April 24, 2024
BYOB
Triple Option on: BYO Oscar
Sideshow Bill on: BYO Oscar
Stella's Boy on: BYO Oscar
Pete B on: BYO Oscar
movieman on: BYO Oscar
movieman on: BYO Oscar
Stella's Boy on: BYO Oscar
Hcat on: BYO Oscar
brack on: BYO Oscar
iothereturned on: BYO Oscar
BYOB: 235 Years Of Relative independence
BYOB Weekend: Hop, An April Fool’s Gag?
| Friday | Screens | % Chg | Cume | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Title | Gross | Thtr | % Chgn | Cume |
| Venom | 33 | 4250 | NEW | 33 |
| A Star is Born | 15.7 | 3686 | NEW | 15.7 |
| Smallfoot | 3.5 | 4131 | -46% | 31.3 |
| Night School | 3.5 | 3019 | -63% | 37.9 |
| The House Wirh a Clock in its Walls | 1.8 | 3463 | -43% | 49.5 |
| A Simple Favor | 1 | 2408 | -50% | 46.6 |
| The Nun | 0.75 | 2264 | -52% | 111.5 |
| Hell Fest | 0.6 | 2297 | -70% | 7.4 |
| Crazy Rich Asians | 0.6 | 1466 | -51% | 167.6 |
| The Predator | 0.25 | 1643 | -77% | 49.3 |
| Also Debuting | ||||
| The Hate U Give | 0.17 | 36 | ||
| Shine | 85,600 | 609 | ||
| Exes Baggage | 75,900 | 62 | ||
| NOTA | 71,300 | 138 | ||
| 96 | 61,600 | 62 | ||
| Andhadhun | 55,000 | 54 | ||
| Afsar | 45,400 | 33 | ||
| Project Gutenberg | 36,000 | 17 | ||
| Love Yatri | 22,300 | 41 | ||
| Hello, Mrs. Money | 22,200 | 37 | ||
| Studio 54 | 5,300 | 1 | ||
| Loving Pablo | 4,200 | 15 |
| 3-Day Estimates | Weekend | % Chg | Cume |
|---|---|---|---|
| No Good Dead | 24.4 (11,230) | NEW | 24.4 |
| Dolphin Tale 2 | 16.6 (4,540) | NEW | 16.6 |
| Guardians of the Galaxy | 7.9 (2,550) | -23% | 305.8 |
| Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles | 4.8 (1,630) | -26% | 181.1 |
| The Drop | 4.4 (5,480) | NEW | 4.4 |
| Let's Be Cops | 4.3 (1,570) | -22% | 73 |
| If I Stay | 4.0 (1,320) | -28% | 44.9 |
| The November Man | 2.8 (1,030) | -36% | 22.5 |
| The Giver | 2.5 (1,120) | -26% | 41.2 |
| The Hundred-Foot Journey | 2.5 (1,270) | -21% | 49.4 |
Review: Little Women (no spoilers) - The Hot Blog
Box Office First Look - The Hot Blog
Why You Should Be Afraid Of The End Of The Paramount Decree - The Hot Blog
Found this in the side column of headlines on a UK site earlier. Might’ve been The Mirror, but I don’t recall. Happy Saturday. http://mutinycompany.com/unimaginative/ThanksMum.png
Anyone else completely underwhelmed by the end of BSG? I guess I’m just not much of a fan. I’ll probably never rewatch an ep of it again and never buy the DVDs, but it was just so much hokum. I’ve got this theory that filmed Sc-Fi peaked with 2001 and it’s all down hill from Kubrick, though I do give props to BLADE RUNNER, CEOT3K, the original version of SOLARIS. It seems that the genre is innately hokey to me. Like they have to have a STAR WARS element of soap opera to it. I don’t know. I just wanted more out of this.
Was trying to kill time and saw Race to Witch Mountain last night – yeeks was that bad. Clearly, I’m not the target demographic, but anyone who said it was ‘surprisingly good’ or ‘competent’ – really? The directorial choices were dominated by huge space-destroying close-ups, the pace alternated between being frantically rushed to tediously protracted, it felt like most scenes of character development had been plucked out, lots of awkward moments where the score dominated over the arbitrary visuals, flailing performances…I wouldn’t be going on but what I read here and elsewhere really made me expect more.
