Hammer Launches YouTube Channel

I’ve embedded the 90-second history of Hammer for you. And here is the channel.

2012’s Top Perv Art? “About Cherry” Clips (corrected headline)

9:16a – For some reason, I thought About Cherry was going to be in Midnight Madness at TIFF. It’s not. Apologies.

Who’s Afraid Of The Big Good Master?

It’s been the oddest thing. Lots of critics have now seen The Master, yet there seems to be almost no deep conversation about it. And the couple of pieces I have found have been written with such flowery, non-specific language (regarding intent, not the story) that it feels very, very safe.

So tonight, I saw it… the way it should be seen. In 70mm, yes, but more so, in a big theater, full of people.They were literally wrapped around the block for this sold-out engagement.

And now, I feel like I understand the near-silence.

What is The Master?

Well, there is lights out acting, beautiful images, and raw, undeniable emotions.

But what is all of this in service of… what’s the point?

I think people are a little afraid to stick their noses out and find out In a few weeks that they were “wrong” or don’t match the inevitable consensus. I know that I am looking to a second screening for greater clarity.

But with one look, this is what I think. It’s Fight Club.

I know this doesn’t make logical sense. This isn’t Momento, leaving you to try to rebuild the narrative in your head. It’s poetic. And Freddie Quells is Lancaster Dodd’s youth/id… the man he was before he met his Lady MacHubburd-ian wife… all the things that Dodd has created an entire quasi-religion to – ahem – master.

To not put too fine a point on it, this is, I think, a story of a man becoming master of his own domain… if he doesn’t want to acknowledge that it’s really his wife who is driving the train to something greater.

Dodd lets his inner Quells out more than once in the film. They share affinities for naked women and moonshine-like alcoholic concoctions. And Freddie seems to want to be “better,” but he doesn’t have an Amy Adams and his youthful love is long gone.

There are a LOT of scenes that are all Lancaster & Freddie… even when others are around. Dodd loves Freddie in a way that is both deep and immediate. Who doesn’t love their inner scamp… especially when it’s being held in check.

I don’t want to spoil the movie in any way. You should all have your own experiences of it. But that is my first take. I can’t really come up with anything else that makes sense. Is it just a slice of life? I guess it could be. But PTA is a million times smarter than that.

P.S. This movie has almost nothing to do with Scientology in a literal or even metaphoric way. The film does have a leader who is coming up with ideas to help clean/ease/manipulate the minds of others. And we watch him shift and adjust and rewrite those notions. But that is truly just a backdrop. None of the central Scientology things – aside from opening with a personality test – are in the story. Non-issue.

DP/30: Tony Scott

This is the same Tony Scott interview that has been online for 8 months, with a higher resolution. Also, when going back to the original footage to output this at 1080, I realized we had a chat for a minute or so about family and life choices at the top. Nothing embarrassing or too personal, but an added perspective on the man that I am glad I can offer.

Tony Scott: Five Favorites

2011 Unstoppable

2009 The Taking of Pelham 1 2 3

2006 Deja Vu

2005 Domino

2004 Man on Fire

2001 Spy Game

1998 Enemy of the State

1996 The Fan

1995 Crimson Tide

1993 True Romance

1991 The Last Boy Scout

1990 Days of Thunder

1990/I Revenge

1987 Beverly Hills Cop II

1986 Top Gun

1983 The Hunger

DP/30: The Late, Great Tony Scott (2011)

(note: a higher quality version will post within 24 hours)

Weekend Estimates by Expendable Klady

So… Expendables 2 is estimated about 19% behind the original’s opening… an improvement, but still behind.

Paranorman is also about there, 19%, off of Coraline, not a direct prequel, but from the same family.

Sony is fine with Sparkle, which they say cost them $14m.

And The Odd Life of Timothy Green oddly seems not to have had much family bump on Saturday.

In all that excitement, the weekend is UP from last year… which reminds us, yet again, what a worthless stat weekends vs last year really is.

The Dark Knight Rises passed $400m domestic, the 4th fastest to get there (29 days) in history. Can is stretch things out and become the 5th $450m domestic grosser in history?

Ted seems to be running out of steam here, losing a lot of its screens. Still it should pass Saving Private Ryan in the next week to become the #7 all-time R-rated grosser.

Right wing propaganda film 2016: Obama’s America hits $2 million. (Is it limited to movie theaters that allow concealed weapons?)

Amazingly, Robot & Frank did a similar number to Cosmopolis, in spite of the Robert Pattinson blitz… showing once again that Twilight love doesn’t necessarily convert to tickets sold. That said, they were the best of a slow arthouse group. I am amazed how many “what can I see?” questions i get from over 50s people this time of year. The list is too short.

BYOB Weekend

Friday Estimates by ParaLeonard

Welcome to the dregs. Same as it ever was.

The Expendables 2 has lost the element of surprise that Stallone’s first inspiration offered. But there is still an audience out there for this kind of genre self-reflection. The opening day is off about 29% from the first, but an opening in the high 20s is still likely to be Lionsgate’s best non-Hunger Games opening since the last Expendables. (Possibly #3 behind a Madea from 2010) At this rate of fall-off, the film will still hit $200m worldwide.

The Bourne Legacy continues to run ahead of the first film in the franchise and behind the other two. You can read that as you like, really. On a smaller scale, this looks a bit like the effort to do an Underworld movie without Kate Beckinsale. She’s not the only one who can film a pair of skin-tight rubber pants… but people just want to see her do it more than Rhona Mitra. The ongoing viability of the franchise will depend on this film… or getting Matt Damon back on board. Time will tell.

Sparkle is a remake of an important, but somewhat obscure blaxploitation era film. One gets the feeling that Sony didn’t really have the stomach to fully exploit Whitney Houston’s death to pump up this opening by a few million. Good on them. The result is a decent, okay open.

Paranorman opens to within a couple hundred thousand of Coraline. It’s a very good movie and while less pre-estrogen-invested than Coraline, not a “boy movie.” Coraline paid a box office price as it rolled along for losing 3D screens. Will Paranorman push past that? We’ll see.

The Campaign didn’t ope big enough for a 60% Fri-to-Fri drop to be okay. It could be that real life is every bit as bizarre as the comedic choices in this movie. It could be that people just aren’t telling friends that it’s a “must see.” IS $80m domestic a good result for a Will Ferrell comedy? Not for the last decade.

Will The Odd Life of Timothy Green get to $17m for the 5-day? That seems pretty good at this part of the season for a movie without much heat. It gives the film a chance to build some word of mouth with a couple summer weeks left.

Ask the same question about Hope Springs that we do about Will Ferrell comedies… except that Meryl Streep’s track record is shorter in this regard and this movie is, apparently, less of a comedy than it’s being sold as. Sony has told the media that they only have a small investment in the film (plus P&A, I assume), so even if this ends up in the 70s, they will be healthy. But nothing thrilling about these numbers given the pedigree (including the director of Prada).

Decent opening for Cosmopolis, but not great and the rest of new indie is… passable.

DP/30: Paranorman, producer Travis Knight

DP/30: Paranorman, wr/dir Chris Butler & director Sam Fell

20 Weeks Of Summer: Wrapping Up

We’re near the end of Summer 2012… at least in the United States. The tricky part of analyzing how things have gone this summer is that so many big films have big markets still coming up on their release schedules. I count 10 films of the 36 on my seasonal chart as “Incomplete.” Four because of international (TDKR, Amazing Spiderman, Brave, Savages) and six because they are either too new in the marketplace or not here yet (The Campaign, Bourne 4, Hope Springs, Timothy Green, Sparkle, and Expendables 2). There are other films that have a lot of room to grow internationally, but have their pictures fairly well started, such as Moonrise Kingdom, Magic Mike, The Watch, Rock of Ages, and others.

Here’s what I do know. I was low on The Avengers by around 50%. I was too bullish on Prometheus and Battleship, both of which did over $300 million, but not anywhere near the $700m range. I thought Total Recall was going to be a breakout this month… until I saw it. Audiences were not as swept away by Rome, as they were with Paris. Another Adam Sandler flop. And Moonrise Kingdom has been stronger than I saw coming.

I was bigger on Ted than almost anyone… but not big enough, about 20% bigger than my early guess, but heading towards over $300m worldwide. Magic Mike did my worldwide guestimate in the US alone. Snow White & The Huntsman managed near $400 million worldwide, over $100m more than I expected.

I had a good beat on Spider-Man, Men in Black 3, Ice Age 4, Dark Shadows, The Dictator, Tyler Perry, Abe Lincoln, and Exotic Marigold. TDKR, now over $850m worldwide, may get to $1b, but not to my guess of $1.2b.

