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
David: Looks like Ghosts of Girlfriends Past (really not a very good movie) has topped off at $53 million domestic, $75 worldwide. And now we have the potential hit of The Proposal. I realize that it’s dangerous to read too much into just two events, but I’m curious: As you’ve often pointed out, stuidos need doubles and triples as much as they need tentpoles. In that regard, and considering the tenor of the times, are star-powered rom-coms the closest thing to sure bets (if they can be budgeted reasonably enough) these days?
Box Office Mojo has HANGOVER and YEAR ONE switched. Amazing that HANGOVER is holding better than UP which is one the best legs on a Pixar film in years.
Dave, sometimes you are a victim of your own bias with regard to your either dislike or ‘not as great as you guys think it is’ attitude toward certain films. So you tend to lowball the estimated gross of these movies. You did it two years ago with IRON MAN, when it was obvious it would cross 300M, you did last year with DARK KNIGHT, and this year its Star Trek and THE HANGOVER.
I thought that you of all people (I sound like a grandpa don’t I) would know how to separate your like/dislike of a movie with its trajectory and eventual box office gross. This is in response to: “The Hangover actually does look to have a real shot at $200 million now.” THE HANGOVER looked like it would cross 200M last week. As for STAR TREK, you’ve been revising your figures weekly.
I see no comment on Pelham 123 which you raved about dropping 60% from last Friday. If it were any of the above films that I mentioned, it would have been the first thing in your post.
IRON MAN was released last year. My bad.
Up has been trailing Nemo by only 4 million. $300 million is in the bag, even if they have to run it till February (they will).
Up will be hard to find locally by Labor Day. It does have a shot at the mid to high 200s, but let’s not go crazy here. It’s a decent Pixar effort but they’ve done better, moneywise and artistically. More a product of little competition, same thing with The Proposal.
Oy… drama.
I didn’t mention Pelham because there’s nothing much to say about the #5 film yesterday. They missed. Do you need me to beat the drum against it?
Hangover is a lot more likely to hit $200 million with an 18% drop this Friday. Last Friday, I was on the road and not really working too hard on box office. What gives you the impression I don’t like the movie?
And wasn’t it me who, last week, predicted that The Hangover would beat UP when others were saying otherwise?
I think, Bulldog, it is you who is showing prejudice in deciding when things are obvious. I use the same thing I use on every movie… math. It’s really not as dramatic as you want to make it out to be.
And then we have Tofu pushing Up to $300 million. I must hate that movie too.
I realize this point is tangential to this weekend’s BO, but since Dave brought it up and I don’t feel like searching for the “Bruno” thread from a week or two back:
I DON’T think “Bruno” is “gotta-see.” It’s, what, three weeks out now? I’ve seen the trailer exactly *twice* at a multiplex despite seeing 40 movies in 2009. Nobody laughed. No one’s talking about it except journalists, industry guys, pop-cult-aware people who write from NYC and LA.
When “Borat” was MONTHS away, every officeplace meathead, frat guy, and crazy uncle was already doing his bad Borat imitation. There was definite anticipation; It seemed to hit just at the right time and catch the Bush-era mood of the country just precisely on point.
No matter who the targets were in “Borat,” people of all stripes were interested in the character and the hype — dads, moms, conservatives, whites, blacks, Latinos, liberals, hipster comedy dudes, even little kids who instinctively laugh at a funny guy with a funny look and voice. (A shitload of clueless parents brought their kids to “Borat” thinking it would be some genteel Mike Myers-style family yukfest.)
“Bruno” seems far, far less mainstream, and as others have pointed out, for right or for wrong, probably off-putting from the word “go” to even a fair share of the “Borat” audience. I like SBC and I like the Larry Charles approach, but I think this’ll fall WAY closer to “Religulous” preach to the converted numbers than to huge “Borat” figures.
Agreed Tofu. UP actually had a bigger week 3 than NEMO, and while I expect it to fall off, I think its safe to say that UP is guaranteed to be the 2nd biggest Pixar film of all time, of course not adjusting for inflation. It’ll be passed the 260M sweet spot when all is said and done, and is actually one of the films that will lose the least once TRANSFORMERS 2 hits. Look for HANGOVER to dip larger, but still make it 200M, and PELHAM to be crushed. UP’s box office will take a hit when it loses 3D screens to ICE AGE 3 on July 1st.
So where is the complaint that I hate Up since I don’t think that it’s a lock, although very possible, bulldog?
Consistency, man.
The Bruno trailer has killed every single time I’ve seen it before a film here in the purple state of Virginia.
I think if there’s less buzz about this one it’s because Sascha Baron Cohen is far less of an x factor than he was before Borat.
What math has UP ending at 260M when it will do 20M this weekend, and be at about 222M when Sunday figures come in. Are you saying that it only has 38M left in the tank? That would have to be one of the sharpest drop offs in box office history, and this a movie with great critical and regular folk reviews. It currently trails Nemo by $5m, you’re saying it’s going to fall short of the Nemo gross of $339M by $79M. I’d like to see that math. And this is not criticism of whether you liked UP or not. I know you did. I’m just questioning your math here.
With regard to your consistency comment: well okay my bad…you’re consistently wrong.
Well, in fairness, both times I’ve seen the “Bruno” trailer in L.A., it played incongruously before a high-testosterone, male-skewing non-comedy (T4, Drag Me to Hell). The audience for the former was largely Latino males, the audience for DMTH was largely white fanboys, and trust me, you could hear a pin drop, if not a pervasive “What the FUCK?” vibe.
Going out on a limb here, but “That’s such a Samantha thing to say” probably sails over most straight dudes’ heads like the fucking Concorde ’79. Wondering my Borat-imitating Uncle Lou in Virginia sitting there knowing what to make of that joke, or of the character in general.
Also trying to picture a rollin’ posse of tough-guy Valley teens making a night of “Bruno” mincing it up at the AMC — or, for that matter, of corn-fed white jock frat dudes in Kansas doing the same. Again, “Borat” SLAYED with young males of every stripe. I don’t think “Bruno” will.
Up is going to hit 300m, Star Trek is going to hit 250m and The Hangover is going to hit 200m. No question about it in my mind.
And yes, I’d like to see the math that has Up only hitting 260m, when it’ll be most of the way there after this weekend, dipping slightly between weekends and has outgrossed Nemo 5 out of the last 7 days on the same days in their respective runs.
“Pelham” seems to have the “Miami Vice” trajectory, no?
All-business, urban-set, A-list summer action movie with two big-name stars as a high-testosterone name action director busting out all the experimental stops?
Both opened in the mid-20s, fell pretty fast, didn’t seem to catch fire with kids due to the “serious”/antiquated adult action trappings, nor with older audiences due to the street-smart flashiness?
GOOD ANALYSIS.
Lex, you suck.
Yeah, but you took the time to type that, so I HAVE THE POWER.
I think Ice Age being in 3D makes Up a lot more vulnerable than people think. Look what happened to Coraline the wknd the Jonas movie opened. It had been holding very well till then. And Up only has 10 more days till that happens.
I’d say 275ish is a good guess.
Joe, really though, how much of a hit is Ghosts of Girlfriends Past? Failure to Launch cost $50 million to make while Fools Gold cost $70 million. That doesn’t even include P&A costs. Let’s assume that GOGP is closer to Launch, costing about $50 million to make. Is a $53 million gross really a double or triple?
GOGP is Joe’s “21” for 2009, just let it be.
I think that’s about right Lex. VICE fell 60% in its 2nd week, and while PELHAM will fall by less, it will be crushed by TRANSFORMERS next week. DEJA VU also ended in that $65M gross, and I think the studio was hoping for more than this. Do you think there is nervousness for PUBLIC ENEMIES? There is no obvious Bourne this year.
And Joe, can’t see how you think GOGP is a hit when its at $53M when it stars the male Sandra Bullock for rom coms. WEDDING PLANNER/2001 = $60m, HOW 2 LOSE A GUY IN 10DAYS/2003= $105M, FAILURE 2 LAUNCH/2006= $88M. And this year, GOGP gets beat by BRIDE WARS, Zac Effron, Beyonce, HOTEL FOR DOGS. Give it up Joe, its a miss. If you’re looking for a rom com success this year, see HE’S JUST NOT THAT INTO YOU. $93M non-summer release.
I said it elsewhere, but the whole second half of July is testosterone-free; Why didn’t they move Public Enemies or Pelham to that chick-flick/Apatow three-week stretch to stay out of Transformers’ path? They might’ve had some room to breathe going up against Ugly Truth or Funny People.
I love Mann but period gangsters = a NO-VAG ZONE, audience wise. I don’t care how many people clock in to say “But women love Johnny Depp!” Minutia-filled 2:45 Depression-set gangster movie with guys in brown coats and fedoras shooting Tommy guns = “It looks boring” from every woman in America. Again, pains me to say it because I’m stoked for it, but it might as well be a dusty old-school style Western. Not that people go to movies by and large based on who the director is, but Mann’s stuff has that in-detail, particulars-of-crime verisimilitude that unless mixed with some pulp elements (Mohicans, Collateral), is about as likely to appeal to women as reading a newspaper.
“Do you think there is nervousness for PUBLIC ENEMIES?”
It depends on the expecations that the nervousness is pitted against. Is the studio expecting to get closer to Johnny Depp’s blockbuster numbers or his average ones? Outside of the odd smash or non-starter, he usually posts a $50 million domestic grosser (in a weird way, a lot like Sandra Bullock does).
Lots of people in places like this are psyched up because it’s Mann and Depp and Bale; but I didn’t see anything in the trailer that’s a sure-fire “you gotta SEE THIS MOVIE NOW” grabber. If it winds up closer to $90 million domestic than $60 million, that’d be one in the win column if unrelated expectations weren’t getting in the way.
Hallick…
I’m inclined to think Uni is expecting American Gangster numbers, and like a 35-40 mil opening.
Purely speculation but you don’t put Depp and Bale in a movie about an iconic figure and pitch your tent in the summer and expect less than 100M. T4 should also cause some nervousness. If Christian Bale can’t outgross Nick Stahl, its either a really bad movie, or maybe its the suit that is the draw, and not the actor. Many have asked whether Dark Knight would have made $533M if Heath hadn’t died, but has anyone asked whether it would have made $533M if Heath had still died, but Bale wasn’t the guy in the suit? Who would you put behind the mask if you were recasting Batman?
I thought The Proposal was as lame a movie as I’ve seen this year. But it is the first time I’ve seen a studio successfully sell Ryan Reynolds, who has the potential to be a major movie star. Every woman I know loves him and, unlike Affleck or McConaughey, men aren’t turned off by his good looks. He even managed to charm the hell out of David Letterman earlier this week, which I almost never see.
Like Will Smith & Clooney, he’s a genuinely funny guy with leading man charisma. It would be a shame if the studios threw away his potential on crap like a Wolverine follow-up.
Is “The Proposal” that movie about John Lesher and Brad Weston?
To be fair, Poland…
You said The Hangover would bomb and find a cult audience on video, even after all signs were pointing towards it being a hit. You also said you had no idea why the media had a boner for it and were optimistic about its performance.
“Every woman I know loves him and, unlike Affleck or McConaughey, men aren’t turned off by his good looks.”
He isn’t THAT good looking. Yeah, he’s probably in the “cute guy” range, but his looks kind of border around ordinary or non-descript too. Which is one of the reasons a person not paying close attention to character names in “Wolverine” could really miss the fact that his character was the one turned into Deadpool.
“Purely speculation but you don’t put Depp and Bale in a movie about an iconic figure and pitch your tent in the summer and expect less than 100M.”
A smart producer would do exactly that because that is precisely what Depp and Bale generally score when they’re not playing Captain Jack or Batman. Not to mention the fact that Dillinger isn’t even an iconic figure anymore. The age group that could recognize the name is closer to the grave than the cradle.
Geez, guys, mellow your harsh. As I said before, I didn’t much care for Ghosts of Girlfriends Past. (The first 15 or so minutes are borderline unwatchable.) And I certainly don’t think it’s a good as 21, which was one of the better youth-skewing popcorn movies I’ve seen in the past two years. But it held on in the Top Ten for a sick amount of time. And the story is far from over: There’s the initial DVD release, the pay- and basic-cable cycles (watch for this to be in as heavy a rotation as The Holiday and Failure to Launch), the DVD reissues as part of Valentine, Mother’s Day and Christmas promotions for years to come… I still say this will end up tunring a nice, if not spectacular profit. If I were a studio exec right now, and had to chose between green-lighting a rom-com with Matthew M. attached, or an action flick with Bale attached, and each was budgeted accordingly…
But Bulldog, you’re right: He’s Just Not That Into You (a better movie, BTW) performed much better. I would call that one a triple, almost an inside the park homer.
Another thing: I think some of you are not taking into account the zeitgeist factor when doing your box-office prognosticating for Public Enemies. This is a movie about an outlaw who goes around robbing banks, and becomes a folk hero for it, during the Great Depression. Just the other night, I showed The Public Enemy to my film students, and pointed out how, during the Depression Era, gangster films constituted one of the most popular movie genres, in no small measure because a lot of people saw them as revenge fantasies against a system that had failed them. (Yes, I quoted Warshow and Scorsese on the subject.) Now, I’m not saying this will be the only reason Public Enemies will be a hit (if indeed it is). But…
Public Enemies making boat loads = a 120 million dollar check for Mann to make For Whom the Bell Tolls. Mann’s gonna go ape-shit in the hills of Spain with all that cash and power. I can’t wait. We’re going to hear set reports being wired out of Segovia or Barcelona that will put Miami Vice’s “troubles” to shame.
I’m going to see PE three times just to help out the Mann…and Hemingway.
Joe I have not seen GOGP and have no opinion of it. I just didn’t think we called a movie a double or triple if it made what is cost to produce. Sure it may turn a profit when all is said and done, but how much of one? I think it’s doing OK more than anything else.
If Road to Perdition can make $100 million, can’t Public Enemies? Then again, the latter doesn’t have Tom Hanks.
Stella: Well, OK, does that make GOGP at least a single? As opposed to a strike out like Speed Racer or Imagine That?
BTW: Am I am remembering correctly that GOGP was placed in turnaround back when it had Ben Affleck attached?
I’m glad you say that about The Proposal. I’ve had a strange desire to see it ever since the first trailer.
I believe you are remembering that correctly Joe. And yes, I’d say it’s at least a single at this point.
“Public Enemies” reeks of an uber-expensive flop — look at the poster and trailer.
@bulldog68: Of course “Up” would do better than “Finding Nemo”. Ticket price inflation, dummy!
I’ve heard only good responses from the Public Enemies trailer. It’s probs a good idea to downplay Bale’s presence at this point, and people aren’t gonna start hating Johnny Depp any time soon.
B4 you start calling people ‘dummy’, you should really learn to read Chucky. No where did I, or anyone else here for that matter, say that UP would surpass NEMO. Our dispute was whether it would surpass $260M.
And if you would read my post as at 12:41: “Agreed Tofu. UP actually had a bigger week 3 than NEMO, and while I expect it to fall off, I think its safe to say that UP is guaranteed to be the 2nd biggest Pixar film of all time, of course not adjusting for inflation.”
You can remove your head from your ass now.
Aside from CRASH, has Sandra Bullock played an unlikable (to some degree) non-underdog character before? I’m drawing a blank. I think it was VERY smart of her to stay safely within her wheelhouse (RomCom) yet allow the America’s Sweetheart role to go to the guy. And I don’t care how old either of them are, they both look stunning in this one. Well played.
I think the digital aesthetic of PE is going to be an issue with regular audiences much as it was with MV. Rather than using digital to imitate film, Mann seems intent on using digital as digital in a manner that calls attention its format. The trailers make it look as though he shot PE at 29.97 instead of 24p.
Ice Age 3 is sneaking this weekend. Doesn’t that seem a little odd for a summer family franchise pic?
I was going to say the same thing MC. The Public Enemy clips and trailers I’ve seen definitely have the “video” look to them. As much or more so than Collateral and MV. I appreciate this from a technical perspective and really like how Mann uses the format in this way, as opposed to just trying to imitate film look. However, in a certain way it may come across as odd or cheap to some audiences. The video look to me gives it more of a personal, gritty look that can accentuate the drama. But it can also suggest smaller budget or TV-ish. It definitely has less of a “big hollywood” summer movie feel than if he had shot on 35mm or in film-like HD.
Wrecktum, who cares? Really, who cares about Ice Age 3 unless you’re under 12.
I said I wouldn’t but I the masochist in me relented. Well it was a freebie. TF2 is lower than the lowest of low expectations. Bay sets a new record for shallowness and ineptness. This just might be the very first piece of anti-entertainment ever created. It felt like 10,000 babies dying during every second of its obnoxious and deathly boring running time. Even Bay worshippers like LexG won’t even try to argue any of its merits as there aren’t any. Fox is a slut. We get it. Just buy a magazine you nerds, don’t support this kind of evil. Hey Speilberg, wake the fuck up! You are looking more and more like Satans whore for pocketing money from this garbage. Is it too much to ask to get a script that doesn’t look like it was written between facebook chat exchanges from 9 talentless scriptwriters? This chaotic and colourful turd must have been designed as some form of therapy for those in a coma. For normal functioning humans (ie not horny arrested adolescents and severely retarded 5yr olds) this is a the equivalent of paying someone for the pleasure of a fucking golfball sized astrocytoma.
TF2 : SEE IT IF YOU ENJOY RAPING BABIES.
Good Poster Tag. Use it Murphy.
>This just might be the very first piece of anti-entertainment ever created.
Pretty sure Godard beat Bay to the punch.
>TF2 : SEE IT IF YOU ENJOY RAPING BABIES.
Maybe Letterman will be a fan.
So, Mike Myers (according to AO Scott) is the ‘anti-funny’, and Michael Bay is the ‘anti-entertainment’. There’s a geeky Darkseid joke here, but I’ll just leave it at that.
Potential stupid question alert…
One note that I find odd is the sheer number of Transformers reviews that mention how loud it is. I suppose I’m curious as isn’t how loud a movie is partially determined by how loud the sound system is? I’ve been to more than a few critics screenings where the films were so loud that my ears were in pain. I’m actually slightly hard of hearing and carry around a set of hearing aids. I’ve actually put them in my ears and turned them “OFF” in many a press screening, rendering them as effective ear plugs (Die Hard 4 and Annapolis come to mind).* Anyway, what makes a movie “LOUD” other than the audio people simply cranking the volume way up?
*I also put in my hearing aids during an afternoon matinee of Shooter, as it was my only chance to understand just what the hell Danny Glover was saying.
Movies SHOULD be fucking LOUD. In an ideal world, we’d leave movies ears ringing like we just spend two hours center-pit at a 1992 Pantera show.
Also, despite JBD’s warnings, I already CAN GUARANTEE WITH 100% CERTAINTY that I will award T2 a FOUR-STAR RATING and that it will be in my TOP 10 of 2009.
Based on actors, directors, subject matter and cinematography, I know almost a to a science what I will think of EVERY SINGLE MOVIE beforehand.
Sometimes actually seeing the movie is merely a formality.
Anyway, good to see every critic is simply dusting off VERBATIM their reviews of BAD BOYS II, which was also 2.5 hours, loud, and AS BAY AS COULD POSSIBLY BE.
“Wrecktum, who cares? Really, who cares about Ice Age 3 unless you’re under 12”
Um, I care because I care about this industry, I care about the business of movies and I care about studio summer slates. If you don’t care, don’t read and comment in a post about weekend box office results.
When people say this is the best Sandra Bullock opening ever, does that count Demolition Man and Speed?
Or not, because she was incidental to the marketing?
Serious question.
Speed and DM both opened at $14 million, which comes to around $20 million adjusted. The Proposal will beat that.
That guy who hates RenFairs has a point. If you are not down with Ice Age 3, then you really need to get to know Diego. He’s like Tommy Gavin. If Tommy Gavin did not suffer fucking endlessly for no other reason, then the sadomasicistic tendencies of the shows writers aka Tolan and Leary.
“As I said before, I didn’t much care for Ghosts of Girlfriends Past…..But it held on in the Top Ten for a sick amount of time.”
Not if by “sick” you mean an extraordinary amount of time. It held for five weeks, in a 2-3-4-7-9 pattern, before dropping out of the top ten. But then look at the movies that held for four weeks in the recent past:
A Haunting In Connecticut
The Soloist
Duplicity
Watchmen
Terminator: Salvation (might reach five tomorrow)
Earth
Those that held on for five weeks:
Wolverine
Knowing
I Love You, Man
Hanna Montana: The Movie
Angels and Demons (could go six this weekend)
And then those that have done six weeks or more:
Monsters Vs. Aliens (9 weeks – now THAT is sick)
17 Again (6 weeks)
Obsessed (6 weeks)
Star Trek (6 weeks and counting)
Sandra Bullock, an actress most people – even cynical testosterone factories – seem to like and Ryan Reynolds, an actor 99% of women and gay men find absolutely ridiculously good looking, together in a movie at a time where there are no rom-coms in wide play? Obvious hit. Still surprising that it is Bullock’s best debut ever. At least we can erase Premonition from the record books for once and for all.
Those drops for The Hangover are astonishing. Conclusion: Make a movie that’s actually good and people will go.
Hallick, thanks for printing that out for the record; The prolonged top 10 stays of Ghosts of Girlfriends Past and Obsessed aren’t any testament to the movies’ greatness or even any particular popularity…
but testament to the fact that (ONE MORE TIME FOR THE CHEAP SEATS BECAUSE EVERYONE HERE FROM POLAND DOWN HAS A SUMMER-MOVIE HARDON and they Aspergianly block me out when I make this point out of sheer stubbornness….)
THEY DON’T REALLY RELEASE THAT MANY GODDAMN MOVIES IN THE SUMMER. So the April bullshit movies stick around FOR TWO MONTHS because IN THE SUMMER they release ONE OR TWO STUDIO MOVIES A WEEK instead of FIVE OR SIX STUDIO MOVIES A WEEK.
I know DAVID does not GIVE A SHIT about ANYTHING released between JANUARY AND APRIL, but the fact remains that there’s ALL KINDS OF FUN SHIT out there for those four months, then we hit May and it’s like, one stupid comic book movie and cartoon after another.
So, gee, when there’s 30 FUCKING STUDIO MOVIES RELEASED IN THE MONTH OF APRIL, then in May there’s roughly FIVE GODDAMN MOVIES, hey, what do you think might occupy the #6 thru #10 spots out of sheer LACK OF ANYTHING ELSE COMING OUT?
But, by all means, go ahead, someone tell me how exciting FUCKING JULY is going to be, between UGLY TRUTH, HARRY POTTER, FUNNY PEOPLE, BRUNO and ICE AGE 3. HOOOOORAY. Yeah, CAN’T WAIT to see that bitchtastic lineup.
YAY SUMMER! So much better than the times of year when there’s a VARIETY to see.
Well two of those titles look good (Potter and Bruno) while The Ugly Truth looks like another movie to sail through on Katherine Heigl’s immense charm. The others seem pretty bad though.
Obsessed was amazing though. Like, in every conceivable ways and then even some more than I hadn’t even thought possible.
“Immense charm”? Isn’t K-HEIG kind of unpleasant and shrewish lately? Does anyone really care? She always seems mean and entitled in any form, but haven’t all her TV fans turned against her for being a pain in the ass? For dissing her own shows and movies like she’s the fucking Queen or something?
Don’t get me wrong, she’s hot, but not as hot as she was in her Bride of Chucky/Roswell heyday… Now she’s just kind of a ball-busting shrew who everyone’s kinda tired of listening to.
Like, shut the fuck up and be hot.
Lex, you use ‘entitled’ a lot as a pejorative, but I’m never really clear what you intend it to mean.
Also, your 7:59 pm post was lame.
VAGINA MAKES THE WORLD GO ROUND
DOES ANYBODY GOT A PROBLEM WIT DAT?
YEP YEP HORNY AS FUCK, ANOTHER DAY, ANOTHER WEEK, ANOTHER MONTH, ANOTHER YEAR WITHOUT THE WARM EMBRACE OF SQUIZZLE.
HELP THE LEXMAN, hit me up in email or twitter with some vaginal suggestionz.
YEP YEP.
Also, like how all the dumb chicks in America like to pretend that RYAN FUCKING REYNOLDS, who goes home at night to SCARLETT JOHANSSON, is somehow an apt match for GRANNY BULLOCK with her pushing-50 old ass.
Lex just keeps getting more and more misogynistic. When’s that next column coming our way?
“Also, like how all the dumb chicks in America like to pretend that RYAN FUCKING REYNOLDS, who goes home at night to SCARLETT JOHANSSON, is somehow an apt match for GRANNY BULLOCK with her pushing-50 old ass.”
I’ve no interest whatsoever in The Proposal, but i can say in fairness that Sandra Bullock seems to have looked after herself better than most of the other big ’90’s actresses. Without wanting to be too unkind, just look at Meg Ryan or the frankly freakish-looking Nicole Kidman nowadays. Even Cameron Diaz is starting to appear haggard these days at just 37. Man, time marches on…
Agreed. Sandra was never really beautiful like other A-list actresses, but that was sort of her charm. And she does seem to have held up very well.
Lex: You think the rest of THIS summer sounds lame. What about next summer, where there’s currently maybe five movies worth being excited about sight unseen?
“Iron Man 2,” “Nottingham” (or whatever it’s called now), “Toy Story 3” (although I know it’s not your bag), “Inception” and “Salt” are the only ones that have my interest.
Depending on what I see trailer-wise, I could be swayed on “Prince of Persia,” “The A-Team,” “Predators,” “Morning Glory,” “Jonah Hex,” and that Ferrell-Wahlberg thing. That’s 11 movies, down from about 17-18 that have my legitimate interest this summer (for better or worse).
You want a failure pile in a sadness bowl? Look at June 2010:
http://tinyurl.com/md4vxk
“Agreed. Sandra was never really beautiful like other A-list actresses, but that was sort of her charm. And she does seem to have held up very well.”
couldn’t have said it better bro
June 1 2010
Katherine Heigl/Ashton Kutcher Untitled Action Comedy
Wouldn’t be awesome that the filmmakers/production company become so lazy and complacent, they never bother to name the movie and release it as “Katherine Heigl/Ashton Kutcher Untitled Action Comedy”
Man, I know June has been the summer equivalent of the dumping ground for the last several years, but I laughed out loud reading that stunningly unexciting list of releases. “failure pile in a sadness bowl” indeed (I may have to steal that for casual conversations).
Summer 2011 is where the real action is… Spider-Man 4, Thor, Kung Fu Panda: The Kaboom of Doom, Green Lantern, Cars 2, Transformers 3, Harry Potter and the Deathly Hollows part II, and The First Avenger: Captain America (that’s just between May 4th and July 22nd). Of course, and maybe someone with more insider knowledge than I can answer… Why the hell isn’t Paramount switching Captain America with Transformers 3 so Cap can open over July 4th weekend (does Bay have that much pull)? The weekend before is booked with Cars and the second weekend of Green Lantern (which should have kept is pre-Christmas opening weekend, natch), but you’d think that Paramount would see the appeal of opening Cap over Independence Day and just switch with Transformers 3.
And why don’t they just call the goddamn movie “Captain America”??? Grr.
He’s the FIRST AVENGER. You title the first film to set up the second film. I have no idea why it’s that difficult to comprehend.
Scott: I could have sworn Bay had had enough of the Transformers, and wanted to move on. So T3 will be someone else’s problem, and hopefully they can watch the MATRIX OF LEADERSHIP collection in that time, to figure out Mudflap and Skids are not as important as Ratchet and Iron-Hide.
CAPTAIN AMERICA first, AVENGER second.
Uh not really. Cap really came of age in Avengers Issues No. 1. You were there Chris. You should remember.
IO, with all due respect, NOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOBODY cares about this minutia that you consistently seem to think should form the basis of every movie, every title, every marketing decision. Yes, I get that you’re passionate about these properties and know all the ins and outs, but surely you acknowledge you’re a rather small fragment of the audience they’re trying to reach.
All these “qualifying titles” like “The First Avenger” and “X-Men Origins” just sound like dorkfest bullshit to people WHO DO NOT CARE or who might have some interest but don’t wanna make a lifetime commitment to reading up on all the ins and outs of Deadpool or Mudflap (?) and who Captain America’s rolling posse was and who became an Avenger when.
It’s like you offer ZERO quarter to the possibility that some people can be casual about this, can know the big names and want to see a fun movie with that basic character and some cool actors, but DO NOT GIVE A SHIT about the entire lore down to every single plot point in Special Edition #763 in its original printing from 1978.
I mean, come on, I know you were born in 1987 and don’t remember, but TRUST ME, “The Empire Strikes Back” was “The Empire Strikes Back” for 19 FUCKING YEARS to anybody in the world until it became “STAR WARS EPISODE V: THE EMPIRE STRIKES BACK.”
Sorry, most people aren’t that huge of a dork.
I also know that CAPTAIN AMERICA came out long before Avengers and Kirby was still drawing him then…These colon added subtitles are silly. So what will they call the next film: FIRST AVENGER: CAPTAIN AMERICA: THE RED SKULL: LEGEND OF BUCKY…
And I wasn’t alive when Cap America returned as an Avenger. My brother was, hence my exposure. I did collect CA when Kirby returned to Marvel in the late 70’s…
I have no idea who Captain America is.
They should get William Katt to play him though.