Saw Adam Elliot’s (Oscar-winner Harvey Krumpet) Mary & Max last week. What is it with claymation that seems to bring out the bizarre? It was very good, but the final act was a bit of a weak spot. A friend of mine was one of the “lead sculptors” so I got a kick out of that. Phillip Seymour Hoffman makes a surprisingly good vocal talent.
Oh, I see Cannes has finally shaken off the bloated corpse that is Dreamworks and finally let a Pixar movie into the festival. Finally. Still can’t believe how much love they gave to Dreamworks animation in the past for no reason whatsoever.
@mutinyco: You were reading the Daily Mail, widely read by women for its Femail section.
The URL you provided included “thanks mum”. By coincidence tomorrow is Mothering Sunday, the British version of Mother’s Day.
I know it’s called Thanks Mum. I named the screen cap that.
Thanks for the DM correction. I realized that shortly after posting.
From all the things I have seen of her, Jade Goody was not a nice person, but the news of her death is still quite shocking since she was only 27 and had two kids. Those poor kids.
Goody was a mixed race gal who had a very troubled/poor upbringing with parents both of whom were drug addicts, her mother recovered…so that often makes for people who are more troubled. She certainly did try I think once she was sick to make up for her big mouth etc by going to India (she was invited) and doing fundraising etc.
By the way Kam–oy, you need to keep yer yobbos in check in Oz: “Bikers brawl through Australian airport; 1 dead” was one of our headlines this AM! Brawling with steel poles and such after disembarking!
Mother’s Day in the UK. Better call my ex-mother-in-law and see how she is.
I expect at least a few comparisons to “Watchmen” when “Tintin” debuts, whether or not they’re germane.
Ms. Goody passes away on Mothering Sunday — no reality show could script that.
Her death leads every UK news site this moment. Dwarfs nine-man Man Utd getting their arse handed to them at Fulham.
The only arse-handing this weekend is Aston Villa getting theirs handed them by Liverpool. 5-0 with a few minutes to go. Ouch! That’s 4, 4, and 5 for Liverpool in their last 3. That’s a season’s worth of goals for some teams.
blackc, why do you expect at least a few comparisons to ‘watchmen’ when ‘tintin’ debuts? just wondering what makes you think that, what the comparisons might be
In the US, at least, Tintin is as “niche” as Watchmen — there is a fan base, but little awareness outside of that. And they’re spending so much money on it that it needs to reach beyond that.
However, I suspect that the phrase “A Steven Spielberg film” will help, a lot more than “from the visionary director of 300.” That and the PG rating it will most likely have.
Also, I’d think that they don’t need to use Tintin the comic to promote the movie — at least not in a major way. They can probably just treat it as introducing a new character. Whereas Watchmen was completely beholden to its comic origin.
Leah, what Luke said. FYI, I was prompted by the article on Tintin’s modest US appeal in Sunday’s LA Times. But as Luke and Mutiny point out, the Tintin flick has certain structural advantages that “Watchmen” didn’t.
ah, i see. i suppose people might compare the ‘watchman’ and ‘tintin’ film projects given the fact they are both based on comic book source material, but even though ‘tintin’ may be ‘niche’ in the US, that won’t matter because:
a) the ‘tintin’ source material is family friendly and WIDELY read and beloved outside the US; the ‘tintin’ films are a belgium/NZ/US co-production produced here, the project is international and worldwide box office will be the key
b) however unknown ‘tintin’ may be in the US, like mutiny said it probably won’t mean a great deal because the intrepid boy detective/adventurer with a shamelessly cute dog can easily be marketed to families without any prior name recognition as thrilling, visually-stunning stand-alone mystery/adventures, and parents – being harried and under siege as they are – will take the kiddies to anything remotely child-friendly in hopes to shut them up for 2 hours, while perhaps enjoying the movie themselves (tho that shutting up thing rarely works in my experience)
In the US, a Tintin movie is going to have to attract viewers based on whatever the movie seems to offer in and of itself, because I don’t even think it’s close to qualifying for the the label of “niche” in this country. Beloved as it is overseas, I’d bet that awareness of the comic books is probably 1% of the awareness “Watchmen” had for its own.
Not to mention the fact that if the name “Tintin” has any recognition in the states, it’s only for the fact that it sounds like “Rin Tin Tin”, the name of the old time Hollywood movie dog. But even “Rin Tin Tin” is all but faded from American memory.
