Weekend Estimates by Klady – 6/7/09
The race for #1 is too close to call, though it is likely that Up‘s final number will go up and that The Hangover‘s number will go down a bit. Nevertheless, a very, very strong showing for WB’s comedy. The notion that this film of unknowns could out-open Terminator has got to be a mind blower to all involved. It still looks like the #3 R-rated comedy opening of all-time, behind only the American Pie sequel and Sex & The City.
When writers write about the idea that Hollywood needs to make better movies, it is generally self-indulgent bull. But when a studio likes what they have made, it creates the opportunity and the will to grass roots a movie, as they did with The Hangover… and in that, there is a real benefit to “good.” Of course, not everyone loves this film. Some hate it, in fact. So “good” remains subjective, but if “people like it” is the criteria, this film is very “good” and the studio did a much more hands-on, dirty handed job than they (or other major studios) do on most pictures.
If this ends up being the right number or if the number gets better, Up will have the best second weekend hold for a Pixar film since The Incredibles (28.7%) after delivering the third best opening ever for the company (again, behind The Incredibles… and Finding Nemo, whose second weekend was off 33.7%).
This film and Coraline this spring should be instructive to studios. You have to be able to sell the thing… but people really do like something more or more complex than they were expecting. Up, like Slumdog Millionaire, is an unexpected emotional rollercoaster. People cry. But people feel great coming out of the theater. Going back a few decades, that would also describe The Sound of Music and Titanic.
Summer Hours seems to be well on the way to being the rare non-awards-season foreign language film to crack $1 million in the US these days. Away We Go won the per-screen race with a 4-screen release… and didn’t make enough this weekend to cover travel expenses for the film’s talent making TV appearances. It makes you wonder what could happen for a quality arthouse film that the media hyped up as much as they did this one because we all have a crush on Maya Rudolph and John Krazinski.
Wow, I would have never guessed that The Hangover would be that big. Nice hold for Up. Disappointing for Land of the Lost. NatM 2 will end well under my expectations. Star Trek chugs along. Terminator won’t meet inflated expectations. Drag Me to Hell, considering its fantastic reviews, plus the amount of horror dreck that will make more, is disappointing. I blame the crowded marketplace.
“When writers write about the idea that Hollywood needs to make better movies, it is generally self-indulgent bull.”
Okaaaaaaay.
I think you need to give credit to Warner Bros. for doing an incredible job selling The Hangover. It’s not just the screenings. The trailer was incredible and the billboards/posters are perfect.
Although I haven’t had a chance to see it yet, I must say that The Hangover is one of the rare movies that I wanted to see purely because of the poster. What a wonderfully on-point, but spoiler-free piece of advertising. I can’t comment on the trailers or TV spots as I’ve been trying to avoid them.
I suspect when finals come out tomorrow that Up will have about a million and change between it and Hangover. Do not underemphasize how huge it is that Up is holding over as well as it is. It’s all about the 3D upcharge, which, arguably, is what has boosted the film over Hangover this weekend.
“When writers write about the idea that Hollywood needs to make better movies, it is generally self-indulgent bull.”
Because…?
You know, if you check the twitter search for Drag Me To Hell, you’ll notice that a lot of people think it was “too over the top” or “not believable”. I guess the point of the story is that when one goes intentionally over the top, adolescents actually notice and then assume it’s a flaw.
Drag Me to Hell is the victim of all the horror movies of the last ten years training audiences to believe that a horror movie has to be grim, self-important, and serious to be ‘good’. Thanks a lot, James Wan, Darren Bousman, and Marcus Nispel.
you mean like Hostel 2 jeff?
OMG you got me!
Except that I don’t consider either Hostel to be a movie that takes itself seriously – in fact, I think that’s why 2 failed. And either way, it’s still following in Saw 1’s lame footsteps in that regard.
My theory on HANGOVER’s success is this. Simple concept that everyone in the demo can relate to. Excellently executed and focused marketing. A film where Vegas itself is also one of the main attractions, which is its own kind of boxoffice draw. Do the math, tis true. And finally, do not underestimate the love for Old School, a film that like Office Space has found a huge audience years later.
