Posts Tagged ‘Hereafter’

Weekend Box Office Report – October 17

Sunday, October 17th, 2010

Jack’use!

Jackass 3D was better than all right with an estimated $49.3 million that easily ranked it at the top of the weekend movie going charts. Another freshman, the seasoned action-comedy Red, ranked second with $21.9 million. The session’s third national debut in medium-wide release was the inspirational N Secure with an OK $133,000 bow.

Among niche and regional bows the polemical documentary I Want Your Money failed to bring out the vote with a $236,000 tally from 537 screens. Telegu-language Brindaavanam rang up an impressive $10,320 average from 20 venues while Bollywood entry Aakrosh was a washout with a $46,400 gross from 24 screens.

Among the week’s exclusive newbies the clear favorite was Hereafter with a $37,380 per screen from six early peeks. There were also impressive openings for the three-hour plus portrait of a terrorist Carlos of $33,700 from single dates in Manhattan and Montreal and a sturdy $101,000 gross for the ripped from the headlines Conviction at 11 cells.

Overall weekend box office revenues topped $130 million for a sizeable 42% boost from seven days back. However, it fell 4% below last year’s tally and the 2010 box office has shrunk to just 2% better than the prior year’s gross for the same period.

Industry trackers had pegged the stereoscopic version of Jackass at roughly $30 million prior to its opening. But they obviously were deaf to bygone wag Henry Mencken’s observation that “no one ever went broke underestimating the intelligence of the American public.” The recently under-served young male audience were eager to don Polaroid glasses and see the aging stars of the reality skein making fools of themselves and others up close and personal.

Pundits also undervalued Red with early estimates in a $15 million to $18 million range. The single joke premise of over the hill spies conscripted back into service (more intentionally mawkish than The Expendables) skewed older but obviously had some appeal for a younger crowd in search of something marginally less mind numbing that required optical gimmicks.

The glacial expansion of Waiting for “Superman” continued to display stamina but it’s clear that Never Let Me Go has peaked and that the rapid expansion of Nowhere Boy left the early years of John Lennon stranded outside the Cavern Club. Stone was experiencing a better than expected hold as it increased its exposure from six to 41 venues.

The frame’s two award contenders – Hereafter and Conviction – constructed solid foundations for their platform bids. Still the early signs suggest a better than anticipated commercial run for the former with the latter yarn requiring a lot of TLC to reach a wider audience.

Among holdovers the second lap for Secretariat showed signs that audiences were discovering the heartfelt saga and The Social Network continues to be propped up by award buzz rather than Facebook fascination.

__________________________________________________

Weekend Estimates – October 15-17, 2010

Title Distributor Gross (average) % change * Theaters Cume
Jackass 3D Par 49.3 (16,010) New 3081 49.3
Red Summit 21.9 (6,740) New 3255 21.8
The Social Network Sony 10.8 (3,910) -30% 2771 63
Secretariat BV 9.4 (3,070) -26% 3072 27.4
Life As We Know It WB 9.2 (2,910) -37% 3150 28.8
Legend of the Guardians WB 4.2 (1,670) -39% 2502 46
The Town WB 4.0 (1,700) -37% 2368 80.6
My Soul to Take Uni/Alliance 3.1 (1,240) -54% 2529 11.9
Easy A Sony 2.6 (1,140) -39% 2314 52.3
Wall Street: Money Never Sleeps Fox 2.3 (1,110) -50% 2045 47.8
N Secure FreeStyle 1.3 (2,730) New 486 1.3
It’s Kind of a Funny Story Focus 1.3 (1,660) -38% 757 4
You Again BV 1.2 (750) -53% 1588 22.7
Case 39 Par Vantage 1.2 (840) -56% 1406 11.9
Devil Uni 1.0 (1,100) -46% 891 31.6
Let Me In Overture .83 (690) -66% 1211 11.1
Alpha and Omega Lions Gate .81 (840) -46% 969 22.6
Waiting for “Superman” Par Vantage .74 (4,060) 17% 182 2.5
Toy Story 3 BV .52 (1,480) -6% 350 412.8
Inception WB .35 (1,180) -29% 297 289.7
Resident Evil: Afterlife Sony/Alliance .34 (780) -73% 438 59.7
Weekend Total ($500,000+ Films) $125.70
% Change (Last Year) -4%
% Change (Last Week) 42%
Also debuting/expanding
Nowhere Boy Weinstein Co. .33 (1,550) 554% 215 0.41
Never Let Me Go Searchlight .32 (1,390) -7% 232 1.65
You Will Meet a Tall Dark Stranger Sony Classics .27 (2,440) 1% 112 1.26
I Want Your Money FreeStyle .24 (440) 537 0.24
Stone Overture .23 (5,780) 199% 41 0.34
Hereafter WB .22 (37,380) 6 0.22
Brindaavanam Blue Sky .21 (10,320) 20 0.21
Buried Lions Gate .13 (1,270) -41% 103 0.76
Conviction Fox Searchlight .10 (9,200) 11 0.1
Aakrosh Eros 46,400 (1,930) 24 0.05
Carlos IFC 33,700 (16,850) 1 0.03
Knockout Eros 18,100 (700) 26 0.02
A Better Tomorrow CJ Entertainment 5,800 (5,800) 1 0.01
Down Terrace Magnolia 2,900 (1,450) 2 0.01
Samson and Delilah Ipix 2,300 (1,150) 2 0.01

