Category: Movie Dramas (Page 173 of 188)

Multiplex Mayhem: The Pre-Coital Edition

With the passing of Sydney Pollack and Harvey Korman, it’s been a sad few days in movie land, but the weekend comes whether we live or die….

*This time, expect an unusually severe case of gender apartheid as the biggest new release to compete with all the action fare on tap is the much ballyhoed festival of contemporary femininity, “Sex and the City” — the further adventures of a bunch of characters I don’t know much of anything about, apparently because I’m an ungay guy and, yes, we critics and movie writers are now expected to divulge our our sexual orientations before discussing certain movies. (I’m actually sort of renowned in some circles for liking a great many things that some would consider girly, particularly musicals…but whatever entertainment-preference testosterone I have in my system seemed to go into overdrive the minute I caught even one second of this particular series, forcing me to change channels — and, yes, I like “Entourage” a great deal. I guess biology really is destiny when it comes to HBO comedies.)

In any event, the reviews are mixed, including that of our own Jason Zingale, who was man enough to admit to respecting the television series and critic enough to say the movie had some story problems. And both Jason and Roger Ebert, who was man enough to admit that this movie was not made for him, were charmed by “Sex” newcomer Jennifer Hudson, who really does seem to be one the positive by-product that I’ve noticed so far from this whole “American Idol” business. Female critics seem to skew a bit more positive, but as the WaPo’s Ann Hornaday honestly opines:

…the question isn’t whether it’s good. The question is whether it delivers the goods — the goods being shoes, romance, ribald humor, shoes, sex, shoes, pithy observations about single life in New York and more shoes.

And the general consensus is that the raunchy rom-com+ will provide roughly $30 million worth of goods from the domestic box office from those rarest of creatures at the American multiplex — post-college-age women. At least that’s what the usual experts say, noting that it’s already done well abroad.

Overall, “Sex” should put in a very respectable second place after the “Indiana Jones and the Kingdom of the Crystal Skull” juggernaut, which is expected to pull in a solid $50 million. I see no reason to disagree.

There’s another movie that perhaps skews to a younger female demographic, and that is “The Strangers,” a chiller about a couple being menaced at home starring beautiful Liv Tyler and himboish Scott Speedman. This one seems to deliver a certain amount of chills, even if many critics turn up their noses, while others, like Bullz-Eye’s Dave Medsker, see both good and bad. Regardless, it’s nice to hear this one isn’t another (physical) torture fest. Considering the scary commercials and the sex appeal to their respective audiences of the two stars, I’d expect this relatively low budget film to have much better prospects for a decent and long life than its characters might. Still, it will likely be bested by the waning, but still mass audience friendly, powers of “Prince Caspian.”



Meanwhile in Indiewood
….There are a number of new films coming out in limited release this week, but it’s late, I’ve been fighting some kind of mini-micro-bug all week, and some lovely baked chicken is waiting for me downstairs. I will, however, mention two that should be interest to our audience.

First, there is the amazingly well reviewed (100% Fresh, RT-meter) documentary, “Bigger, Faster, Stronger*” about the widespread use of performance enhancing drugs in athletics. Considering the doc’s newsworthy subject matter and the fact that it’s about sports, and not politics or war, it sounds to me to have the makings of yet another break-out nonfiction hit.

Also getting mostly good reviews (though some are simply a bit appalled) is “Stuck” in which more than two decades after his gruesome horror-comedy, “Re-Animator,” director Stuart Gordon goes to a horrendous real life incident for some extra-extra-extra black grisly humor and chills. This time with Stephen Rea as a hapless man who finds himself in self-involved Mena Suvari’s windshield. As someone who had to knock back a few drinks to finally see Gordon’s signature horrorfest not long ago, but had a good time with it once I did, I’m not sure if I want to see this one or not. I am fairly sure it’s not dull.

Cassandra’s Dream

Over the past three decades, Woody Allen has written and directed a new full-length feature almost every year. If you don’t think that excuses a poor outing every once in a while, you clearly have no idea how hard it is to make one good film. Unfortunately, Allen has been in a rut for some time, and though “Cassandra’s Dream” marks his third consecutive film to take place in London, it lacks the focus of his first (“Match Point”). The film stars Ewan McGregor and Colin Farrell as a pair of brothers with ambitious plans for the future. Ian (McGregor) dreams of becoming a big shot real estate investor, while Terry (Farrell) just wants to make a better life for him and his girlfriend. When both run into money problems, however, they look to their successful uncle Howard (Tom Wilkinson) for help. He’s more than willing to loan them the money, but first, they have to do him a favor: murder a fellow associate who plans to rat Howard out for his questionable business ethics. Much like “Before the Devil Knows You’re Dead,” Allen’s latest film is a second-rate thriller disguised as a masterpiece. Though McGregor and Farrell both deliver solid performances, the story goes nowhere due to Allen’s inability to develop his characters beyond their one-dimensional relationships. It’s too bad, because while “Cassandra’s Dream” definitely has potential as a film, it would have worked better on the stage.

Click to buy “Cassandra’s Dream”

Multiplex Mayhem: Before the Faces Melt

As I write, the weekend still has another couple of nights left in it, at least on the west coast, and the numbers are murkier than usual — complicated not only by the long holiday weekend and one-day early opening of “Indiana Jones and the Kingdom of the Crystal Skull” but also by recent ticket price increases in some theaters. (The culprit, as Nikki Finke and many others have discussed, appears to be — wait for it — the ethanol clusterfrak. Yes, it’s not just causing food riots, but forcing you to spend another buck for the privilege of enduring a poorly projected flick with talkative teens and sticky floors.) Nevertheless, it’s safe to say that the fourth adventure of swashbuckling Professor Indiana Jones is making enough to keep the money people whistling a happy little John Williams tune for some time.