Only two of the six “Meedtobe Blockbusters” really came up short. But family Product remains the surest bet in Hollywood.

The place where there was the most disappointment was in The Middle. I had nine films in that category (that have opened more than a week ago) and only the two real underdogs smashes – Ted & Magic Mike – are really successful. The Dictator did fine, though it wasn’t explosive. (But did about the same as Bruno domestically and a little better overseas.) One thing about this group… all nine were “originals,” which makes one wonder whether “Hollywood” has forgotten how to sell a new idea (with, obviously, two exceptions).

Also not delivering big was my “2nd Tier Blockbusters” group, with only Snow White delivering more than $100m worldwide so far (and Bourne about to).

Analyzing this can be a Rorschach test. What does the author thing of the business. Me? I think the obsessive focus on the most expensive, highest profile movies have made studio marketing and distribution less sharp with less clearly defined product. WB is the exception this summer, missing badly only with Chernobyl Diaries. The Campaign and Dark Shadows may be a little disappointing, but both opened fairly well. And Magic Mike & Ted are really the two great surprises of the summer, driven, at first, by great marketing… both, by the way, R-rated and required to hint more than show.

Anyway, Disney had the biggest numbers and a tiny output. Paramount had the thinnest schedule, with just two films. Sony’s flops put a damper on their two $600m+ movies. WB did okay. U dud a lot to make up for Battleship with one of the summer’s biggest successes in Ted and nice numbers elsewhere. And Fox barely scraped by with Ice Age covering a myriad of sins, including The Watch, which will compete with That’s My Boy as the ugliest shoulda-been-commercial story of the summer.

I can’t bring myself to say that a studio that releases two franchise-y films in a summer and threw away one little fish from DreamWorks (which deserved better) is The Winner. But if you need to pick one… and you can’t get past Battleship… I guess that’s the pick. But for a studio that has taken a lot of heat this summer, Universal deserves recognition for selling – if not budgeting – their movies this summer.

Is there a loser? An even harder call. I don’t think so. The Weinsteins smashed their Piranha franchise into the rocks. But they were barely in the game this summer. Maybe Tobey Emmerich at the shell game that is New Line (Rock of Ages).

You tell me…

Universal Studios Chooses 25 To Celebrate Their 100 Years

· All Quiet on the Western Front (1930)
· Dracula (1931)/ Dracula Spanish (1931) (Blu-ray Collection only)
· Buck Privates (1941)
· Pillow Talk (1959)
· Spartacus (1960)
· To Kill a Mockingbird (1962)
· The Birds (1963)
· American Graffiti (1973)
· The Sting (1973)
· Jaws (1975)
· National Lampoon’s Animal House (1978)
· E.T. The Extra-Terrestrial (1982)
· Scarface (1983)
· The Breakfast Club (1985)
· Back to the Future (1985)
· Out of Africa (1985)
· Field of Dreams (1989)
· Do the Right Thing (1989)
· Jurassic Park (1993)
· Schindler’s List (1993) (DVD Collection only)
· Apollo 13 (1995)
· The Fast and the Furious (2001)
· The Bourne Identity (2002)
· Mamma Mia! The Movie (2008)
· Despicable Me (2010)

Due in November… no retail pricing set yet.

DP/30: Compliance, wr/dir Craig Zobel, actors Dreama Walker, Pat Healy

If There’s A “2” In Front Of Your Studio Budget, There Better Be A “2” After The Title

It is certainly possible to break even on a $200 million production budget when grossing $400m – $500m worldwide. That’s $220m – $275m income against a minimum of $325m in production and marketing. You can see how there can be black ink. But really, $500m is about where a studio starts to feel like a $200m investment in production was worth the time, effort, risk, and resources. (Many deals are distribution only or close to it these days… but that’s another variation of the same truth.)

In the five years prior to 2012 and 2012-to-date, there have been 53 movies that grossed at least $500m worldwide.

In the most extreme definition of “originals,” 19 of these films qualify (leaving 34 sequels or franchise movies). Nine of them are animated films. Transformers, Iron Man, Alice in Wonderland, Sherlock Holmes, and The Hunger Games aren’t exactly original. And the other five are Inception, Avatar, 2012, Hancock, and Mamma Mia!. (Based on a Broadway musical is such a poor foundation for a $500m grosser that MM! deserves an original spot, no?)

So if you are making a list of directors who have a good enough touch commercially to make a studio feel okay about a $200m investment—co-funded or not—you can look to Nolan, Cameron, and Emmerich as worthy, as all have done it more than once and all three show that they can go there (in most cases) when intended. Peter Berg has done it once, has talent, but is not close to being a sure bet at this level. Phyllida Lloyd is a talented women, but MM! is a freak and she knows it as well as anyone. She won’t be up for “Wonder Woman” directing duties.

So who else? Bay, obviously. I’d feel good about putting Spielberg in the list, though he hasn’t been chasing that so much lately. When he has, we got War of the Worlds and Indy 4. I can’t think of anyone that Tom Rothman would rather bet money on in the Robopocolypse.

After that… hmmm…

Raimi? Not so much without the spider-suit. Likewise, Marc Webb. Todd Phillips has become a strong comedy director, but investing $200m in a comedy is a fool’s errand, even with the Hangover numbers. Guy Ritchie, no. Favreau, no. Marc Forster… you have to be kidding me. None of the Twilight directors, obviously… and not Gary Ross (who doesn’t really think that way anyway)… and no one from PotterVille. Shawn Levy, no. JJ Abrams… not yet… not with two major franchises, neither of which rode to $500m ww under his direction.

Brad Bird could be The Next One to make the list, but on the strength of one movie, not yet. Francis Lawrence is an interesting candidate, but still unproven, really. The Hunger Games won’t prove anything in this regard.

Gore Verbinski and Barry Sonnenfeld might, in some movie moments, have their work mistaken for the other’s. Both have had some massive, massive success. But are they still good for a $200m bet? Well, Gore had Johnny and Barry has Will and when those combos happen, money seems to flow. Outside of that, not so much. I am a fan of both men, but particularly with histories of overruns, they are brilliant, itchy, choices.

Other greats who can make big dollars (and magic) in the right situation include Peter Jackson, the Wachowskis, and as he heads back to live action, Bob Zemeckis might have a big third act in him.

But I’m still at five as the list of really solid bets if you are making a very expensive, non-animated film. And Emmerich is really the only one of the five to knock out “big commercial product” every couple of years. Spielberg may make a movie a year, but he does what he wants… lots of quality doubles. Bay will have his first non-Trannies film since 2005 next year. Cameron made two major releases in the last 15 years. And Nolan dances to his own tune, his post-Bat career just now taking shape.

As I have been writing for years now, too many studios are too comfy making too many $200m+ movies. There are a lot of movies they can produce like programmers, doing development, putting together good casts and genres, and hoping for the best. Movies are a gamble. And all of the Big Five started somewhere… Bay being the only one to really start at the high end.

But getting to $500m worldwide, even if there were 12 such films last year, is no mean feat. The vast majority, as already noted, are sequels, franchises, or animated product from one of 3 companies. Of the five “original” titles tat got there in the last 6 years, as mentioned above, three were from The Big Five, one was Will Smith, and the last one was a cheap movie that had a remarkable moment.

So when we have to discuss John Carter or Battleship or World War Z or 47 Ronin in ugly terms, why would we be remotely surprised? Of the four, the only one with any excuse, as far as being greenlit at those prices, was John Carter, which was as much about Disney managing Pixar as it was about greenlighting a regular film. (Likewise, btw, The Lone Ranger, which is a mega-gamble, but keeps the Johnny Depp in Pirates door open.)

I agree—and have been writing for years—that movie studios need “middle class” movies and even indie divisions to keep balance in a rough business. But the issue of hugely expensive films, tentpoles, whatever you want to call them, is not as complicated as designing a slate. If you are thinking of greenlighting a movie that’s going to be close to $200m or over and it’s not already well-proven… stop. Breathe deep. Think about what the very likely possibility of losing over $50 million for your studio will do to your life. And if after that, you think that the film is really an $800m grosser, do what you want to do.

And if you just think it’s so cool and you’ll get to work with such great people and it might get to $500m if the wind picks it up and carries it just right, get the bottle of very expensive whiskey, pour yourself a couple fingers, and toast to what that really, really great idea might have been. Have a nice dinner with the producer and director when you explain why it’s in turnaround. And live to fight another day.