong week to stop sniffing glue.

I liked Funny Games and am looking forward to the remake. I've seen the trailer a couple of times and liked it for it being so different from other trailers. But I do always wonder what the other people in the theater are thinking when they see it.

Petaluma, given your name I think we saw it at the same theater: the Rialto in Santa Rosa.

Funny thing about the booing experience was the trailer for the new Amy Adams/Frances McDormand that played right after it. At the end of it the guy in front of me started booing, then said "Shouldn't we be booing this instead?" It was the like the Cannes Film Festival of Northern California.

I saw IN BRUGES at the local art house thater which attracts like....80% OLD people.....

with all due respect, fuck you you ageist fuck...and thanks for playing.....

Why is it ageist to point out the theater has mostly elderly people in the audience? Pipe down, grandpa.

Whoops...
yeah Joseph...it WAS the Rialto!! Small world man!! Oh, by the way, if you're over 60 I wasn't talking about "you" in my post above ;-)

"I saw IN BRUGES at the local art house thater which attracts like....80% OLD people....."

That's what I was thinking when I saw a matinee last week at the Landmark in West L.A.

Oh, and now that I've recently seen the original Funny Games, I would be right there booing the trailer for the new one with them (assuming it's a shot-for-shot remake, which I've heard).

No, but I'm almost 30, if that's old. But furthermore the audience I was a part of on Friday night LOVED the movie. They were laughing their asses off, and a few clapped at the end. Which baffled me as to why they'd be against "Funny Games" when they enjoyed a bloody, dark comedy. Go figure.

Scoot: As for the mention of the general age of the audience that didn't read as ageist. It's just that some generations have their own limitations. I saw "Chasing Amy" five times in the theater in these same parts, and maybe because of the glowing review by Roger Ebert that appeared in the local paper many of the elderly were in the audience at each showing. And everytime the scene in which they compare oral sex scares played most of them would walk out.

pet -- with all due respect, suck my old withered dick.....
mcmahon-- you're not all that young yourself....

I even think I have more grey hair than Jeff Wells.

...speaking of TV, has anyone else been keeping up with "Breaking Bad"?
Great stuff. After this and "Mad Men," AMC has become a major player in the original cable series field.

That's so sexist, scooter.

I have nothing against older folks attending the films here...if they didn't there wouldn't be a theater. There's so many elderly patrons at this theater we're talking about, they do "Movies in the Morning" 4 days a week and show films at 10:00 a.m. I never see many truckers or quick stop employees at them...just old withered dick and cooch types.

And BREAKING BAD is excellent. Last night was less climatic than the first three, but still...a really good show.

On behalf of all the geezers around here, all I hafta say to you kids is....GET OFF MY LAWN!!!

I don't mind all the oldsters in theatres, except all that constant pooing in their pants. Honestly, can they stop with the pooing?

God (and exhibitors) loves the seniors: without them, there'd be nobody in the seats on weekday afternoons.
It's the under-6 demographic (and they've actually become a demographic, heaven help us) that truly pisses me off.
There's nothing worse than indulgent yuppie parents who let Tyler or Katrin scream their lungs out, talk incessantly and (if they're old enough to walk) run up and down the aisle during a movie.
And no, I'm not talking about matinees of "Alvin and the Chipmunks" or "The Pirates Who Don't Do Anything," but evening performances of films (say, "Rambo" or "Alien vs. Predator 2") that appeal to more, uh, adult sensibilities.

It's not yuppies, I went to see One Missed Call a week or so ago on Saturday night and a family had brought two or three kids with them. The oldest kid (9-10) was fine but the youngest one (4-5) was bored and refused to sit still and demanded attention or cried until his mom finally took him out of the movie (Dad and the older kid stayed, nice move, dick).

We poo in our pants so we can fling it at you punk-ass kids when you use your cell phones during the movie!

We're only checking to see if we have a cell signal so that when you break your hip we can call 911.

Cadavra, for some reason I thought you were in your fifties.

I think you need to add a few more decades before you can call yourself a geezer pal.

I thought your fifties was all about Divorce and banging young hot twenty somethings with Daddy issues before you really need the Viagra.

I am--57, to be exact. But geezerdom is relative. 50 may be the new 40, but to kids today, who think anything over 30 is decrepit (cf. the bouncer in KNOCKED UP telling Leslie Mann she's "old as fuck"), you might as well be 90.

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.)

URL:
Remember me? YesNo

Comments: