May 5, 2024
The Hot Blog
amit on: Review: Frozen 2 (spoiler-free)
movieman on: BYOB Fall Back, Film Forward
Christian on: BYOB Fall Back, Film Forward
movieman on: Review: Marriage Story (spoilers only in the broadest sense)
movieman on: BYOB Fall Back, Film Forward
movieman on: Review: Frozen 2 (spoiler-free)
YancySkancy on: Review: Little Women (no spoilers)
Hcat on: Why You Should Be Afraid Of The End Of The Paramount Decree
movieman on: BYOB Fall Back, Film Forward
movieman on: I Should Be Doing Box Office
Review: Little Women (no spoilers)
Why You Should Be Afraid Of The End Of The Paramount Decree
Review: Frozen 2 (spoiler-free)
Review: Marriage Story (spoilers only in the broadest sense)
see all »
[twitter-widget username="DavidPoland" hiderss="true" hidereplies="true" hidefrom="true" items="3" showts="60" title=" " targetBlank="true"][twitter-widget username="MCNTweets" hiderss="true" hidereplies="true" hidefrom="true" items="3" showts="60" title=" " targetBlank="true"]
Quote Unquotesee all »
It shows how out of it I was in trying to be in it, acknowledging that I was out of it to myself, and then thinking, “Okay, how do I stop being out of it? Well, I get some legitimate illogical narrative ideas” — some novel, you know?
So I decided on three writers that I might be able to option their material and get some producer, or myself as producer, and then get some writer to do a screenplay on it, and maybe make a movie.
And so the three projects were “Do Androids Dream of Electric Sheep,” “Naked Lunch” and a collection of Bukowski. Which, in 1975, forget it — I mean, that was nuts. Hollywood would not touch any of that, but I was looking for something commercial, and I thought that all of these things were coming.
There would be no Blade Runner if there was no Ray Bradbury. I couldn’t find Philip K. Dick. His agent didn’t even know where he was. And so I gave up.
I was walking down the street and I ran into Bradbury — he directed a play that I was going to do as an actor, so we know each other, but he yelled “hi” — and I’d forgot who he was.
So at my girlfriend Barbara Hershey’s urging — I was with her at that moment — she said, “Talk to him! That guy really wants to talk to you,” and I said “No, fuck him,” and keep walking.
But then I did, and then I realized who it was, and I thought, “Wait, he’s in that realm, maybe he knows Philip K. Dick.” I said, “You know a guy named—” “Yeah, sure — you want his phone number?”
My friend paid my rent for a year while I wrote, because it turned out we couldn’t get a writer. My friends kept on me about, well, if you can’t get a writer, then you write.”
~ Hampton Fancher
“That was the most disappointing thing to me in how this thing was played. Is that I’m on the phone with you now, after all that’s been said, and the fundamental distinction between what James is dealing with in these other cases is not actually brought to the fore. The fundamental difference is that James Franco didn’t seek to use his position to have sex with anyone. There’s not a case of that. He wasn’t using his position or status to try to solicit a sexual favor from anyone. If he had — if that were what the accusation involved — the show would not have gone on. We would have folded up shop and we would have not completed the show. Because then it would have been the same as Harvey Weinstein, or Les Moonves, or any of these cases that are fundamental to this new paradigm. Did you not notice that? Why did you not notice that? Is that not something notable to say, journalistically? Because nobody could find the voice to say it. I’m not just being rhetorical. Why is it that you and the other critics, none of you could find the voice to say, “You know, it’s not this, it’s that”? Because — let me go on and speak further to this. If you go back to the L.A. Times piece, that’s what it lacked. That’s what they were not able to deliver. The one example in the five that involved an issue of a sexual act was between James and a woman he was dating, who he was not working with. There was no professional dynamic in any capacity.
~ David Simon
It seems to me that $23 million for Monster in Law fell a little short of expectations, and it may well have been hurt by the poor reviews. Didn’t Meet the Parents (original) open to over $30 mill? And $21 mill for a tame looking Will Ferrell kids movie seems on target to me. It will probably have legs (MiL could hang on for awhile as well). So maybe it’s fair to say that the first real summer movies opened this weekend and it’s all money from here. I wonder if Kingdom of Heaven’s failure (in addition to Alexander’s) will keep that DiCaprio Alexander movie from happening? It just feels like there isn’t a good market for these sorts of films now. And what is the perception of Hitchiker’s now? Is it a genuine flop or a modest moneymaker?
“Monster-in-Law” is #1 with a bullet, “Kicking & Screaming” a solid #2. “Unleashed” was only in ~2000 theaters so it had an OK per-theater average. “Crash” dropped only 20 percent — Lions Gate did the smart thing it pushing it upmarket/arthouse.
A major tragedy? “XXX: State of the Union” — good political thriller promoted as bad action sequel. What’s the political hook, you say? Retired general stages a coup d’etat during the US President’s State of the Union address.
“Bruce Almighty” and “Notting Hill” were Memorial Day releases in the US, thus their sizable openings.
The original Meet The Parents opened in October, 2000 to a little over $28 million. Not having a clue what the tracking was, $23 million was a terrific number for MiL, especially the solid 3x multiplier (which used to be normal, but now seems to be rarer and rarer).
I was amused by Box Office Prophets which stated about Kicking And Screaming: “so it had an internal multiplier of 3.3
Dave, it’s truly amazing that you’re talking about “Monster-in-Law” as the boost to J-Lo’s career that will rocket her into “Julia Roberts territory.” Like it or not, any person on the street can see that the buzz around this movie has all been about the return of Jane Fonda and her stunning (-ly good or bad, depending on which reviews you follow) performance. If they had given Fonda’s part to, say, Shirley MacLaine, this piece of crap wouldn’t be doing a cent better than “Gigli,” and you know it.
Well, Chet… Gigli was not representative of Lopez’ career, so that’s just kind of silly. You could use Enough or some such junk, but Gigli… no.
And this points up the ongoing wrong-headed thinking of most people and the press. At the end of the day, they count the money. And Lopez will get industry cred for this film. She is top billed. And if it were the media that defined the movie, it would have done Gigli business, since it got roundly smashed as though it has been the movie granny was watching while she slashed her wrists.
On the other hand, you can be sure that the next 1000 pitches her agents get will be team-ups. Also, don’t be surprised when the sequel to this particular film does end up being Fonda without J-Lo.
The same is true, essentially, with Vin Diesel and Ice Cube, who will continue to get offer after offer for kids movies, regardless of xXx2 or Riddick. The fan notion that you can write success off when you don’t like the person doesn’t apply to the industry as a whole. (Some places, yes… no doubt.) The industry needs openers and there are very few legit ones. In the end, you can say that Fonda added $8 million to this opening and it is still J-Lo’s best. And she was considered a mid-range opener before this film… despite Gigli.
Also note that Julia Roberts has slipped significantly. This opening will not put J-Lo where Roberts was… but could put her where Roberts is.
Did J Lo really get people into the seats? Or was it more Fonda and the premise? Of course it’ll help J Lo’s career. She needed this. What’s opening next for her? An Unfinished Life?
Dave: Your exchange with Chester brings up an interesting point — There are some stars, like Jennifer Lopez, who generate an almost irrational hatred in some quarters. I don’t mean someone controversial like Jane Fonda, who, whether you respect her (as I do) or not (hi, Bob!), has engaged in some activities that might inspire extreme emotions. And I’m not saying there aren’t some folks worty of brickbats out there. (Like John Landis: Remember, there are three people DEAD on his account.) But, geez, what has J-Lo — or, for that matter, Alec Baldwin or Ben Affleck or even Julia Roberts — ever done to deserve HATRED? Hey, you don’t like their performances, fine. But hate? Isn’t that something we should reserve for the likes of Osama bin Laden or Adolf Hitler?
I’m somebody who really, really loathes Jennifer Lopez. Let me try to explain why.
First of all, nine out of ten J-Lo movies are awful. I suspect she seeks out the safest, most formulaic pap. (For every Out of Sight, there’s an Enough, a Gigli, and a few Maid in Manhattans.) So I don’t respect her work.
I think what really presses my buttons, though, is her personal affairs. I really think she’s a terrible person– no class, no respect for anybody but herself. I’m not just talking about the series of men dumped when a better offer comes along. I also mean the abuse she heaps on her entourage and the little people along the way, because her sense of entitlement can somehow justify treating everybody like a serf. It’s disgusting.
I could forgive that behavior of, say, a Kubrick type. But her mediocre work can’t cover up such outlandish behavior. In J-Lo we have a medium talent, at most, acting like the world owes her everything.
Irrational hatred of entertainers usually falls into two catagories. Either you don’t like their politics and thus claim that entertainers shouldn’t be allowed to have opinions (shockingly facist thinking that ruined the otherwise amusing Team America), or you don’t think they deserved their particular level of success and thus translate that into thinking they are bad, evil people.
I recall at the age of 10, I developed an unnatural and irrational hatred of Macully (sp) Culkin after I watched the sub-par Home Alone race past my favorite movies (Batman, Raiders, Empire, Jaws, etc) on the all-time high grossing list (at the time, it’s take of $285 million was number 3, behind Star Wars and ET). I was dumb about somethings at that tender age, it’s just a shame that many adults are often caught with the same ‘they don’t deserve that so they’re bad people’ affliction. Of course, the double standard for women is quite obvious. Julia Roberts and Angelina Jolie get trashed for their ALLEGED man-stealing ways, yet Jack Nicholson, Clint Eastwood, and Sean Connery are allowed to ALLEGEDLY act like cads and they are forgiven if not idolized for it.
Scott Mendelson
Eric, don’t be hatin’. She’s Jenny from the Block and only wants to represent the people.
Okay, I know about the Twilight Zone death who else did Landis “kill”? I mean come on I’m shocked more people don’t die making movies. Someone died during the making of Spiderman, if I recall, is Raimi a murder? By the way I saw Crash and liked it on Saturday night but I went with a friend and her bone to pick was that she didn’t know what the point was. I wonder if this thinking is holding the movie back.
Jennifer’s next movie is An Unfinished Life. Another in-law movie (drama). Robert Redford plays Jennifer’s father-in-law. Morgan Freeman, Josh Lucas and Damien Lewis are in An Unfinished Life too. An Unfinished Life could be Weinstein’s last Miramax-hit? IF you ask me: Lopez is a much better in drama movies.
In June she will film a movie directed by the director of My Family (ISA nod for Lopez) and Selena (Globe nod for Lopez).
Why people hate Lopez? Maybe because of her diva image. She should quit singing (her songs are catchy but she is not a great singer) and concentrate on her acting career!
How quickly they forget. (Remember our conversation about history on another thread?) Chris: Go back and double check news stories of the time. THREE people, including two children, were killed, because ALLEGEDLY (thanks, Scott, I like that touch) of Landis’ carelessness. And before someone writes in to say Landis was cleared by a jury — so was O.J. Simpson. In fact, if memory serves me correctly, they were both (mis)prosecuted by the same D.A. No, I’m not joking.
Joe,
I guess that means Alex Proyas should never be allowed to work again either?
Now I know what Stella means about people who put words in your mouth. Ah, me. Look, Scott, I didn’t say Landis should be disqualified from working again. I merely said that he is infinitely more deserving of hate than J-Lo. Becuase last I checked, to paraphrase Robert De Niro in “Ronin,” the worst she’s ever done is hurt some people’s feelings. I don’t recall her ever having anything to do with someone’s being decapitated.
Who died on a Proyas movie? I know Bay has had a death or two. But I think the point with the Landis case was that he was yelling “lower, lower!” at the helicopter pilot just before it crashed.
It is a pain isn’t it Joe?
Stella: Er, ever hear of a guy named Brandon Lee?
Stella, or Martin?
Stella: Yikes. Sorry. Martin. See, now I’m the one putting words in your mouth! Shame on me!
Honest mistake. If only others could say the same.
Plenty of very good filmmakers (John Ford, Clint Eastwood to name the first two that come to my mind) have deaths – usually stunt men – on their sets. What made Landis case so well-known was that it involved children.
A curiosity about the case: the accident scene was not in Landis script, the studio decide the central carachter need to be more likable so maybe it would be a good idea that he help some kids. I always got the impressed that Landis might had been pretty pissed while shooting the thing.