WB sold “The Hangover” as “From the director of ‘Old School’.” That alone makes it a Must to Avoid.
jeff. As flawed as SAW is and boy it sure does have flaws, seeing it with a big crowd on opening day was a hell of a lot of fun. Yes fun! Seeing Hostel on opening day was like picking scabs and pulling wings off flies combined. Your sense of fun has been duly noted.
Chucky again with more hilarity. Stop it dude you’re killing me.
JBD, to each their own (right?), and yeah, the first Saw delivered on a certain degree of ‘fun’ on its opening weekend, but I think you have to admit that it takes itself wayyy too seriously, as one of its flaws, and the series only got worse in that regard from there.
Granted it may have been unintentional ‘fun’ but it was still fun whereas I seriously came out Hostel angry and this from someone who thinks Last House on Dead End St is some kind of masterpiece.
“When writers write about the idea that Hollywood needs to make better movies, it is generally self-indulgent bull.”
Sorry… probably should have offered more context. What I was specifically referring to was the notion that to do better at the box office or with DVD sales, movies need to be of better quality… which is bull.
Popularity and quality rarely match up. It is true that Star Trek would not have likely cracked $200 million if people didn’t really like it. But the opening weekend was not about people liking it, but about what they were sold. So the film would have hit $150 million regardless of the quality of the film… just like Wolverine.
Further, as I keep writing, movies are not some amorphous blob. People choose to see movies – the big movies, at least – as a mass response to marketing of each film and how that marketing touches what they want to see, no matter what any critic or even friend (in many cases) says.
If you want to make a crap movie – say, Drag Me To Hell – make it the best crap movie you can… as with, say, Drag Me To Hell. Works for me. Selling it is another issue. And catching the moment of zeitgeist yet another.
There are correlations between perceived quality and box office. In the indie world, it can be 60% – 90% of what matters. (I hate making these kinds of numbers up, since they are so arbitrary, but I am just making the point…) In the studio world, it’s probably 15%, if that.
We can all point to examples in which quality seems to matter… and where it doesn’t matter at all. Obviously, The Dark Knight can’t do what it did without people really liking it… or Iron Man… or National Treasure… or the Pirates of the Caribbean sequels… etc, etc… you get my point.
Bigger picture, when it comes to box office, quality is a minor issue.
“If you want to make a crap movie – say, Drag Me To Hell…”
Whoa, pump your brakes…
And you’re dodging a point – Hollywood doesn’t need to make better movies for the sake of box-office, Hollywood ought to make better movies because Hollywood ought to make better movies.
I’m not dodging anything, J-Mc. Just offering up what I meant when I wrote that phrase in this entry… not giving my treatise on the history of film and what Hollywood should do.
And as so often is the case… you seem to have missed the rest of that Drag sentence.
Oh, and JBD, I’m not familiar with Last House on Dead End Street, but my point is that DMTH isn’t in the same vein (sadly) as all the big horror hits of the last 7-8 years. I was hoping it would hit with the same wider audience that made 1408 a hit a couple of years ago, but apparently not.
DP, first, I’m not disputing what you meant, but I’m addressing the ‘writers’ that you brought up in the first place, who I’m sure weren’t uniformly concerned with box-office.
And I saw the words “make it the best crap movie you can…”, and still disagree, profoundly. This is a good example of praising with faint damn.
I actually think Hollywood is making better movies overall. This nostalgia people of 25-40 have for the 80s and early 90s is just rose-tinted bs. Even with the proliferation of remakes and sequels there’s enough solid films coming out that blow their 80s equivalents off the screen, especially in terms of comedies and thrillers. Peoples fondness for junk is remarkable and the minute they revisit those magical moments again it’ll all come crashing down.
DMTH reminded me a lot of Curse of the Demon and the original House (which those old enough will remember being a hit and well liked) and I also thought it would have opened stronger. I didn’t love the film but I think perhaps it would have benefitted from a non summer preem.
You may be addressing whomever you think those writers are, J-Mc, but I was not.
And if you don’t understand that Drag is intended as a “B movie,” and don’t understand that in the lexicon of “quality” that makes it “crap,” I can’t help you. It is hard to differentiate sometimes between you being obtuse and being intentionally argumentative or something combining both.
DP you are 100% incorrect. A B-Movie is not automatically crap. I’ll bring up one of my fave B movies. BREAKDOWN. That sir is not crap. I crap on your sweeping analogy and I’m sure others will too.
“Time for another semantic argument!” — Jeff.
What JBD just said @ 2:29 is correct; I meet WAY too many too-cool-for-school Gen X film geeks who’ve just hit that median age for White Men Shutting Down to Current Music and Movies (age 33), and they’ll go see something perfectly decent (anything from Bourne to Star Trek to Revolutionary Rd.) and gripe about it like it’s some personal affront to humanity, all the while holding some bullshit nostalgia for “Real Genius” or “The Goonies” simply because they were on Showtime six times a week during their adolescent years.
JBD – I have been having more and more conversations with older people who are revisiting their 30s, 40s, 50s, and 60s remembered classics and coming away disappointed.
DP, what I’m taking umbrage with is exactly what you just said – the reflexive idea that a b-movie is inherently crap. By that logic, so is Cat People, Detour, the original Night of the Living Dead, etc, etc. I don’t want to make this some kind of IOI-esque obsessive thing where you insist that you liked the movie and I come back with ‘you didn’t like it enough!’ but I find your critical terms to be slightly out of joint.
DP. True sir. I learnt a long time ago to keep the memories and never revisit. Its like wanting to meet up with that incredible girl from your teens who was like some ethereal goddess and then coming face to face with a petulant sow who erases every damn happy memory you had of those times together.
But David, you refer to LOTL as an “art project” but Raimi’s virtuoso skillz are “crap”? Wowser!
I was using a word lightly, JBD, and now it is turning into the equivalent of explaining of a joke, which renders the funniest joke unfunny.
Breakdown is crap… of the very highest order. I love the film. I love The Hidden, consider it a true and influential classic… and it is crap. Popcorn. Silly. Great fun. Crap.
Lex, sometimes you’re right on this subject, but this is a case where it’s not just pointless pedanticism on my part – that’s my intention, anyway. I mean, the argument can also be made that Speed Racer was a hugely expensive b-movie only designed to appeal to kids, but I know that DP doesn’t consider it to be ‘crap’ either, and since both SR and DMTH were designed to be colorful, flashy, fun movies with impeccable craft, I don’t know what the distinction is – except that one has corpses and dead kittens and the other one doesn’t.
For the record. B movies were the second feature on a double feature with the A feature having the star power. Sometimes but usually not, the B film kicked the A films ass all the way home. You simply cannot define the two like DP has done. It does not compute on any critique of film culture. And somewhere in France, some Cahiers fan wants to frog punch you in the nuts.
Christian… I am speaking to the intent. Raimi loves working inside B conceits. That is his canvas of choice.
From talking to Silberling, I have a sense of what he was after with Lost. And yes, the end goal was to make smart “crap.” But his sensibility with it was to have the best production design, cinematography, effects, etc. He was not intending to go campy with the filmmaking, though Will is inherently campy.
I don’t know why I am spending time responding to all of this, except that I like to be understood… which rarely comes from pulling out one phrase from something I wrote.
Things rarely come down to a single, focused goal. You can be doing an art project inside of a big dumb movie (see : The Wachowskis). You can do dumb inside of a big art project (see: The Coens). It really is all a lot more complex that one phrase I turned.
Lex, I cut school to see THE GOONIES opening day. It was the first time I had a theatrical experience where I thought, “That sucked hard.” Still does.
Profound philosophical and aesthetic disagreement here.
Sam Fuller > Stanley Kramer.
Okay lets leave it before I go all jeffy. Just wanted to say that some films rise above their b movie origins and transcend themselves into quality films. its like a form of cinematic alchemy.
Of course I consider Speed Racer to be “crap” by the standard I am offering, J-Mc. It’s a fucking candy bar, stuffed with more sugar that any movie ever seen before, made by artists who are as careful and skilled as Willy Wonka in that sense.
Lex was right.
And JBD… again… beating this semantic horse TO DEATH.
