The Hot Blog

Fantastic weekend, not just for new arrivals like "Into You" and "Coraline," but an entire rash of holdovers ("Taken," "Torino," "Paul Blart," "Slumdog," even "The Uninvited" and "Hotel for Dogs") as well.
One possible explanation could be that the weather in the northeastern part of the country this weekend was downright balmy (relatively-speaking). There weren't any snowstorms, icestorms or sub-Arctic temps to keep people huddled indoors.
And I think it's safe to say that the (somewhat rhetorical) question I posited yesterday has been answered by "Mall Cop"'s new cume. Yes, it will most certainly outgross "Bedtime Stories."

wow, the 'he's jntiy' loathers must be spitting tacks right about now

I don't know why anyone gets upset when bad movies open to big business... it's never the movie itself being judged by opening weekend ticket buyers.

And really, I have no idea whether "into you" is that bad... all I know is that it was a joke around New Line towards the end because it was seen, quality-wise, as virtually unreleasable.

Put this into perspective: other than MLK weekend, no weekend in 2008 grossed as much as the top 12 did here until Iron Man was released the first weekend in May. In fact, if you exclude summer (May-first week of August) and holiday weekends, this weekend would stand as the 3rd highest grossing of 2008 behind just Bond and Twilight's pre-Thanksgiving salvos.

"Gran Torino" and "Paul Blart" are going to finish with grosses around "Get Smart" and "Wanted" domestically. Wtf.

Blart, unless I'm off will be the #2 top January release in history with "Taken" probably number 3. (Save the Last Dance leads in attendance)

Also, what a January for horror movies, even if they mostly sucked. Four $25 million grossers if you include Underworld. And a hardcore R-film reaching $50 million...

And yay for "Coraline."

They can spit as much as they want, Leahnz.
Sounds like a tired reprise of the post-"S&TC"/"Mamma Mia!" bellyaching.
I like a good chick flick as much as anyone (loved "S&TC;" wasn't that crazy about "MM"), and "Into You" is one of the more enjoyable and satisfying examples of the genre in recent months.
And everyone who's gleefully slamming it sight unseen--or in some cases, after seeing it--should be forced to watch the godawful "Bride Wars" in a continuous loop for the next 24 hours.
Not even Anne Hathaway's post-"Rachel" luster could make that thing remotely bearable...and that's coming from someone who liked Winick's previous films (including his 2004 chick flick "13 Going on 30").

Srsly, what's up with the massive grosses we've been seeing recently? Is it just that people actually want to see this product? Or does it have something to do with economy? Is it a fluke? Or is it a trend?

"Rachel" never went semi-wide (thanks SPC) so "Bride Wars" was a perfect set-up for the Chick Flicks to come.

Speaking of which, don't be surprised if Disney puts "Shopaholic" next week into arty theaters. Upmarket types need something light for a change after all that heavy Oscar Bait.

I was a little shocked to learn that Bertrand Tavernier's first American lensed feature (the Louisiana-set serial killer procedural "In the Electric Mist" starring the estimable Tommy Lee Jones) is going straight to dvd next month...and in a truncated 102-minute version minus 15 minutes chopped from the European cut.
It almost sounds like the '60s when Euro auteurs routinely had their work sliced and diced before hitting American shores.
And a straight to video release for something that sounds at least mildly exploitable (TLJ and serial killers) is really disheartening.
Where's IFC and Magnolia when you need them?

There's nothing at all shocking about how well the holdovers did this weekend. Last Sunday was the Super Bowl, which effectively killed business for that day. So it's not so much a matter of those movies doing great this weekend as it was last weekend's grosses not being as big as they would have otherwise.

as one of the 'loathers' leah mentioned, i'd have been surprised if 'hjntiy' hadn't opened at the top given it's promotion and cast list...it just makes me sad (rather than angry) for quality work like 'coraline'...in a couple of weeks, when the jonas twinks take over every 3-d screen in the country, 'coraline' is going to have an even tougher row to hoe.....