Domestic Market Share – January 1 – October 14, 2010

Distributor (releases) Gross Market Share
Warner Bros. (24) 1380.1 16.40%
Fox (16) 1284.6 15.30%
Paramount (14) 1242.3 14.80%
Buena Vista (15) 1129.6 13.40%
Sony (23) 1111.7 13.20%
Universal (17) 765.4 9.10%
Summit (9) 425.1 5.10%
Lionsgate (12) 410.1 4.90%
Overture (7) 78.2 0.90%
Fox Searchlight (5) 72.1 0.90%
Focus (7) 71.4 0.90%
Weinstein Co. (7) 61.1 0.70%
Sony Classics (20) 52.9 0.60%
MGM (1) 50.4 0.60%
CBS (2) 50 0.60%
Other * (266) 222.3 2.60%
8407.3 100.00%
* none greater than .04%

Friday Estimates – October 16

Saturday, October 16th, 2010

Jackass 3D|20.4|3081|New|20.4
Red|8 |3255|New|8
The Social Network|3.3|2868|-31%|55.4
Life As We Know It|3|3150|-42%|22.7
Secretariat|2.9|3072|-29%|20.9
The Town|1.2|2368|-34%|77.7
Legend of the Guardians|1|2502|-42%|42.8
My Soul to Take|1|2529|-63%|9.7
Easy A|0.8|2314|-38%|50.5
Wall Street: Money Never Sleeps|0.7|2045|-49%|46.3
Also Debuting
N Secure|0.42|486||0.42
I Want Your Money|83,400|537||83,400
Brindaavanam|59,300|20||59,300
Hereafter|57,900|6||57,900
Conviction|29,100|11||29,100
Aakrosh|12,300|24||12,300
Carlos|6,900|1||6,900
Knockout|4,800|6||4,800
Vision|3,900|2||3,900
A Better Tomorrow|1,900|1||1,900
||||
*in millions|||

TIFF Review: Hereafter

Friday, October 15th, 2010

After a pretty spectacular opening scene, I was hopeful that Clint Eastwood‘s highly anticipated film, Hereafter, with a script by Peter Morgan, was going to be something special. Then it became evident that the setup is a triptych, which is really hard to weave together into a coherant story without it feeling enormously contrived.

Unfortunately, the conceit of the film just never pays off in a satisfying way.

Our trio of tales kicks off with Marie (Cécile De France), a French television personality on vacation with her boyfriend when she’s caught in a devastating tsunami, nearly dies, and is brought back to life. Marie’s near-death experience has a profound effect on her, and when she returns home she finds she can’t focus on anything but researching and writing about her experience; her obsession with death and the afterlife quickly isolates her from her friends and colleagues and threatens her career.

The second parallel tale concerns George (Matt Damon), a blue-collar warehouse worker who’s hiding out from a gift — an ability to touch a person and connect with their dead family members. After previously making money off his talent at the encouragement of his brother, who seeks to profit from his talent, George has retreated from the world, a lonely, isolated man whose gift has become a curse that keeps him from having relationships with others.

He signs up for a cooking class, desperate for companionship, and there meets a charming woman (Bryce Dallas Howard) with whom he feels he might be able to connect for the first time in his adult life. But when she learns of his gift, it threatens the tentative connection they’re building.

The third of our three stories concerns Marcus (Frankie McLaren) and Jason (George McLaren), twin brothers in England whose mum is addicted to heroin. When tragedy strikes, Jason seeks desperately to find answers about what happens after death, a path that ultimately leads him to George’s old website, which was never taken down.

The thing is, each of these stories on their own — or even George’s story in sync with just one of the others, would probably have made for a much tighter story. Individually as meditations on both the affect on the living when they lose someone they love, and the questions raised when a person is technically dead (or at least, very near death), and then brought back to life, are certainly something many of us ponder when we’re not too busy running around in our lives to pause and consider that every day we run full speed ahead is just bringing us another day closer to the end.

George’s part of the story, in particular, is quite well-written and Damon, as a man gifted with a rare talent that nonetheless serves to isolate him from the world around him, turns in a strong performance. Howard, in the brief time she’s a part of his story, is a powerful and emotional force. De France is also very good, and her journey fairly engaging.

The trouble is that after being fairly interesting for its first 2/3 or so as we catch up with the individual tales, the necessity to bring everything together causes a serious nosedive into the realm of unwieldy contrivance that forces the characters to converge for the inevitable sappy ending. I stayed with it for quite a while … until a moment that smacks you upside the head with exactly where the film is going. Then I hoped against hope that Eastwood and Morgan really weren’t going to be as obvious as all that – surely they weren’t! But they were.

The thing is, I don’t have an issue with Eastwood exploring ideas of what happens after death; as a spiritual person I find those kinds of meditations interesting, and after all, most religion is built around the need for humans to derive some sense of comfort in thinking we have an answer to what happens to us once we depart this life. The need to believe we don’t just cease to exist, like the flame of a candle blown out, is very strong, and with a bit less contrivance this could have been a better meditation on the subject.

Unfortunately, while there are interesting ideas here, and some solid performances in the film, the sum of the parts just never adds up to a deeply satisfying whole. Bummer.

Critics’ Roundup – October 14

Thursday, October 14th, 2010

Jackass 3-D|||||
Red|Red||Green||Yellow
Hereafter|Yellow||Red|Yellow|Go
Conviction |Green||||Green
Samson and Delilah |||Green|Green|
Gerrymandering |||Green||
Carlos |Yellow||||

Clint: Savior Of Hereafter Script By Peter Morgan

Thursday, October 14th, 2010

Clint: Savior Of Hereafter Script By Peter Morgan

Cécile de France

Thursday, October 14th, 2010

Cécile De France A Quick Study To Eastwood’s Style

When Brez Met Clint

Wednesday, October 13th, 2010

When Brez Met Clint On The Backlot; He’s Got “Junk All Over The Place”

Oscars, Already?

Monday, October 11th, 2010

We have the new Gurus O’ Gold chart up, and in taking a look at the consensus votes du jour, I had a couple thoughts. I missed The King’s Speech at Toronto, so I’ll have to wait until screeners come in/Seattle screenings get set to weigh in on it. Could be the Oscar-bee’s knees like I heard from a lot of folks at Toronto, could be Colin Firth‘s year to win a statue. Or not. Time will tell.

Of the Best Pic-contending movies I have seen, I wouldn’t rank The Social Network as highly as it’s sitting right now. It’s very early for that film to be peaking, I think, and I still just don’t see its subject matter and cynicism as broadly appealing to the Academy voters. But we’ll see. Hereafter? Not so much. I wouldn’t even have that one on my Oscar radar at all except that it’s directed by Eastwood — but I personally found it to be maybe on par with Invictus, which wasn’t great, and maybe a tad below Million Dollar Baby (NOT my favorite movie) in terms of emotional manipulation.

Right now, I think my personal top Best Picture pics would be True Grit (haven’t seen that one yet either, but it’s the Coens and the trailer looks great), Black Swan, 127 Hours, Another Year, The King’s Speech (based on the buzz alone at this point) and Winter’s Bone OR The Kids Are All Right as strong outsiders.

I’m more interested at this point in the Adapted Screenplay race, where we have 127 Hours, True Grit and The Social Network as probably leaders of the pack. To this I would add Never Let Me Go, which I think, after reading the book, is a really solid adaptation — more on that one later. Unfortunately, I missed seeing Rabbit Hole (darn that weighty Toronto slate and its surprises), and I’ve heard so many things on that one (mostly positive) that I’m hoping to get to check it out soon.

Right now I’m also interested in the Best Actor and Actress races as well. For Best Actor, everyone (ah yes, the ever-mysterious, yet oddly influential “they”) came out of Toronto saying James Franco is a “lock” for a nomination, and Firth virtually a “lock” for a nom and probable win. I’ve seen Duvall in Get Low and it’s a good performance, no doubt, and one that may appeal to the Academy. Not my personal top o’ the actor heap, but I have no idea what the Academy’s temperature reading is on that film, and no one’s counting my votes anyhow.

Bridges in True Grit may (will probably be) Oscar worthy, but he’s coming off a win last year for Crazy Heart. Personally (and again, not having seen True Grit or King’s Speech yet) my sentimental favorite is Javier Bardem for Biutiful, which I think is the best performance in a career of great performances. But the artfulness of Biutiful may not be enough to lift it up above the rather bleak subject matter to put it up there in the hearts of voters.

As for Best Actress, maybe it’s just me but this feels like a slightly less competitive field this year. After barely missing out on a Best Actress nom for Happy-Go-Lucky a couple years ago, this may be Sally Hawkins year with Made in Dagenham, the kind of uplifting Brit-flick that may be appealing to the Academy. I would probably put Lesley Manville‘s really solid turn in Another Year right up there with Hawkins. and if it were me, Jennifer Lawrence would be right in the mix for Winter’s Bone. I heard really amazing things about Nicole Kidman in Rabbit Hole out of Toronto, too, and I am a fan of Black Swan and Portman’s performance in it. I wouldn’t count her out completely yet.

The Oscar race will start to take shape more as screeners get sent out and buzz starts to bubble up for this film and peter out for that one. This is a fall with a lot of exciting movies to look forward to and it should be an interesting awards season to watch as well. Much as we all get sick of reading and writing about Oscars, our collective obsession with it drives this business to one extent or another.

I don’t plan to write as much about Oscars as the “Oscar pundits,” more to focus narrowly on specific bits and pieces — screenplay adaptations, docs, maybe foreigns depending on what’s nominated there. After years of having my kids do their Oscar picks randomly using everything from Magic 8-Ball to Twister to Pin the Tail on the Donkey (usually with surprising accuracy) I’ve come to believe that it’s really a crap shoot anyhow.

Fun to talk about and argue about and make charts about, but at the end of the day, I don’t know that any one person’s guesses are actually more accurate or better than the randomness of the Magic 8-Ball. So it goes, let the speculating begin.