Fucking yawn, man.
Peace. Out.
I agree with JB 2:50. Most B-movies are crap, they’re made bought and sold to be crap that hopefully brings in some easy money. However, there’s occasionally some art made within the b-movie confines. I’d consider Breakdown a good example. Star Wars, although I’m not a fan of it, also can be considered an example.
Ok, DP, if your definition of ‘crap’ is ‘movie that I loved and defended as important, meaningful art’ then I have absolutely no argument with you. It would just be nice if you used words to mean what they actually mean.
Seacrest out.
I’d like to mention that if you prefer Saw to Hostel 2, then all that means is instead of masturbating to hot chicks being tortured, you prefer masturbating to males chopping off their feet.
Right guys, am I riiiight?
Poland bringing the Double Thunder. Well played.
If I’m gonna see some arthouse shit tonight because I’m otherwise all caught up, which of these will annoy me LESS:
Easy Virtue
Brothers Bloom
Big fucking yawn to you to Dave. I was going to leave it until you threw that in.
This is your classic defense when you fall back on ‘i was taken out of context’ routine.
Just for once have the balls to fess up and say you were wrong. Not just wrong, completely out to fucking lunch wrong. You said all B movies are crap. That is not taken out of context. That is what you said and it is an incorrect statement. And you kept arguing it instead of acknowledging that sometimes films become quality productions from b movie origins. If you disagree then you’re disagreeing with Scorsese, Kael, Farber, Denby, McCarthy, Rosenbaum and every other substantative voice about film history. Find one expert who would agree with you. No fuck that, find one blogger who will agree with you.
What an incredible bore you must be at parties.
Psycho is crap! It’s just a slasher thriller, that’s all.
North by Northwest…just a chase picture.
Crap.
I think we can ALL agree that monster movies are basically a crap genre, so King Kong, Frankenstein, and Nosferatu can all be safely considered “crap.”
Brothers Bloom will shrink your testes Lex and it also features a smokin’ hot asian that will probably remind you of that gal at the supermarket who was so revolted by your face that she faked buying ribbed large condoms just to get away from you.
The Third Man, Maltese Falcon, Lady From Shangahi, and Touch of Evil…what do all of those have in common? They are based on pulp originas and they’re basically thrillers…good guy wins, bad guys loses in the end. Generic, terrible, crap.
Lex, see Brothers Bloom. For all I know you’ll find it overly cute or precious or whatever the fuck people use as code to say “too inventive” or “too interesting” or “too enjoyable.” But it’s a hell of a fun movie. I know a lot of actual critics were annoyed by it, but everyone I know who saw it found it somewhere between fun and absolutely delightful (I was on the absolutely delighted end).
Or, to put it in Lex terms: You can see Rachel Weisz’s ass in Bloom; doubt you’ll see the same of Biel in Virtue.
Star Wars. The B picture to end all B pictures.
Back in the real world you have to laugh at DP’s take on the arthouse weekend.
“Summer Hours”: Released VoD prior to theatrical, hence AMC and Regal will not play it. (Video on Demand).
“Away We Go”: Focus Features can afford to charge it — they’re part of NBC Universal, aren’t they?
Actually, I just checked — seriously — and Summer Hours is still available as VOD. I wonder if that is hurting its b.o. take at all?
Perm – I know you are being funny and all, but you are making EXACTLY my point.
You can make genre films that follow expected formulas but which are much, much better than the rest.
If you are going to make crap, make great crap. As I wrote before – no one who wants to argue with me seems to have noticed – some of my favorite movies are crap that transcends.
And yes, Hitchcock is the great example. He reached beyond the conventions of the genre he tended to work in.
I had no intention of getting into a pissing match over the use of the word “crap” or the definition of “B movies.” But somehow, that became the point of conversation instead of the issue of making great crap out of what springs from generic material, which, sadly, I doubt there is much real disagreement about in here.
Maybe this is the sticking point — if it transcends crap, it’s not crap. If it’s great, it’s not crap. But yeah, this is clearly just a semantic thing that got out of hand.