In any case, Finke, Variety and the Hollywood Reporter‘s Carl DiOrio are reporting an estimated five-day take in the neighborhood of $151 million, with the current tally being somewhere around 126 million smackers. Box Office Mojo, however, reminds us however that, strictly speaking the weekend gross (minus Thursday) is so far a mere $101 million. Sticklers.

For those of you keeping track, this is not quite big enough for a true record breaker. Over a similar five-day weekend run the low expectations/high interest megasuccess of “Star Wars: Episode III — Revenge of the Sith” managed more than $20 million above the “Indiana Jones” estimate — at lower ticket prices (though back before the housing market began its free-fall). But, as I mentioned in the pre-weekend post, that film was perhaps more of a “must see” cultural event. In any event, the international numbers look pretty outstanding as well, with $143 million earned (and how does the week dollar play into this?). In any event, at this point it looks as Harrison has the option of going into his golden years as the world’s most macho archeologist, if he desires. Way to act like a baby boomer.

In other news….there is no others, really. The second place runner-up at the box was last weekend’s below-expectations winner, “The Chronicles of Narnia: Prince Caspian” grabbed on to the no. 2 spot and managed to make up some of its ground by being — yes — big in Japan…and Mexico and Russia and….. Meanwhile, “Iron Man” has turned out to be made of strong stuff indeed. It’s holding on nicely weeks into its run with about $20 million this week, adding to its cumulative take of over $252 million so far. Not bad for a second-tier superhero adaptation starring an acclaimed character actor nevertheless more famous for his personal problems than for his film roles, and directed by a guy, Jon Favreau, who in his acting days was once famously almost cast as a character named Fat Ass.

Meanwhile, those looking for a kid’s movie (which some folks actually like) where there won’t be too many noisey kids to be annoyed by are directed toward “Speed Racer,” which once again had its hindquarters handed to it by the advertising slogan/movie “What Happens in Vegas,” which made $9 million compared to the $120 million anime-adaptation’s very sad $4 million. On the other end of the budget telescope, the low-key, small-scale indie drama “The Visitor” continues to surprise by building steam and hanging out in the top 10 with increasing Oscar buzz for its sixty-something star, Richard Jenkins, and netting $4.4 million so far (perhaps already either matching or a multiple of its budget). The critically beloved, spunky-sexy-stylish (well, that’s what I’m hearing) first film from Norway’s Joachim Trier, “Reprise,” is also looking strong with an average of $6,648 on fourteen screens so far.

As for Uwe Boll’s “Postal” (discussed probably in way too much depth in my prior post)…well, it’s no success du scandal so far, it appears, not even making B.O.Mojo’s top twenty-five. And people thought “Snakes on a Plane” was a let down.

But there was somewhat encouraging news for John Cusack’s poorly reviewed (but not by us) “War, Inc.,” which did a very healthy $36,500 on two screens on either coast. (As it happened, I was actually at one of those theaters, West L.A.’s tony, intimate, Landmark multiplex, last night where it’s likely half the audience knew John personally, over the weekend. Since it was my own money, I saw this instead. Still, I didn’t hear anything horrible about Mr. Cusack’s film while I was there.)

A Chat with Roy Thinnes (“The Invaders”)

As architect David Vincent, Roy Thinnes spent a couple of years during the ’60s feeling as though a significant percentage of the population was out to get him…but as the old saying goes, it’s not paranoia if they really are out to get you, and “The Invaders” most certainly were out to get David Vincent. It’s been quite some time since the series went off the air, however, and it’s gotten precious little airplay in the States in recent years. (Although the 1995 revival is best forgotten, in the absence of the original, we did at least get a series that resembled it at various times: “The X-Files.”) At long last, CBS-Paramount has made the decision to release “The Invaders: Season 1” on DVD, and the set – released on May 27th – features new episode introductions by Mr. Thinnes and a new interview with him. As it happens, we had an opportunity to interview him as well, and in addition to his work on the classic sci-fi series, we also asked him about some of the upstanding films on his resume. Stay tuned for…

Continue reading »

Grace Is Gone

We’ve all seen John Cusack play the sad sap before, but in the Iraq War-influenced “Grace Is Gone,” it’s a different breed of his trademark character. In the film, Cusack plays Stanley Philips, the down-to-earth manager of a retail store who’s just learned of his soldier wife’s death overseas. Unable to tell his two daughters the truth, he packs up the car and takes them on a road trip, hoping that by the time they return home, he’ll have healed enough to break the news. Written and directed by James C. Strouse, “Grace Is Gone” is an incredibly light drama that, despite its subject matter, doesn’t really have a political agenda. Instead, it just uses the situation as a means of telling a simplistic, yet effective story about one man’s emotional journey.

Though the film garnered two Golden Globe nominations for Clint Eastwood’s work on the soundtrack, Cusack’s phenomenal performance was completely overlooked. Much of this has to do with the fact that very few people were given the opportunity to see it, and while I’m not exactly sure why “Grace Is Gone” never received a wider theatrical release, it’s safe to assume that it had something to do with the Weinsteins’ poor marketing skills. This isn’t the first time the brotherly duo have screwed the pooch on a great film, and while I commend them for having the balls to invest millions of dollars into risky projects (*cough* “Grindhouse” *cough*), it means absolutely nothing if you can’t market it correctly.

Click to buy “Grace Is Gone”

« Older posts Newer posts »

© 2026 Premium Hollywood

Theme by Anders NorenUp ↑