EOTW: it’s absolutely daft comments like yours, that make the internet fascinating. 2001 puts people asleep. It’s a great film to a certain group. Everyone else finds it boring. The fact that you find a rather touching tale about humanity to be hokey. Implies a lot more about you, then the properties you find hokey. Seriously; you are so far out to lunch, that you are fast approaching dinner.
“It’s a great film to a certain group. Everyone else finds it boring.”
I bet Paris Hilton would certainly be bored.
Name recognition is overrated anyway. People see what they see because of the names involved (sorry Chucky!) and the trailers andmarketing. If they know of something, so much the better…but if not, so what.
BSG is a touching tale?
Perm: it’s a story about us. Starbuck is Jesus. I find it touching.
Christian: I love 2001, but show it to a 21 year-old. Show it to a younger kid. It’s too dated for them. It even changed the fucking world, but the kids still do not get it.
So I love it, but it’s not Star Wars. It’s not Blade Runner. It’s not the Matrix. Citing all great filmed sci-fi ended with 2001 is sort off-putting.
io would appear to be right about one thing:
based on anecdotal evidence from just the other night, even freakish movie loving kids do not get the genius of ‘2001’. my 10-yr-old is going to kiddie film school over the impending school holidays so we’re working our way through some classics so as to bolster his understanding of basic movie-making techniques, and at the moment we’re doing sci-fi. it was the turn of ‘2001’ (further to the other thread, talk about a film panned by critics on theatrical release only to go on to legend status) with kubrick’s brilliant use of miniatures in the convincing depiction of space (re: miniatures, ‘the terminator’ is another great one for miniatures used in forced perspective, but i digress), so i did a little ‘space odyssey’ screening for the boy with popcorn and candy, the works to keep him happy, and about half way through he turns to me, very annoyed, and says, ‘god, mum, how long IS this SNOOZE-FEST?’
(i choked back a little tear of sadness and forced him to watch the rest like a big meanie, he was not impressed. he wanted to watch ‘the shining’ in order to get a better appreciation of kubrick, to which i responded, ‘fat chance, maybe in 5 years’. i’m super picky about the horror he sees because i don’t want him to end up like me)
leah — gotta admit, i’m kinda with the boy on this…. he’s too young for all the grown-up baggage on ‘2001’ but old enough for kubrick’s vintage (and sanitized retelling of) ‘the shining’…and i say this based on all the posts you’ve done about ‘the boy’… he sounds kinda hip to it all….
Leah, I was bored to tears when my parents dragged me to see 2001 in 1978 or ’79. I was five or six at the time. Now it’s one of my favorite movies. Some movies do work for all ages. Some don’t. I’d have to put 2001 in the latter category. I don’t think anyone would force a 10-year-old to read Faulkner or Joyce. That goes for movies, too. There’s no guarantee the results will be different in a few years, but you should try. I have a feeling you will, anyway.
I didn’t like it either when I first saw it around 15. I have since noticed the errors of my ways.
Lota, that was in Sydney. I live in Melbourne and we have our own yobbos who go about bashing people at sensible places like outside pubs at 1am not freakin’ airport checkin in desks in the middle of the day.
you guys are totally right, ‘2001’ was serious wishful thinking on my part, talk a bout a brain fart. poor kid.
on a brighter note, ‘the terminator’ was an unmitigated success; i’ve caught the little man watching the special features on how miniatures were used in the forced-perspective hunter/killer sequences, the pyrotechnics of the big-rig truck explosion, and stan winston’s segment on the different models of the endoskeleton utilised during filming (he’s already a winston fan because of his brilliant segment on the ‘aliens’ dvd on the operation of the giant alien queen puppet), so hopefully i’ve redeemed myself somewhat after the ‘2001’ debacle. he’s been videotaping the cat with his little action figures trying to get the hang of forced perspective, he’s not there yet but he’s keen
(geeze, kam, you ockers and yer yobbos – we’re far too refined for that, we only have hoons and mongrels ;-)! you know i’m just having you on, not trying to make light of what happened, not funny at all, really horrible)
I saw 2001 when I was about 4 and fell asleep after the opening and woke up for the Star Child. Magnificent. After that, never been bored. But you have to see it on the widescreen first.
Is this the level of modern film insight? Some 21 year olds will be bored? Sucks to be you Ozu and Antonioni!
