Action Movies

Movies
Multiplex Mayhem: The Finish Line
Posted on 05.11.08 by Bob Westal @ 10:13 pm

Last time, I was actually correct for the second time in two weeks, for the most part. There aren’t too many surprises this Mother’s Day weekend, but considering the downticket box-office, some respected filmmakers might be needing some maternal TLC right now.

*It’s safe to say that “Iron
Man
” director Jon Favreau ain’t one of them. In its second week, as per this week’s estimates, the film experienced an approximate (and expected) 50% drop-off in ticket sales for a total of $50,500,000, more than doubling the numbers of any film out there this week. This might actually be an even better amount considering the number of screens has barely increased and the per-screen average is still a spectacular $12, 284.00, significantly higher than any movie playing in the U.S. right now.

* The congenitally jaundiced Nikki Finke is suspicious, but the official reports as of this writing is that the Wachowski Brothers’ “Speed Racer” has just barely managed to nab the #2 spot this week, with $20, 210,000. Considering the reported budget of $160 million — as far as I’m concerned enough money to make at least 16 perfectly good studio movies — this is nothing to write home about. And, perhaps another lesson is that, if you’re going to make a 2 hour, 15 minute kiddie movie, you’d better have something more than a bit of name familiarity, a good cast, and slightly ugly video game visuals. The James McTeigue directed “V for Vendetta” notwithstanding (which I loved, but which generates as many opinions as it has viewers), it’s really starting to look as if the Wachowskis may never escape the shadow of their one bonafide critical and commercial smash, “The Matrix,” if they don’t figure out to simply tell stories.

* Especially considering David Medsker’s backhandedly positive review, “What Happens in Vegas” may not be the worst high-concept romantic comedy, though it’s also pretty clear it’s not the best — how could it be with Ashton “Bob Westal Really Hates My Acting” Kutcher in the lead role? But it did manage to do pretty darn well, netting a higher per-screen average than “Racer” and an estimated $20 million even, which means it pretty much beats the pants of last week’s high-concept rom-com “Made of Honor,” which has made $26,275,000 over two weeks. Could it be the strong “Vegas” supporting cast Dave praises in his review?

*I’m sad to say that David Mamet’s mixed martial thriller/dark moral fable, “Redbelt” was ignored by filmgoers who, if they heard about the film at all, were likely somewhat confused by the idea of a thoughtful, small film with fighting in it and Chewitel Ejiofor is not yet quite the superstar he definitely deserves to be. (It’s hard to blame them since it’s not a concept Hollywood’s been comfortable with lately. People tend to understand what they’ve already been given. Movies that are even slightly different require some time for audiences to figure things out.)

I actually saw “Redbelt” last night and can attest to the lackluster receipts, at least in Long Beach, CA — the theater was less than 1/3 filled at the 7:25 Saturday night screening. It has its flaws and it’s certainly not Mamet’s best — and mainstream audiences are certain to be slightly baffled by those odd cadences which occasionally make themselves known in any Mamet-directed film. (Iambic pentameter…it’s an English major thing…you might not understand.) On the other hand, it’s a more than acceptable entry in the ancient genre of anti-prizefighting prizefighting movies with a possible nascent superstar in its leading man, and it has some strong, bone-crunching fighting sequences. To my mind, it deserved more time to try and find an audience before going this wide. If a movie of this sort is going to sell it all, it needs a lot more time than one week to develop the kind of awareness needed for a major national release. The resulting $825 per screen average should be no surprise in the circumstances.

The British kid comedy, “Son of Rambow” did better, earning $138,000 in 36 theaters. Considering the modest comedy has some international appeal, this may be good enough.

However, the two (very moderate) box-office champs in the limited release indie sweepstakes were two films I barely remembered existed, both from directors of Indian extraction. Fans of spectacular visuals, however, gave the fantasy thriller “The Fall” a nice enough with opening with just over $80,000 on nine screens. This one has some geek boy buzz behind it (though not so much that I realized it was coming out this weekend) and is “presented” by David Fincher and Spike Jonze.The actual director is Tarsem Singh (just “Tarsem” to you!) whose gruesomely stylish, memorable sci-fi/horror flick, “The Cell,” has some lingering cult appeal. (Even a squeamish cinema chicken like me felt compelled to go see that one — though I suppose it’s quite mild by some standards.) So chalk this one up to the artier/alternativeish edge of the geek spectrum.

And romantics and those of us who are suckers for tales of “forbidden romance” and the whole stiff-upper lip gin-and-tonic drinking English colonial drama thing shelled out just over $50,000 in eight theaters to see “Before the Rains,” which manages to have both the Merchant-Ivory imprint and a good review on its website from guru-gone-bankable Deepak Chopra — both catnip to certain segments of the wine-and-cheese set. Don’t laugh. Unitarians like to go the movies too.


Movies
Multiplex Mayhem: The Starting Line
Posted on 05.09.08 by Bob Westal @ 1:23 am

While I got really nervous just before election day — you never really know what those crazy voters are thinking, even if we have polls coming out of every orifice — but I have no compunction whatever in predicting, along with the people who (think they) know, that the #1 movie this week will not be a new release, but last week’s expectations beating megachamp, “Iron Man.” But while Marvel stockholders are counting their money and the rest of us are wondering when Hillary’s going to drop out, there is a race for second place this week, though it’s also pretty easy to call….