There are lots of lots of sources worth referencing if you’re interested in the paticulars of the “Twilight Zone” case. I would suggest tracking down a copy of “Outrageous Conduct” by Stephen Farber and Marc Green, first publishd in March 1988.
Speaking of irrational dislike of actors, I followed DP’s link to the Jeff Wells blog from Cannes and in the middle of his “review” of Gus Van Sant’s latest found this paragraph:
“Remember that rumor about Keanu Reeves and River Phoenix getting into heroin when they acted in Van Sant’s My Own Private Idaho, and Reeves coping with a lingering usage problem when he was acting in Francis Coppola’s Dracula? I don’t know anything at all, but an agent friend who claimed to be in a position to know told me it wasn’t a rumor. Or at least, not entirely.”
What the hell is that about? I could not see that it bore any relation to the film he was talking about. I can only think he has an irrational dislike of Reeves to write something like this–“I don’t know anything at all”–that happened, IF it happened, years ago.
So is Wells a “movie critic” or a gossip columnist?
I hold critics to a higher standard and expect them, if they’re going to criticise an actor, to be specific about their acting–and include the director, because let’s face it, doesn’t the director have a lot to do with how the acting goes down?
The only “boost” MIL will give anybody is to the semi-retarded Toby Emmerich at New Line who will take credit for selling the shit out of a concept and title placed with a whatever movie. Considering that Emmerich is floundering with no guidance since Bob Shaye has been secretly hopitalized near death for 6 weeks with septic pneumonia, this will probably convince him his tiny dick is a footlong. He’s also got Wedding Crashers and Domino so he’s a smuggggg puppy now.
JLO and JFO will be seen as solid actors for many a year to come.
I step away to join the real world and laugh at how seriously some of you take this blog. Dave is the best informed among you and his head is up his ass at least 50% of the time.
Like Dave, how about kissing my rump now that SIN CITY 2 AND 3 have be announced?
Thought so.
I am Spam Dooley and I use Garnier Fructis.
Are Sin City 2 and 3 going straight to video? I don’t know a single person that enjoyed the first one.
Martin
That is because all right thinking people don’t stop and feed baboons like you.
Jerkwad.
I am Spam Dooley and I use Garnier Fructis.
So anyone who doesn’t like Sin City is a jerkwad baboon feeder?
Dave, c’mon, who’s being silly? The only difference between this film and “Gigli” is the heavy marketing it got and the Fonda factor. Yes, “Monster-in-Law” has had the biggest opening weekend ever for Lopez, an actress whose star has been dimming for quite some time. But to anyone familiar with Lopez’s career, that just raises the gasping, jaw-dropping question: WTF??? I mean, is anybody nuts enough to believe that audiences have suddenly, completely out of the blue, taken to her TO A DEGREE THEY NEVER HAVE BEFORE? This is a movie where the film itself and her performance in it were singled out for damn close to the crappiest reviews to be found on her unexceptional resume. Even Lopez’s most recent CD sales have tanked. So gimme a break. No one in their right mind within the industry should give any credibility to the notion that Lopez’s popularity has inexplicably risen from the dead and is in any significant way responsible for this film’s success.
Therefore, as far as your statement that this may boost Lopez to the ranking of an international superstar like Julia Roberts (whose international drawing power, unlike Lopez’s, is consistently higher than on U.S. soil)…sheesh, I’d sooner chalk up this weekend’s haul to Michael Vartan.
Stella’s Boy
Get your GED
I said he WAS a baboon not a feeder.
Tool.
I am Spam Dooley and I use Garnier Fructis.
How many of you folks live in the West Coast time zone? Then check out “Kojak” tonight on the USA network (10 pm), and see how many allusions to Hitchcock’s “Dial M for Murder” you can catch!
Can’t even read your own posts Spam? You said he stopped and fed baboons. Just FYI. But don’t worry. I’m getting my GED soon. When are you going to get yours?
SB
If I meant like he did, I would have correctly written “like you do.”
I have a master’s degree in film.
You are a master of retardation.
and a douche.
I am Spam Dooley and I use Garnier Fructis.
So tell us, Spammy: Is you hair dry or damaged?
some things;
1. Jennifer Lopez is actually good when she gets good movies. Out Of Sight, The Cell, Selena, U-Turn… I like her as an actress, she just needs to stop with boring romantic comedies. Monster-in-Law looks much better than Maid In Manhattan or The Wedding Planner mind you. I am looking forward to An Unfinished Life somewhat. Lasse Halstrom can be good (Gilbert Grape) and sometimes not (Majestic) but I like the cast so I’m ACTUALLY OPTOMISTIC (which is a stark constrast to most people on here)
2. Doesn’t anyone see the similarities between MIL and the whole Guess Who debate that was held during April. Yes, Jennifer bought some points to the table, as did Jane Fonda no doubt. I’m sure some decided to see it because of the two of them together BUT what we must remember is… ADVERTISING. We had a discussion earlier this week about poorly advertised films tanking. MIL was advertised well, thus it succeeded. The film itself is what attracted people with it’s combination of a Meet The Parents-style plot, some great casting and great marketing.
3. Comparing MIL to Gigli is a bit of a stretch, don’t ya think? Even for a rational person.
4. “I recall at the age of 10, I developed an unnatural and irrational hatred of Macully (sp) Culkin after I watched the sub-par Home Alone race past my favorite movies (Batman, Raiders, Empire, Jaws, etc) on the all-time high grossing list”
…that’s sorta sad, really.
5. And Martin, seriously. I’m sure you’ve heard of one person on the planet liking Sin City. The mere fact that it’s fresh on Rotten Tomatoes (78% no less) means somebody liked it.
6. Did Notting Hill open the week of or before Star Wars Episode 1?
I love it when people here just toss off unsupported lines like “Comparing MIL to Gigli is a bit of a stretch, don’t ya think? Even for a rational person,” as if the brevity of their comments give them incontrovertible validity. No, Kamikaze, I don’t think it’s a stretch for anyone (rational or not) to compare the critically savaged MIL to “Gigli,” and you wouldn’t be making a statement like that if MIL had died at the reviewers’ hands just like “Gigli” did.
I believe Notting Hill open some time in June Camel.
And irrational hatred of celebrities is a bit silly.
Unless it deals with Brandon Flowers of the Killers.
The bastard!