2001 rules only in the shots where it looks like SHINING and CLOCKWORK and it’s freaky and unshakable and evil; All the boring parts are pretentious, which is why SHINING and CLOCKWORK and EWS are better Kubricks, because almost every shot is nightmare-inducing and unsettling, as opposed to 2001 where there’s boring parts in between the nightmare-sinister shots.
I was about 10 when I first saw 2001 (on the big screen yet). Didn’t understand much, of course, but it was quite an experience. Since then, I’ve seen it several more times, including once several years ago at the Cinerama Dome (pre-Arclight, and I saw James Cameron in the parking lot afterward).
I’ve always loved it. Never found it boring. Sure, it has some deliberate pacing, since in 1968 you’d have been too much in awe of the sets and fx to get antsy. But I never have trouble getting into it. It helps that, like most Kubrick, there’s a lot of dry humor. It still looks great, and it still stimulates the brain. I think the most dated thing about it is the title.
Well it IS possible Kam that all of those Road Warrior yobs busting up the airport were all from Sydney or enzed : )
2001
Way before my time when it came out..(my parents saw it in college) but at any rate I didn;t see it until long after Blade Runner, when I was in college.
2001 is a very contemplative movie and for the first time in cinema fused contemplative modern art with monster art (the old sci fi like Invaders from mars). Now that I have seen everything under the sun remotely related to science fiction and science fantasy back to the 1910s, 2001 is the first genuinely modern sci fi that actually learned from the space race and what was known about technology, combined with human drama and dread–the nightmares of what we don;t know yet since we were/are infants of what we had created and didn;t fully understand the limitations of technology. Part of the point of the movie I think.
I don’t think any person under 18, with the attention spans being nil, could possibly get into 2001 unless s/he is a bookworm who can sit still for 2-3 hrs at a time.
When I was a kid, 2001 was on TV all the time (or seemed to be), and I could never get past the monkey sequences. They felt like a 3 hour movie in and of themselves. Later on, I started paying more attention to that part and getting into it; up until the movie suddenly shifted to the space station, which frustrated me to no end because I wanted to see what the monkey with the bone would fight next!
I don’t think it was until I was 27 when I finally sat down to watch the whole film from start to finish, and it blew me away. I loved every second of it and I didn’t want it to end.
Lex on 2001: “All the boring parts are pretentious”
Well it may be a lost cause, but I suggest you watch it with no distractions on a wide screen and not be drinking anything except maybe a coffee. Shut your cell phone/Blackberry OFF.
There is alot of food for thought about where humanity was from and where humanity was going–I’ll use the dreaded word PHILOSOPHY. We hadn’t landed on the moon yet, and we were transitioning into the explosive world of technology, from the beginning of stem cell research (and understanding what it meant) and leaping into modern electronics. There were many revolutions from 1965-68 and millions of murders/war deaths worldwide and that must have influenced Kubrick as well.
I still don’t know how Kubrick did some of the shots that he did–just amazing for 1968.
Certainly in that movie, God was in the details.
Oh, and perhaps we’re forgetting the obligatory sugar cube before watching — that will make it the ultimate trip indeed. And in 1968, 18 year olds certainly were lining up to see 2001. That’s who made it a hit, the young heads. Can you imagine seeing 2001 in 70 mm at the Cinerama dome in 1968?
And the dialogue scenes now play as the quiet satire Kubrick intended, nothing pretentious there.
Nah, I’ve seen 2001 a dozen or so times, starting when I was 11 or so, and have always been awed by it… I also always just can’t wait to get to the HAL-goes-apeshit stuff or the finale. It has a little bit of the “unequal” halves shtick that Full Metal Jacket suffers, where there’s a long section that’s almost an entirely different movie unto itself; Fortunately in 2001, the “better” half is the second half, so it has less of the “fits and starts” pacing than FMJ.
I don’t know, it just in general seems like the older Kubrick enthusiasts prefer 2001 and Strangelove, but maybe because I’m younger and they were formative flicks growing up, plus were more violent or colorful or unsettling or rewatchable, I was always bigger on Clockwork, Barry Lyndon, and The Shining, then the first and last thirds of FMJ and much later, Eyes Wide Shut.
I’m younger than you are, Lex, and I prefer Strangelove and 2001 (and Barry Lyndon).
They’re all four-star movies in my mind, so it’s nitpicking; I will say that as beloved and timeless and ironic and funny as Strangelove is (and it is a masterpiece)… It doesn’t really have the unsettling “look” of all his movies after. I mean, there are striking images in it and the sets are incredible… the B&W cinematography too.
Just from 2001 on, everything seemed so of its own striking, bold, colorful, eerie universe (FMJ admittedly being the most terrestrial and least garish.)
further to the subject of the initial critical indifference/panning & the box office for kubrick’s space odyssey:
Stanley Kubrick previewed 2001: A Space Odyssey (1968) for critics, but quickly regretted doing so. Among the mostly indifferent and unfavorable reviews, as noted in the Documentary, “2001:The Making Of A Myth” were: “Somewhere between hypnotic and immensely boring”-The New York Times, “A monumentally unimaginative movie”-Harpers, “Space Odyssey fails most gloriously”-Newsday, and “Big, Beautiful but plodding scifi epic. Superb photography major asset to confusing, long-unfolding plot.”-Variety
but against the odds, word of mouth prevailed:
The film initially did such poor box office that MGM actually considered pulling it from Cinerama release after completion of a 30 day run. The exhibitors began reporting that audiences were not only increasing, but it was noted that some audience members had come to see the film multiple times. It eventually became one of MGM’s biggest hits.’
that really warms the cockles
From The Hot Blog 1968:
“Has Kubrick and MGM released the shaggy dog of all time? After a disastrous press screening, one wag was heard to call the three hour space epic, “The boner of all time.” Heads will roll at the lion for letting a young upstart like Kubrick waste years and millions for his sci-fi head trip…”
There were fucking blogs in 1968? OH MY BABY HERA! IT’S MITOCHONDRIAL COMMON ANCESTOR, YO!
2001 is the best film ever made. All show, no tell. Every edit and movement builds on the previous. Abbreviated dialogue that is designed to propel the story and not sprawl into meandering sub-plots.
IMO, it doesn’t get the respect it deserves because movies became an actor’s medium during the auteur seventies. For me, that’s the irony of the seventies; the last “golden age” turned filmmaking back into filmed theater.
Very true Martin S–never thought of it that way.
And 2001 is the only Kubrick film that I think benefits from its pacing, showing the tedium of space travel along with the cosmic mystery.
And I always think Keir Dullea is underrated in 2001. Watch as he dismantles HAL, contrary to that idiot Paglia who calls it an emotionless rape, it’s cleear that Bowman is deeply disturbed at having to take apart the machine.
It’s just one of the greatest achievements in cinema. Period. Throw me a friggin’ bone here…
The death of HAL is painful. Not sad, but hard to digest because, as Christian said, the pacing is so intentional that you’re forced to think through it all in the same time frame as Dave, where most movies cheat by compressing moments together.
…or you can mentally wander off because it’s not throttling every possible sense.
i was scared SHITLESS of HAL when i was a kid, that voice…shudder. to this day rain’s voice sends a chill down my spine (i read that he used to put his feet up so as to completely and utter relaxed to do his voice work; it worked a treat if you ask me). personally when dave kills HAL, i feel relief tinged with the sadness one must feel when putting down a rabid dog (i think that’s just me, though, i find HAL very menacing)
sorry i really mangled the language, that would be ‘so as to completely and utterly relax to do his voice work’
I can’t let you jeopardize this mission, leahnz…
I got that HAL 9000 iPhone application and, I kid you not, listen to it speak before bed every night. Now if only someone…anyone…in my real, day to day life could appreciate that I have a HAL9000 IPHONE APP! THAT SAYS THE HAL LINES FROM THE MOVIE!! AND LOOKS JUST LIKE THE HAL9000!!!!! Sigh. I live alone.
Speaking of “2001,” found this freeking insane site via twitter yesterday and can’t figure out if it’s a brilliant look at “The Shining,” (and how that film is basically an extension of “2001”) or if it’s someone who has some o.k. insights and spends too much time on thesaurus.com…or, both:
http://www.mstrmnd.com/log/802
‘I can’t let you jeopardize this mission, leahnz…’
‘my mind is going…i can feel it…’
(insert sideshowbob-type shudder here)
‘I got that HAL 9000 iPhone application and, I kid you not, listen to it speak before bed every night.’
wow, don lewis, you are one sick bastard! (wicked link, btw)
FULL METAL JACKET owns 2001 like Simon Legree.
That’s blatantly untrue.