Gurus o’ Gold – A Post Toronto Look At The Field

Monday, October 11th, 2010






Updated on 10/11/10, 3p… adding Guru #15, Emanuel Levy and a few adjustments to others…

22 Weeks To Oscar: The Year Of Good Being Good Enough

Wednesday, September 29th, 2010

I was going to write about how tight the Oscar race already is as we enter the month of October. But looking back at last season’s post-Toronto column… 8 of 10 of the eventual nominees were already well in focus. And had I not been so stubborn about believing that District 9 could make it, I would have had every film except The Blind Side in my Top 13 possibles at the time.

The point is not to ring my own bell, but to pay tribute, really, to how early and how strong the Oscar push efforts are these days. They are still stealth. No one is supposed to notice that a campaign has been going on for months. In fact, no one wants to be up in front, towards the head of the pack, this early. You can be sure that a lot of competitors are giddy that The Social Network has such heat around it RIGHT NOW.

The biggest news coming out of Toronto, aside from films that were non-starters, was that we now have only seven films, by my count, that are in any way contenders that have not been widely available to be seen by The Press and some public. And the only one that seems to be an inevitable nominee – scary words, those – is True Grit.

That is not to say that the other unseen films are not serious contenders. Four are comedies – Due Date, How Do You Know, Love & Other Drugs, and Morning Glory – three from very serious directors and one from the director of one of last year’s commercial phenoms, The Hangover. The Fighter is from revered David O. Russell… who has never made it into the Oscar race. And another, For Colored Girls…, is from critically reviled Tyler Perry, who is a commercial sensation and is working from a play that was one of the most widely seen in the 70s and 80s.

And then there are the films that have already garnered a lot of love. Movies like The Kids Are All Right, Winter’s Bone, and Get Low have many fans and supporters. The Town has had a few weeks as the hot title to discuss, to be followed this weekend by The Social Network. Shutter Island is Scorsese’s biggest worldwide grosser ever, slightly ahead of Best Picture winner The Departed. And what of Oscar faves Clint Eastwood, Mike Leigh, and Alejandro Gonzalez-Inarritu?

I am pretty comfortable that at least 6 of my 7 Most Liklies will be there in the end. The only real question, to me, is whether both Black Swan and 127 Hours, both masterful, artful, commercial films will make the cut. And that’s when distributors have to decide how they are going to craft their efforts. Does a Sony Classics move forward on all fronts or do they decide which of their films is the most realistic nominee? Does a Roadside Attractions, which has very strong candidates in Best Actor and Best Actress, push for more… aside from maybe screenplay nods? Does Lionsgate believe that either of their actor-nom chasing films are BP candidates? And how does Sony balance what feels like a lock for The Social Network when they have a Jim Brooks movie with Oscar winners Reese Witherspoon and Jack Nicholson in the hopper?

But the thing that really, really strikes me at this moment is that it is a very competitive race for a dozen or so movies looking to fit into a few slots (anything can happen in Phase II… there is no such thing as a frontrunner to win at this point), GREAT is not necessary. In fact, GREAT may be a problem for some of these films. This is the Oscar season of Really Good.

There is no The Hurt Locker… no film offering itself up as one. There’s no deep underdog like Precious. There is no Avatar. Toy Story 3 and Inception will be the highest grosser amongst BP nominees (assuming TS3 makes it). But neither film has had the kind of impact that Avatar had and will be two of at least five $700 million worldwide grossing films this year.

So we may be back to the best liked movies over the best movies. How lovable is Made in Dagenham? Is Ed Zwick at an advantage making his first comedy in almost 25 years instead of another drama? Do Academy members really want to wrestle with the heaviness of Never Let Me Go and Winter’s Bone and Biutiful and Rabbit Hole when Black Swan and Shutter Island feel both a little weighty, but are also movie movies that leave you leaving the theater excited by the craft of filmmaking?

I’m really curious. All six of the still unseen non-Coen films could be left on the sidelines. Or they could represent 3 or 4 of the final 10.

In any case, we’ve all been whining about the first half of 2010 and I have to say, there are a lot of good times at the movies coming down the pike. And if even half the unseen films are Really Good, it’s kind of a thrilling year… all of a sudden… out of nowhere.

Cool.

Best Picture Chart – 9/30/10

Wednesday, September 29th, 2010
BEST
PICTURE
Picture
Studio
Director
Stars
Comment
The Films
Most Likely
(by release date)
June 18
Toy Story 3
Disney
Unkrich
July 16

Inception
WB
Nolan
DiCaprio
Oct 1

The Social Network
Sony
Fincher
Eisenberg
Nov 5
127 Hours
FxSch
Boyle
Franco
Nov
24
The King’s Speech
TWC
Marshall
Firth
Dec 1
Black Swan
FxSch
Aronofsky
Portman
Dec 25
True Grit
Par
Coens
Bridges
Brolin
Damon

The only film in this category that hasn’t been seen.
Duking It Out For 3 or 4 Slots (by release date)
July 30
Get Low
SPC
Schneider
Duvall
Spacek
Murray
Feb 19
Shutter Island
Par
Scorsese
DiCaprio
June 11 Winter’s Bone
RdAtt
Granik
Lawrence
July 9
The Kids Are All Right
Focus
Cholodenko
Bening
Moore
Sept 15
Never Let Me Go
FxSch
Romanek
Knightley
Mulligan
Garfield
Sept 17
The Town
WB
Affleck

Renner

Oct 8
Secretariat
Dis
Wallace
Lane
Oct 22
Hereafter
WB
Eastwood
Damon
Nov5
Due Date
WB
Phillips
Downey
Galifianakis
Nov 5
For Colored Girls…
LGF
Perry
Elise
Goldberg
Newton
Nov 12
Morning Glory
Par
Michell
McAdams
Ford
Nov 19
Made In Dagenham
SPC
Cole
Hawkins
Nov 24
Love & Other Drugs
Fox
Zwick
Gyllenhaal
Hathaway
Dec 10
The Fighter
Par/Rel
O. Russell
Wahlberg
Dec 17
How Do You Know
Sony
Brooks
Witherspoon
Nicholson
Dec 17
Rabbit Hole
LGF
Mitchell
Kidman
Dec 29
Another Year
SPC
Leigh
Broadbent
Staunton
Dec 29
Biutiful
RdAtt
Gonzalez-
Inarritu
Bardem
The
Rest Of The Contenders
(by release date)
Mar 26
How to Train Your Dragon
DW/Par
Aug 13
Eat Pray Love
Fox
J Roberts
Sept 1
The American
Focus
Corbijn
Clooney
Sept 24

It’s Kind Of A Funny Story
Focus
Boden/
Fleck
E Roberts
Sept 24
Wall Street 2
Fox
Stone
Douglas
Mulligan
Oct 15
Conviction
FxSch
Goldwyn
Swank
Dec 25

Somewhere
Focus
Coppola

Dorff
Fanning

Dec 1
Miral
TWC
Schnabel
Dec 10
The Tempest
Mir
Taymor
Mirren
Dec 31
Blue Valentine
TWC
Cianfrance
Gosling
Williams

A Poster Hereafter

Thursday, September 23rd, 2010

Trailering Hereafter

Monday, September 13th, 2010

Clint Interested In Death, But Not So Much In A Personal Sort Of Way

Monday, September 13th, 2010

Clint Interested In Death, But Not So Much In A Personal Sort Of Way

Confessions of a Film Festival Junkie

Sunday, September 12th, 2010

In the early days of the Toronto International Film Festival (then known as the Festival of Festivals) its chief nemesis was the World Film Festival in Montreal that immediately preceded it on the calendar. About a decade back the WFF imploded following government investigations and rival local events that nonetheless failed to put a stake through its heart. It still exists but at a considerably diminished level from its heyday.

Despite overlapping schedules, Toronto has never really viewed Venice as competition. The two events do share a significant number of films, particularly those from high profile filmmakers. Venice concluded yesterday with the announcement of its jury prize winners and all, with the exception of Somewhere by Sofia Coppola which took the top prize, are on the Toronto schedule.

One anticipated film that Toronto received the very first look see is Clint Eastwood’s Hereafter. It screened yesterday for press including the army of junket scribes that attend about 20 interview roundtables during TIFF’s opening weekend. They were grumbling about the filmmaker only doing two interviews during his stay and having to go to New York in October for the official press junket.

The film itself can glibly be described as Eastwood does Lelouch. The story, like many by the French writer-director, has multiple story lines involving people whose lives and tales are unconnected at least until the third act. At that point luck and coincidence take hold and, in the case of Hereafter, converge somewhat sentimentally as the principles deal with death and beyond. It’s a pretty good Lelouch and a pretty good Eastwood … but not great stuff.

Three days into the festival I’m feeling a little ambivalent about the paucity of press/industry screenings after 5 p.m. It appears that (at least during the weekend) the Scotia Bank multiplex is reluctant to give up evening screen time and the festival doesn’t quite have its home Lightbox in full operation enough to pick up the slack.

I say ambivalent because I’m using the night time to write and work and the routine of watching and writing seems significantly more grueling than in the past.

There also appears to be fewer regulars attending this year and I don’t feel like I’m getting the tom tom messages about interesting films. It may simply be the physical move this year that’s yet to establish a new buzz central or it might just be me. Grrrrrr.

TIFF Dispatch Day Three: The Best Laid Plans

Saturday, September 11th, 2010

I’ve finally gotten myself to the point of feeling more or less fully immersed in my Toronto routine (read: catching my sleep in four hour power sessions, fueling on coffee and Balance bars all day when there’s no time to eat between back-to-back screenings and Starbucks runs out of paninis, spending so much time in dark screening rooms that the sunlight, when you do come out, hurts your eyes) and have mastered the subway. I’ve seen 11 films in three days, and it’s getting to be kind of a blur (thank you, publicists who hand out press notes for us weary film crickets).
(more…)

Trailering Hereafter

Saturday, September 11th, 2010

Trailering Hereafter

Gurus o’ Gold – A Pre-Toronto Look At The 2010/11 Field

Monday, September 6th, 2010

Welcome to the first Gurus gathering of this upcoming season.

It always seems a little silly to offer strong opinions before the Toronto International Film Festival has even begun. So we don’t. Consider these a gentle guide to what the buzz is, very early in the season.

We asked The Gurus to offer their 15 favorites to end up nominated for Best Picture come January. No ranking, No “sure things.” Just instinct and as much insight as is possible at this moment.

Last year, we did the same and the result was that The Gurus hit seven of the final ten in their Top Ten from this long distance. Two more were picked in the Top Sixteen. And the only film to get nominated that was nowhere to be found on this early list? The Blind Side. (Perhaps that explains the shock from the media when it got nominated… even after becoming a well-reviewed massive box office hit.) So maybe this early poll isn’t really all that silly .

Is there a stone unturned this year? Well, not Stone, which got a vote from Pete Howell. And not Tree of Life, which got 4 votes last year at this time… and just 3 votes this time around (2 of them from the same Gurus as last year).

This is not the look for the future of Gurus moving forward. But our team is designing a databased system that will launch when Gurus goes full-out in November. So, until then…

UPDATE, 9/7/10 – The last three Gurus have now chimed in.

The Participating Gurus
Anthony Breznican – USA Today
Greg Ellwood – Hitfix
Pete Hammond – Deadline Hollywood
Eugene Hernandez – indieWIRE
Pete Howell – Toronto Star
Dave Karger – Entertainment Weekly
Mark Olsen – LA Times
David Poland – Movie City News
Steve Pond – The Wrap
Sean Smith – Entertainment Weekly
Sasha Stone – Awards Daily
Kris Tapley – In Contention
Anne Thompson -indieWIRE
Susan Wloszczyna – USA Today

Frenzy on the Wall: Who’s the Biggest Star in the World (Right Now)?

Monday, September 6th, 2010

William Goldman is one of the greatest screenwriters of all-time, but he was also a fantastic essayist and one of the most insightful minds when it came to writing about films. His collection of essays, The Big Picture, has been read so many times by me that the pages are starting to break free from the binding. But one of the questions he came back to was: who is the biggest star in the world right now? Almost every year during the ’90s, he tried his best to answer that very question.

For whatever reason, Goldman’s not writing (or at least not publishing) his essays about film and I decided that I would try to answer the question as we wind down the year 2010.  Just like Goldman, I won’t use a ton of numbers or charts and graphs, but I’ll present my evidence as best as I can.

Last year, I think the answer would have been a bit easier.  James Cameron was clearly the biggest star in the world in 2009 and it wasn’t even close. The man released his first film in twelve years and just happened to make a movie that broke every box office record imaginable. It is now clear that any year in which Cameron releases a film, he will be the biggest star in that year. One could make a case that he’s the biggest star of this current year since Avatar raked in most of its dough after the calendar flipped to 2010, but by the time this year ends, I don’t think he’ll still be on anyone’s mind.

As for those in front of the camera, it would be easy to name folks like George Clooney or Brad Pitt. Up in the Air and Inglourious Basterds were hits both critically and commercially and it’s reasonable to expect every film to which one of these handsome men is attached will at least make its money back.  People will go to the movies specifically because they hear the names “Clooney” or “Pitt” and that’s becoming increasingly rarer.

If you need evidence of this, check out this weekend’s grosses for The American.  It was the number one film of the weekend, despite the fact that Clooney was the only actor anybody heard of and despite the fact that it’s a deliberately-paced film that most American audiences would usually find dull.  I doubt it’ll have strong legs next weekend, when word of mouth spreads, but the bottom line is that Clooney put butts in seats this weekend. Audiences in this country feel comfortable with Pitt and Clooney, that they will deliver the goods in projects that are worthy of their time and money.
Johnny Depp might want in on this conversation.

I personally think he’s fading as an actor I trust, but Alice in Wonderland still made a ton of money. Although, I don’t know how much if it is Depp and how much of it is Burton and how much of it is the recognizable brand.  Depp certainly didn’t help Imaginarium of Doctor Parnassus get  seen by very many people, and while Public Enemies did okay, it didn’t do as well as expected in a cushy Independence Day slot.  The Tourist will be a good test for him, where he’s paired with one of the top female stars out there.

Speaking of Angelina Jolie, could she be the biggest star in the world? She’s certainly one of the most recognizable faces, gracing the covers of magazines on newsstands around the globe. She was the only major draw in Salt and that film has grossed over a hundred million dollars at the box office. Jolie and action is a formula for success, as she had already proved with Wanted. Unfortunately, put her in a serious drama – even one she’s excellent in, like Changeling – and audiences turn away.

Speaking of Clint Eastwood, I must make mention of him because I think he was on William Goldman’s list every single year he made it. And the weird thing is that you could probably still put him somewhere on the list. The guy has been a commodity for about forty years already and has shown no signs of slowing, releasing a film every single year. When he actually gets in front of the camera, (a rare sight these days) people tend to show up, even if it’s something as dumb as Gran Torino.

Box office gross of the aforementioned film: nearly 150 million bucks and Eastwood was the only draw. Dude is nearly eighty and he still gets audiences to come out. His next film, Hereafter, reunites him with Invictus star Matt Damon and comes out in the fall.

Matt Damon, you say? Why yes, I did. I’d love to put him somewhere on this list, but the truth of the matter is that while he’s a recognizable face and name and he gives any film he stars in the air of respectability…he’s not quite in the running for biggest movie star status. The Bourne films were cash-cows, of course, but the truth of the matter is that he’s too much of a damned artist to be a movie star.