According to IMDB, Notting Hill was released here on May 28, 1999. I am Spam Dooley, and don’t let my posts fool you. I have graduated from high school.
j lo is actually good when she gets good movies? excellent analysis. why aren’t u co writing this dave? that mean she stinks when her movies stink???
He’s Spam Dooley. He has a 9th grade education and his hair has bounce.
It will take a few more 100 million dollar hits for J Lo to be anywhere close to Julia Roberts. What film has she made in the past 5 years is comparable to Julia? The thing is J Lo and Julia are about the same age and Julia has been turning out hits for over 15 years.
I think we can put all the Gigli talk to bed and put that film out of its misery. For all involved. Benn Affleck will personally thank you for it.
First off, HEY CAMEL!! Learn to spell!
Second, Hallstrom didn’t direct The Majestic.
Third, If you think The Cell and U-Turn are good movies, all your taste is in your mouth.
Monster In Law was well advertised, period. My wife loved Jane Fonda and nothing else and she’s the target audience. Kicking and Screaming is the descent of Will Ferrell into Whoredom.
Lets hope that Will Ferrell was forced to do this movie by a contract he couldn’t get out of or he had to help a friend out.
Chet – You’re just plain overreaching on Lopez. There is not much point in arguing it.
Spammy – I believe I said from the very beginning that the film would be fiscally successful and sequels would happen. That doesn’t make the film good and it certainly doesn’t make it the most influential film of the decade.
Sin City was semi enjoyable. I certainly would not call it influential in anyway. Unless mickey Rourke suddenly starts getting A list roles.
SIn City is and will be influential to graphic artists/graphic novelist gamer folks who have been trying to get things made etc of a similar type of format. Its success has already has helped me greatly in a project I am involved in so at first I liked Sin City, now I LOVE Sin City. Thank you Sin City.
KCamel, Frank Darabont directed The Majestic. I wish Hallstrom would get back to the crazy family stuff he was great at, like My Life as a Dog. Gilbert Grape was his best Yankee pic.
J-Ho has a long way to go before she makes as many movies as J Ro. that actually made money. The Cell made me want to strike my head against a sharp object. The Cell, Yikes I’d rather watch Gigli again.
i’m still trying to figure out what the heck was going on in the cell. visually it was pretty cool but the storytelling? uggh.
Dave, why don’t we just let everyone here go back through this thread and see which one of us is overreaching. I am not the one who started this thread by stating that “Monster-in-Law” might rocket Jennifer Lopez’s industry standing to Julia Roberts’s level, maybe even higher since without “Kickiing and Screaming” in direct competition MIL’s opening B.O. might have been in Jim Carrey territory. Sheesh, Dave, with all due respect, who besides you is even looking at MIL as a Jennifer Lopez movie? Virtually all of the buzz is Fonda, Fonda, Fonda, Fonda, Fonda, with a few small asides about Wanda Sykes’s performance. Everything else about the movie is just part of the wallpaper.
Chet – 1. You keep using the word “rocket” as though I said it or thought it. What I wrote was “this opening potentially puts her in Julia Roberts territory.”
Again, this does not require a rocket, Julia Roberts hasn’t proven herself as a huge box office guarentee in a long while, and Lopez was already established as a high seven figures star, regardless of Gigli. If you are so sure she could never recover from Gigli, I suggest you go rent Mary Reilly.
Again, you misquote what I wrote about “Jim Carrey terrirory.” What I wrote was “were there not another competitive comedy on the same date, J-Lo
David, don’t bring up Mary Reilly again. I just had a heart attack.
spiderman is a tobey maguire movie. ask his agent that got his salary spiked from 4 mill to 18 mill. u can say the public will see anyone in the role but i don’t think sony is taking any chances after they found the perfect guy
And Jeff Goldblum should be getting a zillion dollars a picture — no, a JILLION dollars — because, as we all know, “Independence Day” and “Jurassic Park” (to say nothing of “Lost World: Jorassic Park”) were Goldblum movies. Right?
jeff had his shot with the blockbuster and the a list. he blew it with igby goes down and holy man. yes those were his two flicks after the blockbuster successes
I’m sure Jeff Goldblums asking price went up for the Lost World after those two movies.
Jeff Goldblum wasn’t above-the-title, first placement on either of those films, Joe. But his intenrational bankability is based on those films… or was…
Excellent comparison, Joe. (bi-boob, he took those parts because they were the best of what he was offered!) Here’s what I hope will be another illustrative one: Suppose the hypothetical TV series “Arrested Girlfriends” is near cancellation. Further suppose that for its season finale the producers manage to get supportive fan Tom Cruise to make an appearance, and the ratings go absolutely through the roof. That one episode is the top-rated network show of the week, and it saves the series from cancellation. Under those circumstances, should series star Justine Bateman expect a huge raise come the fall season?
Dave, I have no doubt whatsoever that Lopez’s people will try to milk MIL to the far reaches of the galaxy. They wouldn’t be doing their jobs if they did any less. But to casually assume that the industry will fall in line to their demands is quite another matter. Other than for a “Monster-in-Law” sequel, what sensible number-crunching executive has any legitimate reason to be hyper-anxious to cast her? (Although I concede that great reviews in the upcoming Hallstrom picture could change that.)
You cannot toss out invalid comparisons to Ben Stiller, who has proven time and again that his schlemazzel image more often than not reliably translates to box-office gold. Nor can you validly compare Lopez to Tobey Maguire, a fine actor who has always gotten excellent reviews for the body of his work and received across-the-boards “thumbs ups” for his embodiment of “Spider-Man,” especially among the fan base. Lopez does not have a history of being a box-office magnet, and the MIL numbers ought not change that perception. She’s a tabloid curiosity who almost never has gotten good reviews. She’s now the Britney Spears of the film industry, with a career on the wane, probably hoping against hope to be offered a reality show that will respark the public’s willingness to actually pay good money to be in the presence of her bloated booty.
As for Julia Roberts and “Mary Reilly,” that’s both a valid and an absurd comparison. It’s valid because at the time everyone was saying it was the death knell of Roberts’s career. But it’s absurd because there’s no other point of comparison between Roberts and Lopez. At the time “Mary Reilly” was released, Roberts was an international megastar who was having the usual difficulties breaking out of the cookie-cutter image in which she felt she was getting pigeonholed. She was punished at the box office for going against the grain and taking on relatively artsy projects that, at least on paper, seemed challenging (i.e., “Mary Reilly,” “Michael Collins,” “Everyone Says I Love You”) – which arguably is the exact same problem Roberts is again having right now. Meanwhile, Lopez has done absolutely nothing to stretch as an actress since “Out of Sight,” and the public has stopped buying into the whole “I want to fool you into thinking I’m Jenny from the block when in reality everyone knows I’m the nastiest diva-bitch ever” routine. No doubt, Lopez can make a Cinderella comeback and become a hot film-industry player again. Then again, so could Pamela Anderson. But who believes that?
I am going to stop making jokes on this blog. You folks are simply too… literal.
Jeff Goldblum was the fourth actor in those movies. Tobey Maguire is front and center. Even for a joke its not that funny. You kinda proved the point there. You think Will Smith used that Independence Day clout to get a bigger payday?
hey chester, how can something be valid and absurd? do u even understand half the crap u spew? or u here to just make dave sound that much smarter about what he says? cause thats whats happening
LOL Jennifer Lopez the Britney Spears of the film industry?
OK, she doesn’t have Oscars (yet), but she was great in U-Turn, Out Of Sight, The Cell, Selena and even Angel Eyes. She is a talented actress in my opinion.
The Cell, The Wedding Planner, Anaconda, Made In Manhattan and Monster-in-Law are #1 movies. Shall We Dance did pretty good.
She has worked with Oliver Stone, Steven Soderbergh, Francis Ford Coppola and Lasse Hallstrom.
Lindsay Lohan and Hilary Duff are the Britney Spearses of the film industry. Not Jennifer Lopez. As long as Roger Ebert is a J-Lo fan, no one will see her as the Britney Spears of the film industry. 😉
I can’t wait to see An unfinished Life and her next movie about that Mexican serial killer!
So, you love Jennifer Lopez. Why do you apologize for it? She is a good actress. Why hate yourself? Relax.
joefitz84, you actually make my point when you talk about who is at the front and center of a given film. That is, based on all of the marketing and buzz, can anyone honestly say that J-Lo is at the front and center of “Monster-in-Law”? Is MIL being discussed and sold as “a traditional Jennifer Lopez romantic comedy” (e.g., “The Wedding Planner,” “Maid in Manhattan”) – which it most certainly is not – or as “Jane Fonda’s eagerly anticipated comeback vehicle”? Or, looked at from just a slightly different slant, who other than Dave Poland is talking about Jennifer Lopez’s contribution to this film’s success?
If SPIDER-MAN 3 stars Jake Gyllenhaal instead of Tobey Maguire, you think it’ll do one penny less? Does anyone need reminding that James Bond has survived and even prospered for nearly 35 years without Sean Connery? No star is bigger than the property.
Don’t kid yourself, Bro – losing Maguire would be a huge hurdle for the series to overcome. IMHO your James Bond comparison is off for a couple of reasons. First, unlike Bond, Spider-Man has been developed as a full-blown flesh-and-blood character with a backstory that plays into the plotlines and our sympathies. He is more developed than the suave British agent with a penchant for shaken martinis and loose women. Second, even the assertion that it barely matters who plays Bond is questionable at best. Do the failed outings by George Lazenby and Timothy Dalton mean nothing?
Chet – You’re whacked on this issue.
This has gotten boring. So I will just leave you with the facts. Removing the seven films in her career that were not sold based on her – My Family, Money Train, Jack, Blood and Wine, Antz, U-Turn, Jersey Girl – here are the eleven titles she has been central to and their openings.
5/13/05-Monster-in-Law – $23,105,133
10/15/04-Shall We Dance – $11,783,467
8/1/03-Gigli – $3,753,518
12/13/02-Maid in Manhattan – 18,711,407
5/24/02-Enough – $14,009,653
5/18/01-Angel Eyes – $9,225,575
1/26/01-The Wedding Planner-$13,510,293
8/18/00-The Cell – $17,515,050
6/26/98-Out of Sight – $12,020,435
4/11/97-Anaconda – $16,620,887
3/21/97-Selena – $11,615,722
Outside of Gigli, which I think it’s fair to say was a unique moment in time (even Ben Affleck had Payckeck open to $13 million later that year), Ms. Lopez’ low point was $9.2 million for Angel Eyes.
I am sure you will have an excuse why every one of these films opened in spite of Ms. Lopez. But even including Gigli, she has averaged almost $14 million per opening in the last five years. How would you determine her value to your movie, Chet?
Giving Ms. Roberts full credit for America’s Sweethearts and none of either the 2 little films or Ocean’s 11 or 12 (three stars is one thing… a dozen is another), she’s averaged about $19.5 million in this same period based on five films.
That is better than Lopez… but not monumentally… and only A.S. opened better than MIL.
If Jane Fonda had been co-starring with a no-name actress in the film, it wouldn’t have opened nearly as well, if at all. Lopez was the bedrock of the film’s publicity, Fonda’s comeback was the added bonus.
And it does matter who plays Bond, although by now the series has become so formulaic that the producers know exactly what their casting needs are…Bond is basically just a charming vehicle for audience identification while Peter Parker is a full-fledged character.
Dave, you’ve got your numbers lined up correctly but aren’t reading them like a sensible person. First, just looking at those figures, is it meaningless that Lopez hasn’t had a hit in about three years?
NO. THAT KIND OF EXTENDED LOSING STREAK IS NEVER MEANINGLESS. IT IS USUALLY INDICATIVE OF GROWING AUDIENCE DISDAIN.
What’s happened to Lopez since her last film that might have caused audiences to rediscover her this past weekend?
NOTHING.
Before the movie’s release, were there any signs whatsoever that audiences were craving a new Jennifer Lopez vehicle?
NOPE, NOT A THING. AS NOTED ABOVE, HER BOX-OFFICE RECEIPTS HAVE BEEN DROPPING FOR THREE STRAIGHT YEARS, MOST NOTABLY FOR THOSE PROJECTS WHERE SHE WAS FRONT AND CENTER. AND HER NEW MUSIC CD IS CONSIDERED A BOMB.
So how can we explain why this horrifically reviewed movie suddenly made substantially more opening-weekend money than any of her previous efforts?
IT’S SIMPLE AND OBVIOUS TO ANYONE WHO DOESN’T HAVE HIS/HER HEAD IN THE SAND. IT’S ALL BECAUSE OF AUDIENCE CURIOSITY ABOUT JANE FONDA’S RETURN TO THE BIG SCREEN, WHICH WAS RELENTLESSLY AND BRILLIANTLY MARKETED ALONGSIDE FONDA’S JUST-PUBLISHED BEST-SELLING AUTOBIOGRAPHY. AND BECAUSE AUDIENCES CAN’T SEEM TO GET ENOUGH OF THE “MEET THE PARENTS” GENRE.
Would as large an audience have gone to see the film if Lopez’s part was played by any number of recognized name actresses?
NEITHER DAVE POLAND NOR I HAVE DONE ANY POLLING ON THIS QUESTION, BUT IT IS NOT UNREASONABLE TO THINK THIS FILM WOULD HAVE DONE JUST AS WELL (PERHAPS EVEN BETTER, CONSIDERING LOPEZ’S REVIEWS) WITH A DIFFERENT ACTRESS IN HER ROLE. FURTHERMORE, EVEN IF RECEIPTS MAY HAVE DROPPED FIVE OR SIX MILLION DOLLARS, THE MOVIE STILL WOULD HAVE HAD A BETTER OPENING WEEKEND THAN ANY OF LOPEZ’S PREVIOUS EFFORTS. THAT KIND OF PROMINENT DISPARITY IS CONTINUING PROOF THAT LOPEZ HAD LITTLE TO DO WITH THIS WEEKEND’S HAUL.
Are industry players too dumb to see that?
NO.
So is there any reason to believe rational studio executives will want to give Lopez an enormous pay hike for her next picture?
NO, BUT WHO REALLY KNOWS? A LOT OF STUDIO EXECUTIVES HAVE THEIR HEADS IN THE SAND.
Can Dave Poland see that?
PROBABLY.
Would he ever admit it?
NOT IF HIS LIFE DEPENDED ON IT.
I AM CHESTER AND I FEED THE METER!
I don’t know why some seem to be so fixated on having that ONE THING be THE THING that made a movie do good opening numbers.
There are still a lot of JLO fans out there, fans of her movies who may not be fans of her music, and they showed up to see JLO turn out another paint by the numbers romantic comedy with a Meet the Parents twist. Hey Shrek rode that bitch to 436million so why not Jlo.
I personally don’t think that anyone under the age of 40 cared about Jane Fonda’s big comeback, but, if you can get that middle age crowd to the movies, hey, your week 2 and week 3 may show some legs.
Lastly, I think that Hollywood has learnt some lessons with regard to investing in big stars for big payout. Some still do it, but movie marketeers want to stack that deck as much as they could. Any and everything that can give you two extra butts in the seats, any angle they can use to reach both their target demographic and attract a few others they will use, hence the different trailers. Don’t believe for one minute that they sit in a room and argue about that ONE THING that will sell their movie. The audience is wide and varied, they know that no ONE THING will appeal to everyone.
Same as Guess Who. And as long as these pairings are mildly successful, look for some more. Coming Soon….Bowling with Moses starring Michael Moore and Charlton Heston. The Godfather is Home Alone starring Al Pacino and Maculay Culkin, and Fatal Storm starring Whoppi Goldberg and Halle Berry. And of course, don’t leave Scifi out, The Sixth Star starring William Shatner and…..aww shit…you know who.
I agree with Bulldog. The sell of this movie was parental premise + Fonda comeback + Lopez with some Wanda Sykes tossed in. Just because there was a lot of media attention to Fonda doesn’t make it “the factor” that led to the weekend gross. Remember that she hasn’t been in a movie in fifteen years, so that part of the marketing was aimed purely at women of Fonda’s demographic and film geeks who love Barbarella and Klute. Would the movie have done better with Sandra Bullock or Julia Roberts herself? Sure. But that’s not the point. The point is that Lopez proved that she’s still a reasonable draw, and, I believe Dave P’s point was that depending on how the movie holds up over the next several weeks, will give Lopez’s handlers some much-needed leverage for her next film. I don’t care for her all that much these days either but I don’t see why Chester is so intent on burying her.
It’s not and has never been my intention to bury Jennifer Lopez. This has all been in response to Dave Poland’s outlandish initial proposition that “this opening potentially puts her in Julia Roberts territory.” Based on Lopez’s overall track record and what virtually every bit of this film’s buzz focused on, my point all along has been that anybody who interprets the opening weekend numbers that way certainly isn’t seeing the forest from the trees.
“What’s happened to Lopez since her last film that might have caused audiences to rediscover her this past weekend?
NOTHING.”
Well, if you consider her last movie was “Shall We Dance”, then I’m sure she gained a legitimate, albiet however small it may be, bunch of fans in the older female demographic. I’m sure that when fans of that movie (and there were many, and the film made something like $60mil didn’t it?) saw she was making a movie with Jane Fonda that looked pretty funny they thought “why not?”
…is that acceptable?
And sorry for confusing Frank Darabont’s awful “The Majestic” with Lasse Hallstrom’s awful “The Shipping News”, both of which were released in the same year and both of which sank like stones and both of which were horrible horrible movies.
“NOPE, NOT A THING. AS NOTED ABOVE, HER BOX-OFFICE RECEIPTS HAVE BEEN DROPPING FOR THREE STRAIGHT YEARS, MOST NOTABLY FOR THOSE PROJECTS WHERE SHE WAS FRONT AND CENTER. AND HER NEW MUSIC CD IS CONSIDERED A BOMB.”
Shall We Dance: $57.9mil
Gigli: $6mil
Main in Manhattan: $94mil
Enough: $40mil
Angel Eyes: $24.1mil
The Wedding Planner: $60.4mil
The Cell: $61.3mil
Out of Sight: $37.5mil
Anaconda: $65mil
Selena: $35mil
Money Train: $35mil
The mere fact that you chose the last three years of Lopez’s career to target is a bit silly considering she’s only had 5 movies since 2002 and the last three have had grosses of $94mil, $6mil and $57mil so that kind of defuses your theory right there. And then if you estimate Monster-in-Law’s gross you have another movie that will be above her previous title’s gross).
But extending the outlook to her entire career and it looks just like many other’s CV. A few hits, a few misses and one big flop (where she was the only decent thing in it to be honest).
Plus, Shall We Dance and Maid in Manhattan had worldwide grosses of $148.1mil and $155mil respectively). And if An Unfinished Life gets traction who knows where it could go…
I’ll grant you that three years may not tell the whole story. But delve a little deeper, Kamikaze:
SHALL WE DANCE: Domestic gross: $58 million. Production budget: $50 million. Marketing costs: Unknown, but certainly more than $8 million. CONSENSUS: A domestic disappointment.
GIGLI: Domestic gross: $6 million. Production budget: $54 million. Marketing costs: $20 million. CONSENSUS: A crushing domestic flop.
MAID IN MANHATTAN: Domestic gross: $94 million. Production budget: $55 million. Marketing costs: $33 million. CONSENSUS: A minor domestic hit.
ENOUGH: Domestic gross: $40 million. Production budget: $38 million. Marketing costs: $30 million. CONSENSUS: A huge domestic flop.
ANGEL EYES: Domestic gross: $24 million. Production budget: $53 million. Marketing costs: Unknown. CONSENSUS: A huge domestic flop.
THE WEDDING PLANNER: Domestic gross: $60.5 million. Production budget: $35 million. Marketing costs: $20 million. CONSENSUS: A minor domestic hit.
THE CELL: Domestic gross: $61.3 million. Production budget: $57 million. Marketing costs: Unknown, but certainly a lot more than $4.3 million. CONSENSUS: A domestic flop.
OUT OF SIGHT: Domestic gross: $37.5 million. Production budget: Unknown. Marketing costs: Unknown. CONSENSUS: A hit with critics and everyone else who’s seen it. Financial picture unknown.
ANACONDA: Who even thinks of this as a Jennifer Lopez movie by the terms established by Dave? That movie is all about the snake, the ensemble cast and most particularly Jon Voight.
We can stop right there. Going back eight years is long enough. And it’s certainly sufficient to show that her box-office appeal, even when adding in international grosses, remains questionable at best – and cannot put her in the league of someone like Julia Roberts, who has been on semi-hiatus for some time now. To me, it’s a lot like decreeing that Ashton Kutcher might now be on equal footing with Harrison Ford. Who would ever say such a ridiculous thing?
Anaconda, The Cell, The Wedding Planner, Maid In Manhattan and Shall We Dance were hits. That’s why New Line gave her the role in Monster-in-Law. Duh. Don’t be silly.
Jennifer Lopez DVDs are selling like crazy. Shall We Dance did great overseas. Look at the big picture. I think Jennifer Lopez is one of the few actresses in Hollywood that has so many hits.
Everything what she needs now is an Oscar. I think she is an underrated actress and I hope she will be nominated some day.
FYI: according to Variety, most of the people who went to see Monster-in-Law last weekend, were UNDER 30.
Poland seems excessively keen on making wild declarations for stars drawing power based on opening weekends. His superstar “opener” diatribe for Ashton Kutcher and GUESS WHO, was made to look ridiculous and misinformed when Kutcher (without the help of Bernie Mac or black audiences) struggled to open A LOT LIKE LOVE a few weeks later. Interesting to note that on the weekend that film was released, Poland avoided doing a box office analysis.
Poland is all about extremes. He seems to have some need to overload ONE person with all the credit for a movies success. MONSTER-IN LAW benifitted from the genre (Guess Who, Meet The Fockers) which is extremely popular at the moment, and Jane Fonda’s much ballyhooed “comeback”. Lopez helped of course, but she couldn’t get that sort of opening by herself. I do think Lopez’s popularity has been on the decline for awhile, and even though MONSTER-IN LAW might represent a brief respite from her string of failures, I think she’s too much of a risky commodity for studios to hang a big pcture around. Her international appeal is very limited (unlike Nicole Kidman or Julia Roberts, who can make up for domestic underperformers with big international box office), and she’s an erratic draw.
sorry to break the news to u, ringu but thats how the industry works. ur earning power is ur power to draw crowds out opening weekend. u may not like it but dave tells it like it is
Chester, I think you just like hearing yourself talk on and on. This is not your blog. If you feel the need to post an epic then start your own blog. It is not hard to condense your thoughts into a short and simple paragraph. Trust me. What you have to say isn’t that important.
Never thought I’d ever see this much hatred for Jennifer Lopez. A lot of bitter men here.
the facts are j lo has opening ability. u can’t hate it all u want chester but them the facts
I would never market my movie going experience around a Jennifer Lopez film but my wife and daughters sure would. They were there over the weekend. They also like her music. Not my taste but not everything can be.
I’d see a J Lo movie before I see a Julia Roberts movie. Thats for sure.
Julia Roberts is effectively retired. So you can compare J Lo to Julia circa 1996. Not now. There is a huge void on the female side now that Julia is done. J Lo, Kidman, Reese Witherspoon, Lohan, Cameron Diaz, even Hillary Duff are all angling to be the top female. In regards to not only salary but also who sees the top scripts and gets first choice.
julia roberts will be playing the district attorney or the divorced mother in three years. welcome to middle age
Does that mean her future sitcom is on hold?
I need to rebut two of Chester’s box-office flop comments.
“SHALL WE DANCE: Domestic gross: $58 million. Production budget: $50 million. Marketing costs: Unknown, but certainly more than $8 million. CONSENSUS: A domestic disappointment.”
1. As I said it made roughly $150 worldwide
2. I’m sure it’s doing exceptionally on DVD (everytime I’ve been in a video store for the last 3 weeks 80-100% of the 40 or so copies have been gone)
3. It was one of the only movies last year to have true “legs”
4. It also boosted interest in the Miramax-owned original and I’m sure Paramount is thanking it slightly for helping to boost the Ballroom Dancing craze right now (Para has Madhot Ballroom)
5. It is considered a hit
“GIGLI: Domestic gross: $6 million. Production budget: $54 million. Marketing costs: $20 million. CONSENSUS: A crushing domestic flop.”
As many people have said many times, everybody knows this as a flop and everybody has moved on. It was just one of those moments when everything goes wrong for a movie (however, Jennifer was actually decent in the movie, no matter how bad it was)
Irrational hate shouldn’t lead to hyperbole (which is quite frequent around here). She’s a likable actress and people respond to that.
I don’t think we can give J Lo credit for Shall We Dance since its a supporting role. And they could have cast Bette Davis, circa 1935, in Gigli and it would have bombed.
J Lo can be a great actress. She is truly exceptional in the outstanding Out of Sight. I just think it’s the material she’s been choosing lately. I don’t like the movies themselves. It has much, much more to do with that than not liking her. Gigli needs no mention. I didn’t see Shall We Dance and have no desire to. Main in Manhattan is awful. Enough is worse than awful. The Wedding Planner is pretty bad. Angel Eyes is pretty bad. And Monster-In-Law certainly looks pretty bad. That is not an impressive list, even if you liked one or two of them.
Its Maid in Manhattan. Not Main.
They’re not making those movies for men. They’re making them for women. Women who drag their men along. But her choices have been subpar if she can’t even get women in the theatre. She needs to get back to working with great directors like Soderbergh.
i’d rather sit thru root canal than see a j lo picture. i have liked two shes ever done. out of sight and u turn. thats it.
I know what it’s called joefitz. Would you like me to point out every mistake you make on here, such as “Not Main” not being a setence?
If you knew what it was, you should have said it at the time. I am not a mind reader. Only on Sundays.
Okay, guys, let’s knock it off before someone starts getting petty.
petty this is all about. but at least the pettiness is semi interesting
If you’ve liked Jennifer Lopez pictures in the past why do you have so much annimosity towards her? I mean, would you still venomously hate her if she made another really great movie?
If An Unfinished Life turns out to be a classic and she wins an Oscar and you like her performance (hyperthetical) would you still say you hate her and say you hate her movies?
You are invited to check some relevant pages in the field of online casino online casino http://www.casino7-online.com/online-casino.html … Thanks!!!
In your free time, visit some information about online pharmacy online pharmacy http://www.ridgeviewelem.org/online-pharmacy.html pharmacy pharmacy http://www.ridgeviewelem.org/pharmacy.html weight loss pills weight loss pills http://www.ridgeviewelem.org/weight-loss-pills.html … Thanks!!!
You may find it interesting to take a look at the sites in the field of texas holdem texas holdem http://www.poker-valley.com/texas-holdem.html poker tables poker tables http://www.poker-valley.com/poker-tables.html poker hands poker hands http://www.poker-valley.com/poker-hands.html free online poker free online poker http://www.poker-valley.com/free-online-poker.html poker table poker table http://www.poker-valley.com/poker-table.html world poker tour world poker tour http://www.poker-valley.com/world-poker-tour.html free texas hold em free texas hold em http://www.poker-valley.com/free-texas-hold-em.html hold em poker hold em poker http://www.poker-valley.com/hold-em-poker.html on line poker on line poker http://www.poker-valley.com/on-line-poker.html official poker rules official poker rules http://www.poker-valley.com/official-poker-rules.html poker rooms poker rooms http://www.poker-valley.com/poker-rooms.html strategies for texas hold em strategies for texas hold em http://www.poker-valley.com/strategies-for-texas-hold-em.html texas holdem online texas holdem online http://www.poker-valley.com/texas-holdem-online.html poker players poker players http://www.poker-valley.com/poker-players.html omaha poker omaha poker http://www.poker-valley.com/omaha-poker.html texas hold em online texas hold em online http://www.poker-valley.com/texas-hold-em-online.html go play poker go play poker http://www.poker-valley.com/go-play-poker.html free poker tournaments free poker tournaments http://www.poker-valley.com/free-poker-tournaments.html cowboy poker cowboy poker http://www.poker-valley.com/cowboy-poker.html poker download poker download http://www.poker-valley.com/poker-download.html 3 card poker 3 card poker http://www.poker-valley.com/3-card-poker.html poker site poker site http://www.poker-valley.com/poker-site.html video poker software video poker software http://www.poker-valley.com/video-poker-software.html online poker tools online poker tools http://www.poker-valley.com/online-poker-tools.html texas holdem tables texas holdem tables http://www.poker-valley.com/texas-holdem-tables.html poker strip poker strip http://www.poker-valley.com/poker-strip.html poker rule poker rule http://www.poker-valley.com/poker-rule.html texas hold em poker game texas hold em poker game http://www.poker-valley.com/texas-hold-em-poker-game.html online casino poker online casino poker http://www.poker-valley.com/online-casino-poker.html poker on line poker on line http://www.poker-valley.com/poker-on-line.html – Tons of interesdting stuff!!!
First, Jennifer Lopez has been in some excruciatingly bad movies, especially “Enough,” “The Wedding Planner,” and “Gigli.” At the same time, however, she’s been in some good ones, too: “Out of Sight,” “U-Turn,” “Blood & Wine,” “Selena,” and “The Cell.” Her performance in “Angel Eyes” was probably the best part of that film. It’s unfortunate that people like Chester hate her for now reason. Yes, she’s been in some bad movies, but is that entirely her fault? She can only worry about her own performance, not how the movie will turn out. Someone said that they loathe her because she “has no class,” which is an incredibly stupid remark given that none of us actually know Lopez as a person. This is part of the problem: too many people focus on her personal life when they have absolutely no idea what they’re talking about. It’s my contention that once she became a major pop star–and “J.Lo” was born–people didn’t think she was credible as an actress. It’s too bad, really, especially since directors like Oliver Stone, Lasse Hallstrom, and Steven Soderbergh have praised her as a hard-working, dedicated, and talented actress. Hopefully, films like “An Unfinished Life,” “Bordertown,” and “American Darlings” will restore some of that credibility. I also hope she continues to do smaller movies and take smaller roles. Finally, although Jane Fonda was certainly a huge draw for “Monster-in-Law”, you shouldn’t underestimate the amount of fans that Lopez has. And by the way “Rebirth” isn’t really a flop–it’s already sold over 1 million copies in three and a half months–and she hasn’t even released a third single yet. So everyone give her a break. She’s not out to get any of you and she’s not out to make your life difficult. Let her do her thing because she’s pretty good at it, and hey, watching a Lopez film is a hell of a lot better that watching a Sandra Bullock film!