Poland just likes to think he’s the sheriff over what’s CRAP and what’s not CRAP, when really he seems to love CRAP more than most people who post on this forum. He loves some crap. He loves it like a monkey on a for day bender with nothing but coke to blow, and feces to throw.
Yancy hit it just right. I haven’t seen Drag Me To Hell, but if the artistry goes way above and beyond the source material, it’s not crap. Not even “good crap.” It’s more. Because you break down the story of King Kong or Psycho or The Godfather, and none of those are “good” stories.” They are only made great by how they are made.
So in my mind, there is no subject matter that is inherently “not crap” or “crap,” because any story can be great and transend, or be terrible. All stories, in my mind, are equal.
“Maybe this is the sticking point — if it transcends crap, it’s not crap.”
Yes. To me, “great crap” is an oxymoron. While I have some silly guilty pleasure movies that I like a lot, that doesn’t make them “great”.
My personal definition of “b-movies” has always had to do with a movie’s ambitions. Its a like a lower difficulty gymnastics vault. You may not be able to score a 10, but you can still execute it perfectly.
I think this post and the following comments prove that Poland gets too sensitive and defensive when he gets called on his CRAP…or maybe thinks his CRAP smells better than our CRAP. Well, CRAP on that!!! When is his next review of the next CRAPTASTIC masterpiece?
Given his constant boners over Biel, I’m shocked Lex didn’t see EASY VIRTUE opening day.
I liked both BLOOM and VIRTUE very much, though I would probably give a slight edge to VIRTUE.
For the record, if anyone cares:
Brothers Bloom was AWESOME. REALLY glad I went to see it after all… The “cutesy”/arch trailer had almost scared me away, and I assumed it was some sub-Wes A., sub-Coen campfest, but those “precious” bits were well integrated and not anywhere as annoying as I’d feared; Ruffalo, Brody and Weisz were as good as you could possibly ask for and it was really nice to see something that was both quirky and surprising but also paid homage to the leisurely, travelogue-style romantic thrillers of the 60s and 70s.
As expected, it’s maybe a *little* too clever for its own good and at times it bordered on grinding me down with overplotting, but then Johnson would always do pull it back out with something interesting or unexpected.
Also, BLONDE ASIAN CHICKS = MEGABONER.
GOOD MOVIE.
Lex, Jessica Biel wears – heaven forbid – PANTS in Easy Virtue so you probably wouldn’t like it since her character tries to imply that she can be independent despite wanting to find a man and get married. You would also despise Kristen Scott Thomas and the actresses who play her daughters since they are, what you could call, “ugly, frumpy, boring shrews.” No boners for you.
I sort of did a double-take when Dave said Breakdown was “crap”. No matter if you classify it as “good crap” or actual “crap”, but Breakdown is by no means “crap”. It’s a tight and taut movie and a thriller that is actually thrilling and it takes a nice spin on those sort of mid-american road thrillers. Nothing “crap” at all about it.
Although I do understand – vaguely – what you mean about “if you’re gonna make a crap movie make it as crap as you can”. Grindhouse and Showgirls being too examples.
Of course Dave will probably say I don’t understand him properly so I dunno.
I’m surprised to see that after I checked out of this conversation, 10 hours ago, it kept going. So I guess the conversational derailing developed its own momentum?
I can think of plenty of examples of ‘good crap’ like The Incredible Melting Man, or Troll 2, or the Wicker Man remake, or pretty much any movie Dan Haggerty was in in the late ’80s-’90s, where you’re basically laughing at the movie, not laughing with it. Those movies are indefensible as anything other than crap, no matter how much you might enjoy gawking at the wreckage.
But a movie like Drag Me to Hell, which was made with precise skill and craft, complete dedication from the filmmakers (especially given the number of things that drench Alison Lohman during the movie), and a compelling and forceful, if not deep, moral code that resonates with our current socioeconomic climate? It’s ‘crap’ because it’s unapologetically fun? Because it’s well-made? And because black is white? And what movies, under this definition, aren’t ‘crap’, since it apparently includes any mainstream mass-appeal movie that isn’t a straight drama.
The reason I think this is all more important than just a semantic quibble is because I think it’s important to not simply categorize movies or anything else into some ‘crap’/’not crap’
hierarchy, which apparently is so pervasive that one can internalize the attitude without even realizing it.