He’s the kind of guy who gains forty pounds to star in a Soderbergh film, the kind of guy who brings subtlety to his pitch-perfect performance in The Good Shepherd (one of my favorite performances of the last twenty years). He’s the kind of guy who will take time out of his schedule to film cameos in Soderbergh’s Che or Coppola’s Youth Without Youth. He doesn’t seem especially motivated by money or fame; instead it seems his one big desire is to work with as many great directors as possible.

The guy has worked with Scorsese, Coppola, Soderbergh, Minghella, Van Sant, Gilliam, Redford, Eastwood, and has a film coming up with the Coen Brothers. He might be one of the finest popular actors of his generation, but he’s not one of its biggest movie stars.

Damon also worked with Steven Spielberg on Saving Private Ryan and Spielberg used to be a staple on this list. You could always put him on it because he’s easily the most famous film director in the history of motion pictures. If you ask any bozo off the street to name a film director, they’ll definitely be able to mention Steven Spielberg. Unfortunately the man hasn’t released a film since Munich (What Indiana Jones film? I keep telling you, it doesn’t exist!).

He’s got a couple of projects on the horizon, including War Horse and Tintin, but I can’t put him anywhere near the top until he finally makes that damned Abraham Lincoln movie. Or, you know, if War Horse is brilliant and makes a ton of money. But he deserves a place on this list, even as just a producer.  Hell, every Transformers movie is a gigantic hit and he’s one of the men responsible for it.

How about the star of that hit franchise? No, not Michael Bay or Optimus Prime, but Shia LaBeouf. He’s only 24 years old and he’s the lead actor in a franchise that has grossed a kajillion dollars (he was also in that Spielberg movie that doesn’t exist and grossed a lot of money). But, come on, we know people weren’t going to the theater for a chance to see LaBeouf. And while Disturbia was a decent-sized hit, Eagle Eye was a disappointment. We’ll see how he does with the Wall Street sequel, but even if it’s a huge success, it probably won’t be due to him. He might be the biggest star in the world in five to ten years, but he’s not there yet.

There’s no natural transition to this one, so I’m going to try not to snap my neck with this segue: Will Smith! What about Big Willie? He’s still getting jiggy with audiences, whether it’s in the atrocious Hancock or the even more atrocious Seven Pounds. It’s actually an amazing testament to his star power that the latter film managed to gross seventy million dollars, despite its subject matter.

I mean, that’s not an easy film to sell and basically they marketed it as “Will Smith…in a movie!” Nobody had any clue what it was about, but the promise of Will Smith drew people in. That’s pretty impressive. But he’s been absent from screens for two years now and Men in Black III isn’t coming out until 2012, so he’s taking a break from his throne.

No, Jaden Smith isn’t where I’m going next.

I don’t know who to blame or  praise for the success of Twilight, so I can’t really put any of those kids or filmmakers on here. I’ll chalk that one up to “phenomenon” and move on.   Same goes for the much better Harry Potter films.

Leonardo DiCaprio? He’s the star of one of the most talked-about movies of the year, Inception, which will end up with around 300 million bucks in the bank. Not too shabby. He’s also Scorsese’s favorite actor and DiCaprio has helped turn Scorsese into a legitimate box office favorite. Or maybe it was the other way around? Unfortunately, he couldn’t help turn Revolutionary Road or Body of Lies into hits.

In the right project, DiCaprio is gold. And Inception might have been more about Christopher Nolan than DiCaprio. I think his turn as the title character in Eastwood’s J. Edgar Hoover biopic will probably garner some awards buzz, but we’ll see if he can take it to the top of the box office.

Adam Sandler was the answer to this question for a while. But that was back when his movies cost nothing to make and grossed insane sums of money. Now the movies cost more, he costs more and he can’t even guarantee a hit when he’s working with Judd Apatow. Grown Ups grossed about $160 million, but it definitely cost quite a bit to make and market. He’s near the top of the list, but it seems he’s veering closer towards modern-day Eddie Murphy family-movie territory. And that’s a hit or miss world to live in.

Okay, enough beating around the bush, the answer to the biggest movie star in the world? Well, who could it be other than Sandra Bullock? She’s gracing the cover of Entertainment Weekly this week despite the fact that she’s got nothing to promote and she wasn’t even interviewed. She starred in two massive hits last year, got an Oscar and could get anything greenlit immediately. She was the star of 2009 and is the biggest movie star to grace a cinema screen right now.

But that’s not the answer. She might be the biggest actor in the world, but the biggest movie star right now (and I would argue, for the last decade) is very simple…

PIXAR.

Name me another company, actor, director, etc. in the history of cinema that has never made a film that bombed either critically or commercially. You can’t do it. (Okay, maybe John Cazale?) Every year, Pixar releases a film that grosses a ton of money and tops critics lists. This year, they put out Toy Story 3 and it grossed over 400 million dollars. I don’t think any movie star on the planet can guarantee you half that. Well, except for Pixar.  I’m putting the over/under on the next five Pixar releases at 250 million and I’ll take the over.  I’ll win every time.

Without a doubt, the biggest movie star in the world is Pixar. And it’s not even close.

26 Weeks To Oscar: The Year Of… Patience

Monday, September 6th, 2010

The awards season has gotten off to a rousing “uh, okay.”

Yeah, the festival season is upon us and there is a lot of drool dripping over some of these films – including my own happy salivations – but it is easy to mistake strong players using the fests to launch their long, complex, and expensive awards plans and the notion that festival excitement is, in and of itself, an answer. It’s not… at least, not to the positive.

Films will die at VeniTelluRonto™, but even the most robust winners/survivors cannot assume they’re set. Some actors will lock in, probably… but not Picture. Two of last year’s ten nominees premiered at one of these festivals in the year they were released. (The Hurt Locker is the third… which was in Toronto in 2008… and almost failed to sell.) Slumdog was the only one of the five the year before. 2007 saw 4 of 5. But that was the exception that reminds us of the rule. In 2006… 1 of 5.

I’m not saying that these festivals are not a great tool for movie marketers to grab a great deal of attention. (And the Oscar race is a marketing event first and an artistic event second, make no mistake.) And who knows? There are those who feel that TIFF 2010 will have more than half the nominees in its theaters. No reason it can’t be the case. But again… it’s the start of a marathon, not a sprint where the first winners get automatic byes.

There are plenty of players in the game for Oscar 2010, but for the first time in a very long time, there are virtually no “you can lock that in from months away” candidates sitting there. You have Eastwood and you have The Coens and Sony over the moon about Fincher’s The Social Network. After that, even amongst pedigree players, it is hard for anyone to get a realistic temperature out there.

In the immortal words of Nancy Meyers, something’s gotta give. But what?

Danny Boyle has his golden statue and a movie that’s a thriller and a crowd pleaser… but is it Oscar? Mike Leigh is always a threat, but one never knows which film will leap up. Jim Brooks has batted .600 overall, with 3 of his first four films getting BP nods… but it’s been 13 years and a flop since he went to The Carpet.

The next group is pretty muscular, but still, a bit aspirational. Ed Zwick is always around The Money, so maybe a lighter film will get him to gold. Julian Schnabel hasn’t made a movie that didn’t get serious awards interest, but Miral may or may not be “good for The Jews.” Julie Taymor may get Shakespeare back in the game for the first time since Ken Branagh. (You remember Ken… director of Thor… right?) Randall Wallace has been to the dance, but is his horse movie too Disney to be embraced as seriously as it will need to be?

David O. Russell is one of the most storied young directors… but has never been nominated… is The Fighter his The Wrestler? And what of young Aronofsky? Is his thriller too thrilling for The Senior Circuit? Also challenging voters with fresh intensity are Mark Romanek, Anton Corbjin, and Ben Affleck (back, this time starring in his sophomore, somewhat more conventional but still very 70s, directorial effort).

Right in what seems like The Oscar Pocket are Tony Goldwyn with a period overcoming-the-odds flick, Calendar Guy Nigel Cole with a warmer Norma Rae, Tom Hooper segueing from John Adams and the well-liked but unrewarded The Damned United to something more Queen-erific, and Roger Michell doing another turn on classic Jim Brooks.

And the Really Young Set… or at least, young to The Academy: Cholodenko, Boden/Fleck, Cianfrance, and Schneider. All in play for real… but still a bit of a mystery to the voters, who, in reality, are not cineastes, but industry pros, as given to whims as any other large group.

Debra Granik is a remarkable director and undeniably a starmaker, but Roadside Attractions needs to leap into the Oscar game with both feet is her Winter’s Bone is to get out of summer and take a firm position in the awards season. RA also picked up the Bardem-starrer from Alejandro Gonzalez-Inarritu, making them The New Awards Player in town. They have earned a taste for all this, after winning Oscar last year for Best Doc. They just picked up the new Ondi Timoner doc, hoping for a repeat. Roadside certainly doesn’t want to follow too closely in the footsteps of Sidney Kimmel and Bob Yari, as both men have, ahem, narrowed their film interests since they were seen chasing awards. They don’t have the support of horny vampires, a la Summit. But in the land of 10 Best Picture nominees and extremely strong candidates for Actor & Actress, it may be their time.

And who has the fullest stable of contenders? Harvey Weinstein… natch. But damned if I know whether he has the cash, staff, and will to grab what, from a distance, could easily be 2 BP slots out of 10.

Of course, there are the pictures that have already done their big theatrical releases: Toy Story 3, Inception, and Shutter Island. Plus we’ll see pushes from Alice in Wonderland and How To Train Your Dragon.

Floating out there are a new Peter Weir film (aka, the Scott Rudin movie that has no distribution) and a first from screenwriting Oscar winner William Monahan. But who wants to jump onto a moving train to get them into the race in the next 3 months?

And Tyler Perry’s presence is now official. And if he doesn’t get some love, Academy members could just find themselves Madeaed. Watch out.

Does any of this make you feel more settled about what happens next?

Thing is… it will turn into some solids as we move forward. It always does. And those sure bets are often not as sure as we all like to think. But right now, there is a lot more passionate churning about every category but Best Picture. And I have to say… kinda cool for a change.