(sorry if this double posts but the typepad is acting wonky)

You know, as mentioned before, I kind of actually want to see HJNTIY, mainly to see Johansson, Affleck and Connolly, and to give props indirectly to Greg Behrendt, an AWESOME COMEDIAN AND NICE GUY who wrote the book:

But I know the audience is going to be 90% female, and here's a nice but TRUE sweeping generalization for you: WOMEN WHO GO TO MOVIES EITHER EN MASSE or just two galpals CANNOT SHUT THE FUCK UP in a movie theater.

They sit there and titter and sneer and make their catty little comments then giggle again. Every chick flick or romance I've ever seen where two or more women sit together, it is a GUARANTEE-- a fucking G U A R A N T E E -- they cannot sit there and not utter a peep for the duration.

Pretty sure a random matinee crowd for this would do more ill-behaved chattering, texting and and whooping than a Fast and the Furious sequel audience on Friday opening night at Citywalk.

Though maybe I should go and plop down between a group of them and look like a sensitive male romantic. Maybe I'd get laid.

'wow, the 'he's jntiy' loathers must be spitting tacks right about now'

i hope that didn't make it sound like i'm a 'just not that into' basher, i haven't seen it and have no opinion!

Excellent plan, Lex.
Let us know how that works out for you.
(And curious to hear your reaction to "Into You" considering your antipathy towards Goodwin, Long and "Entourage" dude.)
As for me, I'll take an estrogen-heavy chick flick audience over a testosterone-fueled action movie crowd any day. Most women seem almost grateful to be patronizing a movie they think was made with them in mind (even bad ones like "Bride Wars" and "The Women").
Since the fanboy contigent automatically thinks EVERY damn movie featuring even a modicum of CGI was made exclusively for them and their beer/Gameboy/reefer buds, their 'plex behavior is obnoxiously rude and reeking of entitlement 99% of the time.

Excellent plan, Lex.
Let us know how that works out for you.
(And curious to hear your reaction to "Into You" considering your antipathy towards Goodwin, Long and "Entourage" dude.)
As for me, I'll take an estrogen-heavy chick flick audience over a testosterone-fueled action movie crowd any day. Most women seem almost grateful to be patronizing a movie they think was made with them in mind (even bad ones like "Bride Wars" and "The Women"), and it's actually kind of touching to see their palpable excitement.
(Sorry if this is a re-post. Typepad strikes again.)
Since the fanboy contigent automatically thinks EVERY damn movie featuring even a modicum of CGI was made exclusively for them and their beer/Gameboy/reefer buds, their 'plex behavior is obnoxiously rude and reeking of entitlement 99% of the time.

You're a vile sexist pig, Lex. No wonder you're alone.

And also: Frost/Nixon is officially the lowest grossing Best Picture nominee of the year. Well done, guys!

I second movieman's positive feelings for HJNTIY, but it is some kind of a mess that tries too hard to fuse its book, Love Actually, Swingers, and When Harry Met Sally into one cohesive storyline. My biggest issue with the movie is the fact that it thinks people themselves actually believe the bullshit they tell their friends to soften the blow of being dumped by somebody. So when Ginnefer Goodwin is relating to Aniston and Connelly all of the inside information she got from Justin Long's character, they both look like their worlds came to an utter, devastating end. Sorry, but in the real world, those two women would be doing spit takes and rupturing diaphragms trying not to laugh out loud in that poor naif's face.

The grain of truth in the idea that women got sold a bill of goods by people telling them that boys who treat them like crap really like them just gets blown so far out of proportion it edges the film into insanity-land.

And yet, I still enjoyed a lot of the movie, and it had more than a few moments that weren't wall to wall bullshit. Aniston and Affleck's sections were surprisingly well done (even though Ben Affleck seemed to be playing a junkie without telling anybody else involved in the film. The first time you see him on screen, he looks gaunt and DISEASED).