Basically this is my long-winded and pompous way to say that if something ‘transcends crap’ then by definition it’s not crap, any more.
Sorry to go on for so long.
“especially given the number of things that drench Alison Lohman during the movie…”
GIANT. BONER.
Drag Me to Hell RULES.
B was originally a budgeting term. It came down to stars and if the studio felt it worthwhile to pay for them. It’s not hard to define what is and is not until you hit Star Wars and Jaws. The former was conceived and produced as a B, while the latter was a produced as an A from onset even though its concept had been a mainstay of B monster movies. So Dave defines it by concept, Jeff and others are using execution, and to me, it’s budget. DMTH is certainly B with an A craftsmen, but it’s wrong to retcon any of Hitchcock’s big work as B productions, especially since the studios were still defining pictures as A and B during Hitch’s day.
@martin. See my B definition further up. I do think you are wrong about SW budget being defined and produced as a B title. That film was expensive and very much a tentpole title from the studio. They might not have had any clue about its potential boxoffice but it was in no way as intended as a ‘cheap’ b movie in their release plan. Not at all.
Martin’s definition of B movie is crap.
Just cane back from Drag Me To Hell. Yeah, it was pretty much crap.
Raimi’s made a couple B-movies that transcend, but DMTH is not one of them. It wallows in its B-ness, and that’s the point I guess. Star Wars and Jaws were both B movies, but the turning point at which B-movies started getting made with A-budgets. Now most of what comes out is B-movies with A-Budgets. The few real A-movies come out in the fall, but that’s about it.
Big Perm: NOOOOO!
Apparently Jeff didn’t pick up on Bitch Perm’s EMINENTLY SUBTLE RUNNING GAG, which he didn’t wear into the ground AT ALL.
I’ll make a brand new joke no one’s ever heard before…I HAVE A BONER!
Oh wait, that’s not even a joke. That sucks. Anyone making a joke like that can not be funny and will fail as a comedian. I realize that now. Sorry.
I was serious about Drag Me To Hell though. It was the epitome of “good enough,” but I don’t know. It was all right. I didn’t hate it.
JBD – we’re in the same area. With SW, it’s a worn out discussion, but along with Jaws, they changed everything including release schedules. Fox may have put money into it, but that was the gamble since they weren’t going to dump into A talent. Look at Cushing’s hit list before SW, and he was one the billable names. Guinness was sporadically working but was nowhere near the catch he was a decade earlier. I’m not denying the investment, you’re right on that, but if you look at the other sci-fi at the time, Fox wasn’t thinking it would surpass Planet o/t Apes, let alone Jaws. I’m sure things changed during the first final screenings, but at that point, SW had its own life.
The only reason Peter Cushing was in STAR WARS was the same reason Christopher Lee was in the prequels. Lucas wanted them as a lifelong fan. I don’t think FOX had anything to do with that casting.
Wow, BIG Monday for The Hangover – it made over $7.6 million, more than Star Trek, Up, or Wolverine. If there wasn’t so much comedy competition this month (and there’s a ton), I would say this thing has a shot at $200 million.
Kenobi was originally written for Mifune. Fox, IIRC, were the ones to nix it.
I agree that Lucas was a Hammer fan, but then why wasn’t Lee, Vader, if not in suit then voice? When you compare Lee’s resume to Cushing, you see Lee was still getting big-time gigs like Golden Gun and and Airport where Cushing was working solely in English horror. If SW was a big event in Fox’s eyes, they would have ponied up for Lee and Mifune. Instead, you have Prowse and the uncredited James Earl Jones, who had a very limited resume pre-SW. In ’76, Lee and Mifune would have been top bill and both were available. That to me, is about money, and Fox willing to gamble on unknowns with big FX.
JBD “some films rise above their b movie origins and transcend themselves into quality films. its like a form of cinematic alchemy.”
Yes, well said. It must be why probably half my favorite films or more are American “B” movies.
And Up…..