*How long has it been since I was puzzling over the identity of “Racer X”? Well, let’s just say it was slightly longer ago than 135 minute runtime for the Wachowski Brothers version of “Speed Racer,” a movie that’s been gestating since I had a full head of hair. 135 minutes is a long sit for most members of the pre-13 set (and many in the post-13 set), and with the Wachowski’s erratic storytelling skills apparently confirmed by a lackluster 34% Tomatometer score, this one might drive some to distraction and have weaker than usual legs for a family friendly film with considerable adult nostalgia/geek appeal.

Also, the would be blockbuster’s trailers look less like anime and more like a particularly gaudy video game, and that might not help with the grown-up side of the equation, though J. Hoberman (almost the last critic standing at the Village Voice) has some backhanded compliments. Also, as my esteemed colleague Jason Zingale noted, the casting here is spot on, with Emile Hersh (last seen starving for his art with Sean Penn) as Speed, Christina Ricci (freed from Sam Jackson’s radiator) as galpal Trixie, Matthew Fox (I haven’t watched “Lost” since halfway through it’s first season, so I can’t make a joke) as the mysterious Racer X, and master thesps Susan Sarandon and John Goodman as Mom and Pops Racer. (It’s also got Stephen Colbert’s very special Korean popstar nemesis, Rain, who’s getting okay reviews.) The very strong cast should be good for some tickets, at least until word about the kid-patience-testing length gets out.

*Since we’ve been basing movies on video games and theme park rides, why not movies drawn from tourism board ad campaigns? That’s the question asked by the makers of “What Happens in Vegas,” a rom-com made even less enticing than usual by the presence of the questionably talented Ashton Kutcher, here paired with the far more able Cameron Diaz, who could really use a bit of respect and a hit without the word “Shrek” in the title. In the case, the premise of a drunkenly married couple forced to spend months of “hard matrimony” might be good for $10 million or so. It would help if its word of mouth is better than the reviews, which have a fairly nasty tinge this time. Even benevolent blurbmistress Susan Granger is brandishing her rhetorical butter knives on this one.

And, in other news…. After opening in just a couple of theaters last week, writer-director David Mamet’s Redbelt goes wide in over a thousand theaters this weekend. Personally, I think that might be a case of too-much too-soon for this relatively smallish film, but I wish it well and look forward to seeing it myself. “Son of Rambow” is also expanding with a more modest, and possibly shrewder, additional 31 theaters.

In the “ouch” department, the follow-up to Henry Bean’s outstanding 2002 indie, “The Believer,” “Noise,” a comedy of sorts, is opening in two theaters and no one seems to care much, despite starring a couple of our best, Tim Robbins and William Hurt. Shame.

And considering we are aligned with an online men’s mag, I should make mention of the opening of “The Babysitters” in very limited release. The premise of this black comedy is pretty much the premise of the similarly titled film you’re likely to find in the blocked off section in the back of the vid store. The reviews are about what you’d expect, and then some. Take the semi-literate, quasi-grammatical critique by Prairie Miller:

The Babysitters is a pathetic excuse to trot out a procession of teenage girls in the raw, performing graphic simulated sex acts with your basic suburban family man drooling all over himself. Going home and taking a hot, soapy shower after viewing, is highly recommended.

By God, Prairie is right. One needs no excuses, pathetic or otherwise, to show graphic simulated sex acts — they are there own justification. As for “hot, soapy showers” following a viewing, well it’s kind of a waste of water compared to baby oil, but sure.


Movies
Multiplex Mayhem: Bob Downey…B-Lister, No More!
Posted on 05.04.08 by Bob Westal @ 3:27 pm

Forget what I said last time, there’ll be no schadenfreude for Nikki Finke, or anyone else in H-wood, on this day, for “Iron Man” has netted some $104,250,000 at the domestic box-office since it’s Thursday night pre-release, exceeding expectations by as much as $30 million smackers. Finke and Variety also inform us that the film also netted another $96+ million outside North America, making this a cool $200 million dollar weekend and overall bringing us into something not so terribly far from “Spiderman” territory.

I’m actually not one bit surprised that the film has apparently very wide appeal despite not being as action-packed as some others because my personal gauge of today’s mass audience, my Adam Sandler worshipping, “Saw” adoring, thoughtful-movie-disdaining nephew was wowed by it, even noting the smaller amount of action but finding it, mysteriously enough, really entertaining in any case. (Stories? Characters? Could they sometimes mean money? I think that the real secret weapon of “Spiderman” was its heart, but then I’m a dreamy idealist with absolutely no connection to reality. Can you guess which candidate I’m supporting?)

“Iron Man” also enjoyed the best per-screen average of any film I’ve looked at since starting this series, at $24,543 on over four-thousand screens. (So far, the best per-screens in Multiplex Mayhem land have been major art-house films showing in only a few theaters nationwide.) Overall, the calm, sober analysis offered by the Finkean legions, via a “Paramount insider,” is that Robert Downey, Jr. and the movie beat Jesus (Mel Gibson version, I assume) and, yes, Will Smith. No word on which one would win in an Ulitimate Fighting match with Zarathustra and the Mighty Thor. And I can’t think of a better opportunity to plug this masterfully written Bullz-Eye salute to the the lesser known great acting works of Mr. Downey, which is absolutely coincidentally written by, er, me.

In other news, despite probably sucking, “Made of Honor” managed to grab $15,500,000, with “Baby Mama“, starring the adorably (im)mature Tina Fey, is holding on decently in it’s second week with $10,332,000. Meanwhile “Harold and Kumar Escape from Guantanamo Bay” just barely edged out the impressive box-office “legs” of “Forgetting Sarah Marshall,” with both films netting just over $6 million, making it an imperfect but acceptable week for not-immensely stupid comedies.