Unfortunately, the interesting resolution their couple gets near the end is ruined by the Hollywood ending tacked onto it directly afterwards. Why couldn't the film just leave well enough alone? My female companion turned and made a motion with her finger down her throat at that point. What did you think of it, movieman?

I know exactly which scene you're talking about, Hallick, and I semi-agree with your "enough already!" reaction.
But since the Anison/Affleck characters were my favorites-and I cared more about their happily-ever-after than anyone else's--it put a (mild) smile on my face even though I knew the filmmakers were (totally/absolutely/completely) gilding the lily.
Yeah, Ben did look a little junkie-fatigued (especially in his sans facial hair scenes). I thought maybe it was from burning the midnight oil while putting the finishing touches on "Gone Baby Gone" the same time he was shooting his "Into You" scenes.

I didn't see the scene as gilding the lily so much as betraying a more unique outcome for the more generic outcome.

To make a bizarre analogous comparison, I was semi-watching "Private Practice" the other night, and one of the characters had accidentally gotten pregnant. And so comes the inevitable scene, where another character asks her if she's going to keep the baby. At which point I snapped at the screen and yelled out, "Of fucking COURSE she's going to keep the baby! Haven't you been to a movie or watched a TV show yourself in the last ten years? That's what they ALWAYS do."

So without going into spoiler-level details for HJNTIY, part of the reason I liked Aniston and Affleck's couple the most was the adult way in which they got back together. It wasn't just that I didn't need the extra scene that came after that; I vehemently didn't WANT the scene that came after that. It completely scuttled the pleasure of their reconcilliation for me by once again doing something "they" ALWAYS do.

Hallick- I guess I didn't take it as personally as you.
Sure, I would have preferred it if the preceding, and gratifyingly grown-up, A/A scene had been their swansong. But they'd generated so much goodwill--with me anyway--that I wasn't going to deny Jen her Cinderella moment.
And how cool was it to see Kris Kristofferson as Aniston's dad?

"And how cool was it to see Kris Kristofferson as Aniston's dad?"

That was bizarre. The first time I saw him, I wondered, "WTF is Kris Kristofferson doing in this movie?!?". But he was great, and his little scene with Jennifer Aniston at the rehearsal dinner was one of the many saving graces for the movie. And the topic of their chat also feeds into my reasoning for why her Cinderella moment was sabotaging the uniqueness he was pointing out in her character. I thought the perfect resolution to her plotline was the realization that she didn't need this particular Cinderella moment to have the life she was hoping for.

And how about that Luis Guzman cameo? "That was a lot of prepositions...". Another saving grace in his own right.

Will the "Taken" sequel be titled or "Taken 2 Extremes" or simply "Took"?
I'm definitely smelling a "Transporter"-style franchise in the offing.
Would it be selfish of me to wish that Besson would (could?) direct another movie as from-the-heart and auteurist-whimsical-loopy as the divine "Big Blue" again?

I totally get where you're coming from, Hallick, and I won't deny that I felt a tad deflated when Ben did what he did in his final scene with Aniston. It almost felt like a capitulation to the status quo, and I seriously wondered whether his heart was really, truly in it (and if not, how long were they going to last?) But like the action fans who overlook the gaping plot holes, xeonophoia and Maggie Grace's retarded daughter act in "Taken," I simply rolled with the punches 'cause I was having so much fun. There really is something to be said for a movie that's cast with so many charming, attractive young (or young-ish) actors.
Y'know, I'm actually getting a wee bit tired of Guzman.
He's sort of become "Latino Go-To Guy" in ever damn movie these days. Is there really such a dearth of Hispanic actors in Hollywood today? What about Jon Seda? I haven't seen him in awhile--a long while. I'm betting that he could use a paying gig.

Nothing from those top 10 of the weekend has done much for me except the wonderful Coraline, thank you Bill Mechanic/Pandemonium...though it took awhile.

Respectable haul, and expect it will build.

"Y'know, I'm actually getting a wee bit tired of Guzman. He's sort of become 'Latino Go-To Guy' in ever damn movie these days."