No one cares about Captain America. No one cares about Thor. Marvel’s gotta be nervous, scraping the bottom of their z-list to try to make a buck.
Adding the “The First Avenger” to the Captain America movie just strikes me as an obvious concession to foreign markets.
But Thor and Captain America are FAR from Marvel’s Z-list. They’re higher-tier than Ghost Rider and some others that have been adapted. About the same place Iron Man was a couple years back.
But Z list? This is a company that holds copyrights on something like 16,000 characters. We’ve got a looong way to go down the alphabet.
Oh, Wrecktum, Marvel and DC’s z-list are so far away from the likes of Thor and Captain America (both A-/B+ listers), you wouldn’t believe it. Wake me when they do a CAPTAIN CARROT movie.
IOI, I’m not stupid. Yes, I know why they’re titling the movie that way. And yes, I think it’s a stupid, marketing-based decision. Where’s Chucky on this one?
I know. I was just baiting.
That said, they are second-rate characters. Iron Man was great, with awesome effects and a perfect star turn by Downey. Thor, especially, is an enormous crap shoot. Not only will they have to sell the character (since most people are only vaguely aware of him) but they have to sell Chris Hemsworth as Thor.
But both Thor and Captain America suffer from the same nearly-catastrophic problem: really, really, really, really stupid costumes.
@Kami: WB added another 190 theaters for “The Hangover”, thus the smaller-than-expected drop.
@Scott: I saw “Away We Go” today at an AMC outside Philly — and the projection booth made sure to not turn the volume up to 11.
@wrecktum: “Ice Age 3” will easily beat “Public Enemies”. Family fare, name recognition, running time — and no Oscar-pimping.
Cap and Thor both have newer costumes, but you seemingly hate costumes. You miserable…
Which are both fairly minor variations on the originals. Especially Cap’s, which is just darker and wierdly shiny – Captain Celophane. And Thor’s costume they just made black… probably anticipating the film’s look.
I don’t hate costumes. Batman and Spider-man have great outfits and they were perfectly defined cinematically. Likewise, the Iron Man costume is so cool that it’s how Paramount initially sold the movie, if you recall.
That said, Thor and Captain America have really stupid outfits. Stupid powers, too, if you ask me. Though I’m not sure what Thor’s comic book powers really are, since he’s such a third rate character that most people don’t know. He’s got a big hammer, that’s it, right? Please hammer, don’t hurt em!
OK, I have to ask: Will certain Righties raise a stink because Thor is… well, you know… the GOD OF THUNDER?
Chucky: Ice Age: Dawn of the Dinosaurs will indeed make a lot of money. (Saw it today, and my already high b.o. expectations were raised.) But isn’t it one of those name-checked sequels you despise?
BTW: I see my Ice Age review is already on line at Variety.com. Just sayin’.
embarrassing confession #53:
‘ice age’ (the first one) is HILARIOUS and touching and one of my all-time fave animated movies (the voice work is superb, thank you leary, romano and leguizamo for a guaranteed laugh in our house)
I love THOR. It’s comic book Shakespeare action. Epic.
Leahnz: Nothing to be embarrassed about. I watched the first one again just this morning — and yes, it does hold up beautifully. Indeed, if my 22-year-old son hadn’t had a previous commitment, he would have joined me to see the new “Ice Age” — he and his buddies actually admit to enjoying the first two.
Liked the first Ice Age quite a bit (it was morose, intelligent, and moving), never got around to seeing the second, but if the third one is supposed to be good, I just might do the make-up work prior.
thanks joe, i feel a little less dorky about my ‘ice age’ love now
and scott. your comment wasn’t there when i posted mine just now, weird
Scott: Credit Patton Oswalt for the “failure pile” line. It’s from his legendary KFC bit. Yeah, 2011 should be a world-beater if all of those titles live up to expectations. And yeah, it does seem like a no-brainer to have “Captain America” open over Independence Day, right? Perhaps “Transformers” will bump back to 2012, as Bay presumably wants.
PATTON OSWALT IS A FUCKING DOUCHE NO-TALENT HACK, looks like the lead singer of Accept, worst standup in the history of American comedy.
Dane Cook owns Fatton Midgetwalt and his pretentious food-worshipping dwarf ass like fucking Simon Legree. Oswalt is pure, smug condescension.
Lex: I like you, but in a word: No.