By the way, it also wasn’t a bad 48 hours or so for two debuting indie-sized films with more mainstream appeal than usual. In six and five theater’s respectively, David Mamet’s “Redbelt” managed a healthy per screen average of $11,433 and the Sundance-fave kid-comedy of cinematic recklessness, “Son of Rambow” did nearly as well with $10,500 per theater.

That’s it for this week. I’m off to go make pre-Indiana/North Carolina calls for someone David Mamet probably won’t be voting for. (Yeah, I know, I found a way to link to my old blog post twice in two posts. I live for web-hits, baby.)


Movies
Multiplex Mayhem: The Origin Story
Posted on 05.02.08 by Bob Westal @ 2:06 am

Even with my lousy record, I feel no compunction in calling the winner of this week. For once, we’ve got a sure thing.

*If “Iron Man” is not the #1 movie at the U.S. boxoffice this weekend, then there’s also an excellent chance that Mike Gravel and Ron Paul will be duking it out for the Presidency this fall as the Republican and Democratic nominees. With solid buzz, astonishingly good reviews, and little or no real competition for the young to middle-aged male movie dollar there is no bigger sure thing. The only question now is how much of a blockbuster we’re talking about. Both Carl DiOrio and Nikki Finke are talking about figures of $75, $80, $85 million or more, apparently based on “Iron Man” “tracking” better than the “The Hulk” back in ‘03, which made $62 million its own opening weekend, and, well, lots of people actually seem to like this movie.

But, as always, there’s a possible fly or two in the ointment, because a lot of those people are critics and some folks are actually worried that in the wake of megasuccess of 100% character-and-plot free “Transformers” this could actually be a bad sign for the the first feature film solely produced by Marvel Entertainment, could they like the film too much. Among others, TV’s own Richard Roeper and Michael Phillips, after administering hearty thumbs-ups, worried that the film might be a bit, you know, un-stupid to make the monster dollars it needs. With a Pixar like score of 95% on the Tomatometer, the bar is definitely set high — if it only makes, say, $74,999,999.99, you can expect the schadenfreude to flow from Nikki Finke’s next column and elsewhere. Whoever wrote the line “This place is full of vultures, vultures everywhere!” wasn’t really talking about Casablanca.

Also, there is some concern about women given that it’s a superhero/action flick and that there’s lots of estrogen-fare on tap at the nation’s theaters, last last week’s winner, “Baby Mama.” On the other hand, as with the “Spider-Man” franchise, this film has more female appeal than usual with a stronger than usual character orientation and a bit of romance courtesy of well cast stars Robert Downey, Jr., playing a more troubled than usual superguy, and the lovely Gwyneth Paltrow as his woman Friday. Also, the light touch of director Jon Favreau (”Elf“) reminds us that once young writer-star of “Swingers” has shown some real chops when it comes to fashioning solid, mainstream entertainment. Frankly, if this movie doesn’t pack ‘em in, I’m not sure there’s hope for any of us.

* Oh, there actually is one other major studio with the temerity to open this week — though if few heterosexual males (and not many discerning folks of any gender or sexual preference) will be likely to willingly attend the horribly reviewed Patrick Dempsey-Michelle Monaghan standard issue high-concept rom-com “Made of Honor.” This film is continuing a recent trend of major films with single digit RT scores. Though “Made” might benefit from the obvious counter-programming and the legitimate goodwill generated by its two stars, it will be lucky to come in an exceedingly poor second and could be defeated by the less patronizingly fem-friendly “Baby Mama.” We’ll see.

Meanwhile, in Indiewood.…They’re just starting to be rolled out in a very small number of theaters, but this week has two fairly major, nominally indie, films with some actual potential for mass appeal. Specifically, we’re talking about the latest from supermacho playwright-turned writer-director David Mamet, “Redbelt.” Though I’ve blogged about my issues with Mr. Mamet’s announced political conversion, I’m still looking forward to this one.

It could prove to be a low-key hit in the long run with the inherent male-centric interest of its subject matter, Mamet’s undoubted story-telling chops, and the appeal of mixed martial arts subject matter of its charismatic star, the outstanding, extremely busy, yet still underrated Chewitel Ejiorfor (Talk to Me, American Gangster, Dirty Pretty Things, Serenity, Inside Man, etc., etc., etc.) On the other hand the reviews this one is getting, including from our own David Medsker, are just slightly below par for Mamet. I wonder how long before someone claims it’s a case of anti-conservative bias.

On the other hand, the reviews are consistently kind, if muted, for the festival hit, “Son of Rambow,” reportedly inspired by the now legendary case of three middle-school boys making a homemade shot-by-shot remake of “Raiders of the Lost Ark,” but switching locales to England and the source flick to a much darker action movie. This PG-13 entry one also has my favorite MPAA rating explanation in a while. “For some violence and reckless behavior.” Could be fun.


And some good impressions…
Posted on 04.28.08 by Jason Thompson @ 9:33 pm

Really, I just wanted to make use of the SNAKES ON A PLANE subcategory we still have around here. So here we go. Enjoy.



Movies
Multiplex Mayhem: Slapstick Battle of the Sexes Postgame
Posted on 04.27.08 by Bob Westal @ 4:25 pm

It was a good weekend for the power of the PG-13 rating and the eternal drawing power of the promise of belly laughs.

* As predicted correctly by me (and everyone else who dared) two days back, the Tina Fey/Amy Poehler opus “Baby Mama” won a relatively healthy box-office weekend with $18,271,000. In a weekend with three fairly strong comedies cramming the U.S.A.’s multiplexes, the obvious advantage here is the PG-13 rating — at the risk of stereotyping grossly, one imagines cool unmarried aunts (preferably with glasses) taking their young teen nieces in droves to this one, Ben & Jerry’s ice cream to follow. There was a time many decades ago when TV stars were considered questionable box-office material but, with the distinction between home and theatrical entertainment breaking down in just about every way possible, I think we can agree that that is well and truly dead now.

* Also, youngish male audiences, at least, for the most part don’t seem to mind a little very broad political satire mixed in with their sophomoric giggles, “Harold and Kumar Escape from Guantanamo Bay” scored a solid, if not quite boffo, $14,570.00. Considering that the film’s $12 million budget was less than half of the $30 million that “Baby Mama” cost, this film could well turn out to be the more profitable, at least for the time being. Anyone up for remake of the Marx Brothers’ anti-authoritarian classic, “Duck Soup“?

* A true photo-finish in third place between last week’s two top grosser, with the martial arts fantasy, “The Forbidden Kingdom” netting $11,230,00 and “Forgetting Sarah Marshall” netting $11,014,000. What makes it so close is that “Sarah Marshall” actually beat the wirefu/chop socky summit meeting in terms of per screen numbers, with an average of $3,934.00. Once again, a Judd Apatow comedy is showing some real staying power. Amazing what non-braindead laughs, and an attention to story and characterization, can do.

* The weekend’s other major opener, “Deception” did a predictably rotten $2,225,000. (According to entertainment news gadfly Nikki Finke, the film was only released in theatres as a favor to Hugh Jackman. She also has “Sarah Marshall” coming in at #3.) And the barely released 0% RT rater, “Deal” got a $31,000 in 50 theaters, with a per screen average of $620.00 in its first week.

Meanwhile in Indiewood….Errol Morris’s “war on terror” documentary, “Standard Operating Procedure,” which I discussed on Friday a bit, opened strongly in its two theaters with a per screen of $7,450 — beating out the per-screen of “Baby Mama” by $266. However, the real per-screen winner this week was a film I failed to mention. “Roman de Gare” is the latest from 71-year-old French hitmaker Claude Lelouch. For an internationally renowned French auteur, Lelouch’s slick style is not quite the catnip the film critics that some of his contemporaries can claim, but this one got mostly good-to-okay reviews and such is the appetite out there among older and more educated filmgoers for a decent, diverting thriller with actual characters and a story, that it’s spectacular $12,750 per screen should be no surprise at all.


Movies
Multiplex Mayhem: “My PG-13 Kung-Fu Defeats All R-Rated Comedy!”
Posted on 04.20.08 by Bob Westal @ 4:54 pm

Oof! Once again, my sorry prognostication skills are naked before the world. Fortunately for me, it’s not like anyone really expects me to eat William Shatner’s toupee. I mean, it’s not like I could actually obtain the thing — he still needs it for “Boston Legal.” (I’m damn glad I didn’t suggest Tony Curtis’s apparently retired piece.)

So, quickly forgetting my ignoble defeat, let us move to the cold, hard numbers from the number crunchers of Box Office Mojo….

* “The Forbidden Kingdom” earned a healthy $20,870,000 at some 3,151 cinema dojos, more than doubling both Jet Li and Jackie Chan’s most recent vehicles, with the exception of the still powerful (for some reason) “Rush Hour” franchise. Considering the international appeal of the its stars and subject matter, this one seems on-track to make a healthy profit for its relatively modest rumored budget of $55 million. (Considering Chan and Li’s fame, one has to imagine they’re taking a lot of their compensation on “the back end.” $55 million would barely pay for the vegan lunch of two similarly powerful Hollywood heavyweights.)

*”Forgetting Sarah Marshall” was remembered by enough filmgoers to net $17, 348,000 on just under 2,800 screens. (And, no, it didn’t beat “Kingdom” on per screen averages either, earning $6,200 to the fight-fest’s $6,623.) Relative to it’s $30 million budget — which is low by current studio movie standards but still strikes me as somewhat inflated for a non star-driven, non-effects-laden comedy — it’s doing just fine, but nowhere near the bonanza of “Superbad,” which had about six months of buzz, an odd sort of star power from its three unknown leads, and the world’s most relatable premise for the prime moviegoing demographic of hormonally-challenged males and the hormonally-challenged of heart.

* “88 Minutes,” this weekend’s critically reviled, geriatricly pitched, Al Pacino starrer, did badly and failed to make it into third place. (That honor went to last weekend’s top film, the PG-13 slasher remake “Prom Night“). Still, it did better than you might think, netting some $6,800,000 from unsuspecting adults easily lulled by a familiar name and a premise that dates back to 1950. Whoo-ha.

* “Expelled: No Intelligence Allowed” was booked into 1,052 theaters — as far as I know, a post-”Fahrenheit 9/11″ record for any documentary. Despite some controversy, the buzz on this doc — which only got two Tomatometer-adjudged “fresh” reviews, including a mild endorsement from Mark Moring of Christianity Today — was basically non-existent, though it was able get positive blurbs from Christian far-right heavyweights James Dobson and Pat Robertson, as well as lousy film critic turned annoying rightwing radio host Michael Medved. Presumably a mostly conservative evangelical audience was able to put $3,153,000 in the collection plate, and a not horrible per screen average of just under $3,000. Nevertheless, it looks like the Beast (aka Michael Moore) remains by far the king of the documentary box-office.

*This is especially true as the liberal heir apparent to the Beast’s throne of first-person filmmaking, Morgan Spurlock, failed to make much of a dent in arthouses with “Where in the World is Osama Bin Laden” which had a pretty dismal opening weekend with a per-screen average of only $1,401 in 102 theaters and a grand total of $143,000. It did, however, manage to beat a truly low profile — so low it can’t be found on Rotten Tomatoes — but possibly not horrible horror flick called “Pathology” which did find it’s way into fifty theaters this week, but perhaps not for long. Mr. Disgusting likes the film, but smells a rat at MGM….


Movies
Multiplex Mayhem: Romantic Shtick vs. Middle-Aged Martial Arts
Posted on 04.18.08 by Bob Westal @ 12:55 am

I know I may live to regret this, but….


* If “Forgetting Sarah Marshall” is not the #1 movie this weekend, I’ll eat William Shatner’s toupee. This latest, strongly reviewed, entry from the Judd Apatow hit factory is pretty much made for a weekend like this. It’s got what appears to be more than enough raunch to entice males as well as sufficient romantic appeal to lure female moviegoers — and everyone likes to laugh. With great buzz and a some very funny trailers, I don’t see how this one loses.

Even if its star and screenwriter, Jason Segel, isn’t the most well known or charismatic member of the Apatow clan, he’s a familiar face from his popular sitcom, “How I Met Your Mother.” It’s also got “Superbad” boy Jonah Hill, “That 70’s Show” star and frequent “Robot Chicken” voice Mila Kunis, and, most of all, Kristin Bell, of “Heroes” and “Veronica Mars.” Bell is both enormously versatile, extremely funny, and one of the most talented young actresses working. She is also enormously hot in a bikini. Having her in the title role can’t be a bad thing.

On the other hand, Variety indicates I’d better start figuring out what brand of beer best washes down a thirty year old toupee, because apparently “Marshall” isn’t “tracking” all that amazingly well, which would scare me if I understood what “tracking” actually meant. (Blogger Jedboy tried to explain it awhile back, which basically comes down to a way to quantify the unquantifiable thing we call “buzz” — it frankly sounds like a lot of overpriced hocus pocus to me, but then I’m sort of genetically predisposed to hate this stuff.)

Maybe straight males are scared of having to look out at Jason Segel’s genitalia for an entire scene. It’s funny how guys who don’t mind watching people being hideously tortured for an hour at a time run screaming from the thought of looking at a penis, but there you go. Also, of course, the fact that this film is ranking as the most well-reviewed Apatow flick since “Superbad” means absolutely nothing because, you know, quality means absolutely nothing. And, of course, the R-rated comedy will have some strong, PG-13 competition from our next intriguing entry. I’m starting to worry.

*”The Forbidden Kingdom” is, in international terms, the biggest cinematic summit meeting since Pacino and De Niro had the ultimate filmic power lunch in “Heat.” Martial arts superstars Jackie Chan and Jet Li are both getting older and therefore, like all athletes, less capable than before of the sort of stunning feats of astonishing grace and agility that they both exhibited back when they were mostly making their best Cantonese language extravaganzas. Teaming them is a canny means of compensating for that problem commercially and should work well enough to make the film very profitable internationally. Though it’s getting somewhat mixed reviews, the fight scenes are reportedly strong and the scenes around it at least somewhat engaging — which is all the fans really demand. “The Forbidden Kingdom” is certain to do very well, but I still think that R-rated laughs still have a broader appeal than even PG-13 martial arts, but then I’m not paying attention to the mighty power of tracking.

*Whatever happens, I think we can safely assume that the new Al Pacino thriller, “88 Minutes” will be enormously lucky to come in a poor third and will likely land much lower down in the top ten. Pacino’s fans are largely the kind of old fogies who might actually pay attention to reviews, and with a dismal 11% “Fresh” rating and word that it was apparently held back for some time, this one really smells like a giant size turkey and is providing fodder for critics’ quipping skills, never a good sign. On the other hand, one of the very few critics to like it, and especially Pacino’s performance, is the venerable Andrew Sarris, so that should be a salve to the egos of Mr. Pacino and director Jon Avnet, if not to the nerves of studio accountants.

Meanwhile in Indiewood….Several pictures that almost define the term “off kilter” open in limited release this weekend, including two poorly reviewed comedy docs coming from different ends of the political spectrum. “Expelled: No Intelligence Allowed,” featuring conservative op-ed writer turned dead-pan movie comic Ben Stein making an argument that there is an academic conspiracy against so-called intelligent design, has so far scored only scored one positive review on the RT Meter. Where are those titans of right-leaning movie criticism, Michael Medved, Kyle Smith, and Box-Office MoJo’s egregious Scott Holleran, when you need them? No doubt hoping to get at least some of the dollars that fundies have been holding back since the release of “The Passion of the Christ,” this comedy documentary is opening in over a thousand theaters, apparently hoping for Michael Moore numbers on its first weekend. Stein can be funny, but I don’t see this making “Sicko” money.

Meanwhile, Morgan “Super Size Me” Spurlock’s new film made a thud on the festival circuit and with most critics. There’s no reason to expect much at the 102 theaters it’s opening in, but the title “Where in the World is Osama Bin Laden?” has some innate interest and our own Jason Zingale had a few nice things to say about it.

And finally, just because we are who we are here at Premium Hollywood, I must mention “Zombie Strippers” which at least has gotten some decent reviews and stars Robert “Freddy Kruger” Englund and Jenna “Porn Star” Jameson. Guys like zombies; guys like strippers; guys like Freddy; guys like porn stars. There would seem to be a market.


Movies
Multiplex Mayhem: The Preliminary Invesigation
Posted on 04.11.08 by Bob Westal @ 2:29 am

A sorry weekend seems to be in store at America’s mainstream mansions of mass entertainment this week. So sorry, in fact, that a movie nobody seems to particularly care for, the youth-oriented gambling drama, “21,” has a chance of staying at the #1 spot for a third week, but more likely not.

*”Street Kings” has an okay shot at the #1 spot this week. In fact, until I looked a bit more closely at the reviews (including our own David Medskar’s ho-hum take) and the writing credits, I thought this one showed some promise of being be a pretty strong piece of entertainment, despite the often problematic nature of its star, Keanu Reeves. What excited me was that this film is the screenwriting debut of one of my favorite novelists, James Ellroy. Ellroy’s work has, with the exception of “L.A. Confidential,” pretty much defied decent movie adaptations up to now, particularly in Brian DePalma’s highly regrettable adaptation of perhaps my all-time favorite detective novel, “The Black Dahlia.” So, why not give the Demon Dog of American Letters the chance to come up with something original. Since “Training Day” had a bit of an Ellroy feeling to it with Denzel Washington’s humorously charismatic bad cop, the choice of director David Ayers, not a great director by any means but an efficient storyteller, made sufficient sense.

Also, an unusually strong supporting cast would seem to help, including a couple of personal favorites — Oscar winner (and fellow Daniel Webster Junior High alum) Forrest Whitaker, Hugh Laurie (”House” to most, charming twit Bertie Wooster and ultra-twit Prince Regent from “Blackadder” to BBC America fans and me), plus Jay Mohr and Cedric the Entertainer, who just seem to make sense in this context…I’d love to hear those guys enunciating some of Ellroy’s poetic, blood-spattered profanity. But, with his original screenplay rewritten by two other credited writers, the reviews are not discussing dialogue that snaps, crackles and pops like it comes from Satan’s own furnace, just another average-to-below-average violence-packed thriller that, at least, doesn’t sound like it’s extremely boring. The bar is set awfully low right now, and this one might just jump over it.

* But the smart money at both Variety and the Hollywood Reporter says I’m wrong about “Street Kings.” (Okay, I’m not all that smart and if I was into money, do you think I’d be doing this?) It’s entirely likely this weekend will be won by another in a recent string of review-protected horror flicks, this one a remake of a a movie that wasn’t all that much liked the first time around, “Prom Night.” (The original was a “Halloween” follow-up with Jamie Lee Curtis and Leslie Nielson back when people thought he took this stuff seriously.) The trick here is that this a slasher film that’s rated PG-13, which strikes me as a bit wrong, like showing the pre-sex intros from a gonzo porn film to twelve year boys. Still, while “wrong” often works in show bidness, there has been a glut of horror, both PG-13 and R, lately. Without some real buzz behind it, “Prom Night” may pleasantly disappoint.

*No one’s expecting very much commercially from this week’s semi-indie Fox-Searchlight dark comedy, “Smart People.” With a strong cast led by Dennis Quaid, Thomas Haden Church, Sarah Jessica Parker, and Ellen Page, the set-up and casting — which has Quaid as a recently widowed, ultra-elitist academic dealing with a dysfunctional family and a new girlfriend (Parker) — has resonances with recent “small” hits like “Juno,” “The Squid and the Whale” and “Sideways.” However, even though Bullz-Eye’s Jason Zingale liked it a bit more than most, I think he’d agree this one has nothing like the buzz that accompanied those. Almost always, this kind of picture needs to be seen as unusually good to succeed, and I’m definitely not getting that here.

In fact, the reviews, can get pretty negative, but one did remind me of a grammatical fine point I’d become hazy on. Here’s what Rick Groen of Canada’s Globe and Mail said:

Here, trouble starts early when the rumpled academic in question – Lawrence, the widowed English prof tilling the fields of Victorian literature – is heard misusing the word “loan” as a verb.

I’m embarrassed to admit this took me a second. Yes, it’s not “I’ll loan you the money.” It’s “I’ll lend you the money.” After all, the soon to be Hamlet-stabbed Polonius didn’t advise Laertes, “Neither a borrower nor a loaner be.” A good reminder.

Meanwhile in Indiewood….I’m happy to say, things are looking much more interesting on the arthouse side of things this week. The big indie this week may be “The Visitor,” the new film from writer-director Tom McCarthy — creator of the 2003 Sundance hit, “The Station Agent,” which made Peter Dinklage a household name…well, assuming your household is in Santa Monica or Tribeca.

Anyhow, when I went to Sundance with a bunch of critics for another website, one of my cohorts reported writing the phrase “unlikely friendship” in four separate reviews. And so, like its predecessor, “The Visitor” is a star-free tale of an unlikely friendship, this time between an depressed professor and a young immigrant couple. On the strength of McCarthy’s prior film, I’m wiling to say this one is worth a look and may do some decent business with older filmgoers seeking gentle but smart fair.

Other than that, most of the action is on the documentary front. By far the most high profile doc with solid critical buzz is “Young@Heart,” about a senior citizen’s chorus dealing with a repertoire that includes the words of Sonic Youth, the Clash, James Brown, and Coldplay. Speaking of buzz, but showing up in only four theaters, is “Super High Me,” a film which takes pothead comedian Doug Benson and gives him the Morgan Spurlock treatment. Aside from appearances by such comic luminaries as Sarah Silverman, Bob Odenkirk, and Patton Oswalt, I’m mentioning this one because it’s directed by a guy who played the straight man in this great comedy short a few years back.

I maybe shouldn’t, because it’s only playing at New York’s Film Forum, but I can’t resist bringing up the mega-Freudian documentary “Stalags,” about pornographic Israeli novels, which started popping up during the 1961 trial of German Holocaust planner Adolph Eichmann. The subject of this porn: Nazi she-wolves administering what we’d now call “enhanced interrogation techniques” (nudge nudge wink wink) to brave British and American soldiers. Let me repeat, these books were written and consumed by Israelis. I’m also plugging the well-reviewed documentary “Bra Boys,” about Australian surfing hooligans. If I don’t, narrator Russell Crowe might beat the crap out of me.


Louis Leterrier opens up about The Hulk
Posted on 03.13.08 by Jason Zingale @ 11:40 am

While most fanboys have no doubt already watched the new “Incredible Hulk” trailer several times (check it out here if you haven’t seen it yet), Empire Online has released an informative deconstruction of the two-minute spot by director Louis Leterrier.

Surely you have your reservations about the film (personally, I think The Hulk looks a little too rubbery), but after reading through Leterrier’s discussion, I’m definitely a more interested in seeing the final product than I was after watching the trailer. Along with a detailed reasoning for the Abomination’s look, Leterrier also discusses the film’s climactic (26 minute!) battle and why the trailer took so long to release.

Check it out here, and then come on back to discuss.


Interviews
A Chat with Adrian Paul (“Highlander: The Source”)
Posted on 03.06.08 by Will Harris @ 12:25 pm

Although he’s been bouncing around Hollywood as far back as 1987, when he played Kolya ‘Nikolai’ Rostov on the “Dynasty” spin-off, “The Colbys,” it’s fair to say that Adrian Paul is more often remembered for his role as Duncan McLeod in the “Highlander” saga. After quite a few episodes of the TV series and a feature film, Paul took a break from the “Highlander” universe for several years, but he returned at long last for last year’s “Highlander: The Source,” which turned up on the Sci-Fi Channel and has recently seen DVD release. We spoken to Paul about his experiences in making the film (and whether there’ll be any more), his thoughts on longtime “Highlander” producer Bill Panzer, why his other sci-fi series, “Tracker,” never really took off, and what he’s been working on recently.

Adrian Paul: Hi Will.

Bullz-Eye: Hey Adrian, how’s it going?

AP: Good, good.

BE: So how hard was it to step back into the shoes of Duncan MacLeod after a few years?

AP: It was interesting. It was a different time, too, you know, and they wanted a slightly different type of character; you know, a little darker. But, you know, it’s fine, and you can do that because you know the values of the character; you kind of step back into it and try and find new stuff. So what with the old and the new stuff, you hopefully have a character with some new twists.

BE: Was it painful to lose your katana after all these years?

AP: (Laughs) No. The thing was, I think nothing’s lost, y’know? I mean, we know where it’s buried! But I love the katana. I love tai chi and working with the katana; I find it a very malleable type of weapon. But I do like using other weapons, too, and we wanted to sort of give it a whole different type of flavor. So we tried it, and even though a lot of the fights were sped up…which wasn’t my idea…we had some really interesting fights. The thing was that we actually tried a whole bunch of different types of weapons and stuff so that we’d have a roundabout look on it, but we didn’t know what we were facing when it comes to visual effects. That was an unknown quantity to us, so all we could do was choreograph it and hope for the best.

(Read the rest after the jump.)


Movies
Oscar recap: We need a montage, or Cate was jobbed
Posted on 02.25.08 by David Medsker @ 5:01 pm

I was having a chat with Film School Reject and Fat Guys at the Movies co-host Kevin Carr last Friday about the Academy Awards. I naively thought that, because of the writers’ strike, this year’s show should be pretty brisk because they won’t have time to prepare any elaborate bits. But Kevin set me straight: he said, because the producers are doing the majority of heavy lifting, the show will be filled with self-congratulatory, back-slapping puff pieces.

Smart guy, that Kevin Carr.

I had an All-Star lineup of writers at my house last night, including Carr, fellow BE critic Jason Zingale, Film School Rejects editor in chief Neil Miller, Nights and Weekends EIC Kristin Dreyer Kramer, and From the Balcony EIC Bill Clark. About 20 minutes into the broadcast, all of us were singing Trey Parker’s “We Need a Montage” song. Holy cow, are the members of the academy proud of themselves. Here are some wacky moments from Oscars past. Here are a bunch of Best Actress winners. Here are a bunch of Best Actor winners. Here are ALL of the Best Picture winners. Thank goodness, then, for Jon Stewart’s tribute to periscopes and binoculars.

As for the awards themselves, there were some pleasant surprises and some pleasant non-surprises. I was thrilled to see Brad Bird get an Oscar for “Ratatouille,” likewise Javier Bardem getting the Supporting Actor award for “No Country for Old Men.” Marion Cotillard snagging Best Actress was a nice shocker too, as was “Falling Slowly” beating three songs from “Enchanted” for Best Song. Mega-bonus points to Stewart for bringing Marketa Irglova back out on stage to say her thank-yous after the orchestra drowned her out.

Something must be done, though, about the academy’s tendency to vote for someone in a category just because they liked the movie and want to make sure it gets some kind of recognition, even if the person in question doesn’t exactly deserve it.

Tilda Swinton, I’m looking at you.

My jaw hit the floor when Entertainment Weekly listed her as the favorite to win. Did they see the movie? She wasn’t all that memorable. Not that she was awful or anything, but between her, Clooney and Tom Wilkinson, she was easily the weakest link in “Michael Clayton,” and she sure as hell was no Cate Blanchett in “I’m Not There.” This isn’t grade school, people; if someone doesn’t deserve an award, you don’t give them one just because you don’t want the movie to get shut out. Really, Swinton winning is a joke. It’s like Votefortheworst.com took over Price Waterhouse for a day. I would rather have seen Ruby Dee win than Swinton, and Dee had no business even being nominated. How many lines did she even have in “American Gangster,” six?

By the way, the group and I casted three biopics last night. Casey Affleck should play David Byrne, Amy Adams is the perfect person to play Kirsty MacColl, and Tilda Swinton as…David Bowie. Admit it, you were thinking it too when you saw her fiery red hair.

The producers of the Academy Awards know that their show has a reputation for being unnecessarily long. The strike gave them the perfect opportunity to correct that. They didn’t take it. They made montages. Lots and lots of montages. And in their “honor,” I present them with “The Montage Song.” Boneheads.



The trailer you’ve been waiting for
Posted on 02.14.08 by Will Harris @ 2:07 pm

I can’t even express just how psyched I am.



Movies
The worst lines in film history…?
Posted on 02.03.08 by Will Harris @ 5:24 pm

Probably not, given that there’s only one film from prior to the ’80s (and the line they’ve cited is, while a little cheesy, still one of the most immortal in cinematic history), but if you’re curious to see EW’s personal favorites, you can find there right here.

I don’t agree with all of them - I actually quite like some of the lines they’ve called out as being awful - but I sure as hell agree wholeheartedly with at least this one:

“You know what happens when a toad gets struck by lightning? The same thing that happens to everything else.'’

Recognize it…?


Interviews
A Chat with Rory Cochrane
Posted on 02.02.08 by Will Harris @ 3:48 pm

You probably know Rory Cochrane, even if you don’t think you do. His longest and most high-profile gig was serving as a member of the “CSI: Miami” team as Tim Speedle, but prior to that, he’d already earned the status of cult icon by playing the stoned-as-shit Slater in “Dazed and Confused,” as well as the monetarily-challenged Lucas in “Empire Records.” Since departing “CSI: Miami” of his own free will, Cochrane has kept busy with the occasional film; we spoke to him on the occasion of the DVD release of the disconcertingly-real thriller, “Right At Your Door,” and we took the opportunity to ask him about how much of a toll the filming of the movie took on him, why he left a sweet gig on a weekly TV series, and…well, frankly, we spent most of the time just trying to get him to give us answers of more than a word or two. (Nice guy, that Rory, but not one to give you essay-length responses.)

Rory Cochrane: Hello?

Bullz-Eye: Hi, may I speak to Rory?

RC: Yes.

BE: Hey, this is Will.

RC: How are you doing, Will?

BE: Pretty good. How are you?

RC: All right.

BE: Actually, I tried you a few minutes ago, but I figured you were still on the last interview maybe,

RC: Oh, yeah? I didn’t hear it beep.

BE: Not a problem. So…”Right at Your Door.” Very intense flick. I hadn’t actually seen it until they sent me the DVD – it never played in my area – but it’s great.

RC: Oh, well, I’m glad you liked it.

BE: Definitely. It’s part disaster movie, part horror movie, with a thread of romance running through it. How was it to shoot?

RC: Very grueling…and intense, you know? I’m sort of glad that it was only…that we shot it in twenty days. Which is a good thing, because I would probably have had to check myself into some sort of institution afterwards if it had went any longer.

BE: Yeah, it’s a little dark.

RC: Yeah.

BE: How did you get involved in it in the first place?

(Read the rest after the jump.)


Actors
Heath Ledger: dead at 28.
Posted on 01.22.08 by Will Harris @ 5:28 pm

I’ll just write here what I wrote to the other Bullz-Eye editors when I first read that Heath Ledger had been found dead of a presumed (but not confirmed) drug overdose:

* My first thought was a general, all-purpose “omigod.”

* My second thought was, “What an idiot,” which is invariably what I think when I hear about anyone dying from a drug overdose.

* My third thought was a more specific “omigod,” namely, “Omigod, his poor little daughter…”

And, lastly, I thought, “Somewhere at Warner Brothers, some suit has already said, ‘Goddamn motherfucking Heath Ledger! Oh, wait: this’ll be probably actually be good for box office. Never mind!”


Bullz-Eye’s Badass Knife Scenes
Posted on 01.21.08 by Jason Zingale @ 9:08 pm

Badass Knives

Midway through the annual Bullz-Eye mumblety-peg party – “Okay, you can be Bishop and I’ll be Hudson. Wait, which one is the droid again?” – we started talking about our favorite movie knife scenes, beginning of course with a certain James Cameron flick starring someone who looks human but doesn’t quite act human, and Lance Henrikson as an android. When the conversation reached a fever pitch, our wives called from upstairs, telling us to just shut the hell up already about our stupid knives. Sent hurtling back to reality, we decided to create a concise list of 10 of our favorite badass knife scenes from the movies, listed in chronological order. And, to keep the playing field level, we declared scenes involving all other blades ineligible. This meant the exclusion of several staff favorites, but not all blades are created equal, therefore their cinematic moments should be treated in a similar manner. This is a journey into knives. A journey which along the way will bring you new hardware, new bloodshed, new badness, new bloodshed, new badness.

Read all about our final 10 scenes here, and then be sure to come back and discuss your favorites, as well as offer up suggestions for some of the films that didn’t make the cut.