Gee -I thought Freddy Rodriguez had that job. Maybe they can start passing the 'Latino Go-To Guy' hat around like a pair of Travelling Pants.

A few years ago, I would've had the same reaction to Mr. Guzman's presence, but I hadn't seen Luis in anything new in a while. He's been working here and there in lower profile projects apparently, but nothing like his heyday. Oddly enough, "He's Just Not That Into You" doesn't even show up on his IMDb page.

hallick...re:your original post---it appears your female companion was much brighter than you....

sorry....i should have said 'more perceptive'...i really didn't mean 'brighter'....

Anyone here actually see PINK PANTHER 2, either to review, of your own free will, or on a dare?

Well, let's just say someone had too much free time on his hands and some free passes to burn off, and the showtimes were right...

Hard to pick on a legend like Martin, and I barely remember the '06 one but I don't remember it being this bad; As most critics have stated, it goes from being merely lame to actively depressing, considering the cast includes JEREMY IRONS, Alfred Molina, Andy Garcia, Lily Tomlin, Aishwarya Rai, Emily Mortimer and John Cleese.

A couple of the Tomlin scenes MUST have been Martin's screenplay contribution (apologies if they're not), because they're whimsical and silly and sort of cute; Mortimer is really charming and their interplay is sort of delightful. But everything else is "Love Guru"-level.

Can someone give me the scoop on this Beyonce/Ali Larter/Idris Elba thriller? Is it going to be awesome or like a bad cable movie? The poster is pretty striking.

Oh jesus christ, stop going to shitty movies and start looking for a new job or go to a gym.

Guzman was the go-to-latino but I actually haven't seen him in a couple of years. Thankfully.

lex---- i've actually seen pp2 (hee-hee...i said pp)....well, that about sums that up.....

Owen Gleiberman gave PP2 a B-. He even liked the way Martin "artfully gibberizes" the word hamburger. But the film ultimately wasn't "rude" enough for him. This from the guy who gave Bad Santa an F?

'Course, I don't suppose any of us are looking to OG for comedy recos anyway.

Yance...

I was actually *disappointed* that there wasn't MORE of the HAMBURGER running gag in PP2; After all, it's the cornerstone of the marketing campaign, and I figured if they were STILL running it into the ground for TWO FULL MOVIES, it would enter some surreal zone where it just goes beyond tiresome and unfunny and into strangely brillaint (SEE: my posting style, where NOTHING is funnier to me than killing a joke dead then running with it for another two years.)

Sadly, the running gag is barely featured.

Aishwarya Rai might own, though.

The makers of the new PINK PANTHER film don’t understand that what made Peter Sellers Clouseau an entertaining comic marvel was his bumbling idiocy, lack of intellect and inability to navigate through his job without causing havoc which ultimately lead to the case being solved. In other words, Clouseau solved cases by accident, in spite of not because of his rank or skills.

Steve Martin’s take on Clouseau, however, is different, he plays him ’smart’ - the egotistical take on the character is what killed the first movie for me.

Clouseau was never meant to be smart, he was supposed to be an idiot.

Look at something like PINK PANTHER STRIKES AGAIN (in my opinion one of the great comedies ever) and the setpieces (Clouseau storming a castle several times and ending up in a moat, the assasination scenes in Berlin with Clouseau accidentally killing off hitmen, etc - pure genius). Throw in Henry Mancini’s score, Kato as a sidekick (missing from the new movies) and the genius of Herbert Lom (as his superior) as well as Blake Edward’s talented comic direction and you get a comedy classic.

These new Steve Martin PP films are fast food comedy - they dishonor the franchise and Peter Sellers. If you think Martin repeating ‘Hauumburgah’ over and over is funny, you’ll love the new movies.

"sorry....i should have said 'more perceptive'...i really didn't mean 'brighter'...."

I would've stuck with 'brighter' anyway. She most definitely is.

Count me in as another HJNTIY non-hater, although I totally agree with Hallick and movieman about the Affleck/Aniston resolution.