SPOILERS for *UP*
SPOILERS
SPOILERS
SPOILERS
SPOILERS
Wow “Up” is a really strange film…not all joy and light is it? but riveting to small creatures (kids) who instead of talking throughout, actually paid attention (imagine a large full cineplex type theater QUIET) and walked out begging to see it again. I think some parents didn;t like the first 30 min of downer including infertility, ageing, death, not being able to afford a holiday, and assault, but it’s good for the little knippers to have something to think about other than special effects.
Alpha was pretty funny.
Martin, I was under the impression Lee wasn’t available at the time for SW. Lucas wanted him for Moff Tarkin, hence replaced by Cushing. And Lucas probably wanted a muscular body builder type for Vader as in Prowse rather than the thin Lee.
Mifune woulda been grand but even that shows Lucas wasn’t concerned with grabbing big names.
Mifune also would have confused Lucas’s “the Empire is British” scheme.
^ As noted above, Mifune was in the running for Obi-Wan, so the “Empire is British” thing doesn’t enter into it.
Ah, I skipped that.
I can’t imagine that Guinness’s fee and Mifune’s fee would have been significantly different, at that stage in their careers.
Say Mifune had gotten the part: who plays young Obi-Wan in the prequels?
Sonny Chiba.
John Cho, of course.
ken watanabe? i guess he’d be too old tho (there’s a younger japanese actor who looks startlingly like toshiro but i can’t for the life of me remember what i’ve seen him in, very helpful)
Hiroyuki Sanada (has bags under his eyes 24/7 but he is Jedi as they get and can look young
Ching Wan Lau
Andy Lau
Hidetoshi Nishijima (the youngest)
they would be most appropriate.
Hi Leahnz, been traveling (and will be again soon), how bout-ye?
well hi there, ms lota! (i be working my ass off in wellywood at the mo so no travelling for me, can i travel vicariously through you? actually, i’m a white knuckle flier so my travels always begin and end with a serious fear-of-plummeting-to-my-death-rush, a downside of traipsing of which i am not fond!)
(a little shout out to movieman for renewing my love of the word ‘traipsing’ today, kudos)
Why, thank ye, Leah.
I’ve always been particularly fond of that word myself. Too bad it’s used so infrequently these days.
So you’re a white-knuckle flier, huh? Guess that means we’ll never have that weekend rendezvous in New York City where we can bond over our mutual love of “An American Werewolf in London” and River Phoenix while supping at Per Se.
Dammit. Another of my fantasies bites the dust.
My major beef with flying these days–besides the cost, the fact that every airport feels like a maximum security prison (except prisoners in m.s.p. have more rights than airline passengers), the interminable delays (no apologies necessary, thank you), ad nauseam–is how cruel the whole experience is for smokers like me. (The last time I checked, the only major U.S. airport that even featured a smoking “lounge” was Atlanta Int’l Airport.)
Triple Option mentioned the escalating price of petrol in another blog. How about the price of cigarettes? In the past 30 years, gasoline and cigarettes have gone up more in price than any other consumer good (i.e., ten times their 1979 average).
For all of you unsympathetic non-smokers out there: imagine how you’d feel if the price of movie tickets had escalated 10 X what they were when you first start paying your own way into the cinema.
Not fair, right?
Mifune didn’t speak English, which might have been a concern to Fox. (Yes, he could have been looped, but still…)
Martin: JEJ was hardly an unknown when STAR WARS was made, having done TV, Broadway and films since the early 60s. He had starring roles in such films as THE GREAT WHITE HOPE (Best Actor Oscar nomination and Golden Globe win), THE MAN (as the first Black president), CLAUDINE, SWASHBUCKLER and BINGO LONG, as well as an Emmy nomination for EAST SIDE WEST SIDE and a Tony and Drama Desk Award for the stage version of GREAT WHITE HOPE, all prior to 1976.
i’ll make it back to new york one of these days, movieman, knuckles be damned! (speaking of ‘AWIL’, i made my annual pilgrimage to the moor just the other night to catch up with jack, david and alex; the film is indeed a much cherished, true blue classic of cinema in my house, made with such genre-bending style, skill and humour the likes of which are seldom seen today, i never tire of it)
the three most taxed items in this country: petrol, booze and cigs