It's almost worth seeing to watch Jennifer Connelly serve the same function that Emma Thompson did in Love Actually, elevating the whole movie by creating a believable person whose path to happiness is a little less obvious.

It's interesting that Martin really seems to think he has nothing to offer the filmworld but this.

I genuinely feel bad for Steve Martin seeing him reduced to Ted Wass and Roberto Benigni hand-me-downs.
Yet the last time Martin wrote (and starred in) a genuinely terrific movie--2005's "Shopgirl"--nobody bothered showing up.
At least he's winning some new fans among the small fry set.

He has a young wife, eventually a young child, and he could use this cash for their future. I cannot blame the man for securing his future. Even if the movies he's doing are total fucking ass.

I'm sure I get called out on this, but I could care less is Steve Martin takes a big gigantic shit all over The Pink Panther name. I saw Shot in the Dark a few weeks ago, and I know it's the classic one and considered the best...and I could barely stand it. Sellers is great but my God, the unfunny jokes and the endless scenes of people trying to kill him. Horribly, horribly unfunny.

Re: Sellers' Panther and Shot in the Dark.

For me, the '70s run of Sellers Panthers-- Return, Strikes Again and Revenge-- were formative years multiple-rewatch classics. Not sure that they really hold up that well today, but they had a nice mix of Edwards sophistication, broad gags, and mystery plotting. That's the "Panther" I remember.

And the original "Pink Panther" is almost something else entirely, a suave, dated, swingin'-60s bedroom farce, and still plays as rather pleasant if boring.

But I've NEVER entirely gotten "A Shot in the Dark." Had always heard it's the ULTIMATE Panther movie and some LAUGH RIOT; Remember renting it back in the eighties and barely chuckling, actually finding it kind of dark, dreary, stagey and depressing, not remotely of a piece with the '70s entries I liked so much.

I'd much rather watch the much-maligned "Trail" and especially "Curse" (TED WASS OWNS) over "Shot," which is like a filmed play on clunky sets and has little of even Edwards' epic visual panache.

Yeah, at least the later ones had big goofy stunts. The first was also awful...what the hell was with the David Niven romance plotline? I hate bedroom farces. At least in that one, when Sellers shows up you're going to see something halfway amusing.

Well, the original Pink Panther was intended as an ensemble heist comedy, with David Niven getting top billing. It was luck/circumstance that Sellers exploded out of it as Clouseau.

Re: Steve Martin, though - are people thinking that he somehow has blown through the tens of millions of dollars he's made over the years, and Pink Panther 2 is his family's only firewall against playing banjo in the streets? I kind of doubt it.

fwiw -- i've actually talked to martin about both pp movies and he seems to genuinely enjoy doing them and thinks they're funny....now, i know there's a level of bs when talking to the press but i've been doing this for a really long time and can usually spot when someone is dancing....but he gets that he's not peter sellers and he likes doing family stuff.... and, like mcmahon said, he hardly needs the money.....

I'd love for Steve Martin to pull out one more movie like The Jerk. I'd take a PG-13 version of that movie, the funniest bits were clean anyway. "Do you have a balloon?"

Martin could live a few lifetimes just on his art collection, couldn't he?

If he's having fun, cool. But so many of his films seem to be a waste of his talent. I'm with you, movieman, Shopgirl was a pleasant surprise.

"If he's having fun, cool. But so many of his films seem to be a waste of his talent."

Here's the most bizarre thing I've run into in quite a while: Steve Martin created the story for the Don Cheadle movie "Traitor". Not only that, but the IMDb points out that he did so "while filming Bringing Down The House".

Processing this thought is bending my brain inside out right now. I gotta go lie down.

At the risk of undercutting my above comment about Steve Martin, I actually kinda enjoyed Bringing Down the House.

Did anyone consider the possibility that Martin might have been contractually obligated to do a sequel?

Well then that was stupid of him.

Yeah, and doesn't let him off the hook for doing the first one. :)

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: