Category: Movies (Page 389 of 498)

This week’s battle is between two overtly silly comedies pitting comic cloak-and-dagger hi-jinks against sex and scatological jokes, PG-13 division. They also pit a sophomore comedy star whose also a pretty talented actor against a once hilarious sketch comic whose now a…once hilarious sketch comic. Sorry, but I think this one is pretty easy.

* As much as I loved the original series — or perhaps because I loved the original series — I had no interest in a new “Get Smart” movie until I heard that Steve Carrell had been cast. It’s just one of those instances where an actor in a role makes so much sense that it’s pretty hard to resist. I mean even if this — actually the second film about Secret Agent 86 (let’s not forget 1980’s all but forgotten “The Nude Bomb“) — isn’t the greatest comedy ever, how bad can it be? According to the critics, including good ol’ Dave Medsker, the consensus seems to be, not all that bad, if not all that good either. Still, the bar is set not all that high for this sort of movie and while a mean person could make the case that Carrell’s film career peaked when he was a suicidal gay virgin Proust scholar hanging out with Abigail Breslin, he’s certainly built up enough good will from “The Office” to compensate.

Also helping: a strong back-up cast, including another of Carrell’s “Little Miss Sunshine” cohorts, the great Alan Arkin, cast just as perfectly as the Chief — not that anyone could ever replace the great Edward Platt. Then, because it’s a high profile movie made in 2008, there’s Dwayne “no longer the Rock” Johnson as the formerly unknown Agent 23 and Anne Hathaway stepping into the adorable shoes of Barbara Feldon. Even if the movie makes the somewhat counterintuitive step of making Maxwell Smart fairly, er, smart and casting Terrence Stamp, whose played his share of very serious villains (though we all know that General Zod can be downright hilarious) as Siegfried, audiences aren’t going to mind as long as there are enough laughs to go around, and it sounds as if this one might meet the minimum daily requirement.

Personally, though, I’m curious about the catchphrases. One thing about the old series that outpaced most of today’s lowbrow comedy is the use of not the all too common, endlessly repeated single phrase (“Are you having a laugh?”) but multiple, repeated running gags repeated with such borsht-belt shamelessness that this frequently annoying comedy trope achieved a kind of genius. Certainly critics remember: I saw at least two not quite positive reviews complaining that “Get Smart” “missed it by that much.” All I’m hoping for is that, at some point, Stamp as Siegfried dares to utter the lines so perfectly enunciated by the great Bernie Kopell to poor Shtarker: “This is KAOS, we don’t ______ here.” Regardless, however much “Get Smart” makes, or fails to make (there’s some pretty stiff competition this week), it’s almost sure to do better than it’s close competitor….

*So far, “The Love Guru” is most notable for generating some controversy — though nothing compared to the reaction that “The Love Rabbi,” “The Love Imam,” or “The Love Pope,” might have enjoyed/suffered. Religions tend to take it badly when you put religious figues in a context heavy on jokes about urine, feces, and hilarious male genitalia. Still, a defense from star Mike Myers’ real-life guru pal (who’s also has a cameo role in the movie, so we know he’s impartial), Deepak Chopra, probably made no difference to anyone except some Malibu pilates instructors, though this is clearly no “Life of Brian.” While the Indian-American market is a growing and lucrative one, this film has a lot less to fear from outraged Hindus than from outraged members of the critical-American community, who have given the film a moderately abysmal 11% on the T-Meter of life.

In any case, judging by the horrible buzz and the worse trailer, this really does seem to be kind of flick where the critical putdowns it generates are funnier than anything onscreen. Unfortunately, they’re not all not funny either, though I rather liked:

Thus Myers marries his two passions (hockey and not being funny) into one noxious ball. (Walter Chaw)

and

If Mike Myers is obsessed with poop, pee and penises, that’s his problem; if audiences make him rich for playing that out on-screen, then it becomes ours. (James Rocchi)

I hate to say it, but, while I’ve often found Myers hilarious (come back Dieter from “Sprockets”!), I’m kind of rooting against this one because Myers has fallen into bad entertainment habits, possibly stemming from a lack of respect for his audience. Still, it’s hard to overestimate the eternal appetite for jokes about the three “P”s. Or not. If audiences think Myers’ shtick is as played out as a lot of us seem to and “The Incredible Hulk” shows some legs (sorry, Mr. Shaye) a #3 spot for “The Love Guru” seems more than likely, and #4 or even #5 more than justified.

Meanwhile in Indiewood…. Among the limited releases, the aciton epic “Mongol” is going wider this week, opening in an additional 89 theaters, says the Box Office Mojo theater count. Still, while the Mongolian-American community is rather small, Anglo-Indian-Americans miffed at, or too mature, for “The Love Guru” can check out the semi-well reviewed melodrama “Brick Lane” opening in seven theaters. Members of the little-girl American community can see the aforementioned Abigail Breslin in the similarly modestly well reviewed “Kit Kittidge: An American Girl” based on a series of very popular books I had no idea existed until thirty minutes ago, opening in five theaters. And for us indie flick fans, there’s that less modestly well-reviewed, squirmy not-quite-romantic, comedy about parking enforcement we’ve all been clamoring for: “Expired” with Samantha Morton and Jason Patric.

Oh, I’ve been waiting to write the first part of that headline since, well, two days ago…though, to be fair, the new film from M. Night Shyamalan did outperform expectations, but more about that further down. Also, let it be noted that I came up with my “smash” headline before seeing the reports of either Variety or the Hollywood Reporter/Reuters. Blame the wordsmithery of Stan Lee for that. Excelsior.

* To no one’s surprise, “The Incredible Hulk” won the weekend — though the amount [Update: Forgot to say $54,538,000!] it won by might have been a surprise to those who, like Nikki Finke‘s “insiders,” misinterpreted the controversies the film generated as commercially harmful. Rancorous production/post production only impacts ticket sales if the rancor actually hurts the film artistically. I use the A-word advisedly; what I mean is that audiences don’t really care that much about the behind-the-scenes goings on of a film, except in a gossipy sort of way. What that means, I think, is that they might be mildly more interested in seeing a film if, say, they hear the two stars got it on during the course of the film, perhaps destroying a previously existing marriage or two along the way. “Creative conflicts” only interest a few of us, but it’s true they can increase the odds of making a film that bores audiences — but if the movie beats those odds and most people who see the film are actually satisfied, then the impact is probably zilch. As long as there are no accusations of murder or manslaughter, the already widely mistrusted star doesn’t jump on a couch like a loon or drunkenly yell ethnic epithets and call cops “sugar tits,” few will even notice. And, as I mentioned last time, in a case like this where there is more than one version of the film around, it actually gives the studio a very nice shot at a DVD double dip later on down the road.

There may be some minor impact in a case like this where the star/co-writer is so angry, he refuses to do publicity (with the humorously obvious exception noted by Jason Zingale below), but that’s just one earned media stream that can be replaced by other types of publicity, and in a case like this, there’s obviously plenty to publicize. Besides, popular and talented actor that he is, few people were paying $11.00 to see Edward Norton, mostly they were paying to see Big Green, the second best known Marvel character after Spiderman. That’s not to minimize the importance of a likable star to a film like this, but this isn’t a casting coup that boosts a relatively little known character along the lines of “Iron Man” — and even in that case, it’s hard for me (lacking the power of easy access to studio tracking data, anyhow) to guess how much the quirky appeal of Robert Downey, Jr. (and also Gwyneth Paltrow) drove the initial box office, though there’s no doubt in the actors’ importance to that film’s impressive staying power. A look at B.O. Mojo confirms that “Iron Man” is looking to crack the $300 million domestic mark by next weekend.

* “The Happening” started off the weekend quite strongly in the #2 spot, but suffered a drop later on that, as Nikki Finke correctly implies, might have something to do with exit polls indicating that people didn’t much like it, though it somewhat contradicts her suggestion that the film’s poor reviews were generated by a general low regard toward its director. I’d be a huge hypocrite, however, if I criticized her much for that, since I’m already on record as supporting a wittier version of the same idea from Manohla Dargis. Still, while there’s always a place at the table for schadenfreude in show business, it’s also true that there is no stronger rebuttal to it than a good piece of work, and most agree that just isn’t exactly what Shyamalan came up with. (Our own Dave Medsker praises the directing, while slamming the script.)

Still, I’m in danger of engaging in some of that myself by making “The Happening” sound like a flop just because it came in third with a mere $30.5 million, a few million less than another smash hit, “Kung Fu Panda,” which enjoyed a very modest drop of 43% in ticket sales in its second week (50% or more is common these days), and raked in over $34 million. Audiences, apparently hoping against hope that the M. Night who brought them “The Sixth Sense” still lurked somewhere and maybe kind of liked the idea of a little R-rated blood to go with it, were willing to take the plunge and, assuming it doesn’t suffer too drastic a drop from here on, it looks like a pretty sure thing that the maligned ex-wunderkind will get another at-bat in the big leagues.

The good news here is that Hollywood is showing it’s traditional resilience in the face of an otherwise crappy economy. People are going to the movies despite ridiculously high prices and all the other problems of moviegoing today. A spate of stronger than previous films is helping and, I’d like to think, a partial rediscovery of the importance of stories and characterization hasn’t hurt.

Meanwhile in Indiewood…. As predicted, this wasn’t much of a weekend for new films opening in limited release, but a couple of interesting phenomena are worth mentioning. First this weekend’s most lucrative single screening room might have been New York’s arty Film Forum. In this case, the counterpoint to M. Night Shyamalan’s first R-rated film was the first G-rated film from that lovable madman, Werner Herzog. The eco-polar documentary “Encounters at the End of the World” netted $25,700 this weekend from elitists who nevertheless know that the no one makes adventure docs like Herzog. However, the MPAA rating notwithstanding, this may not really be the kiddies. For one thing, ever ready to stare death in the face, Herzog reportedly seems to think we’re pretty much doomed, though I haven’t seen word just how long he thinks we’ve got. He also seems to take aim at “The March of the Penguins” and — as per alt critic (who also reviews the new semi-documentary from the even more wonderfully insane Guy Maddin) J. Hoberman:

…Herzog immediately questions the birds’ imagined family values, asking a painfully diffident scientist if there are gay penguins. The naturalist ponders the question and suggests that penguin threesomes and even prostitution are not unknown.

And, finally, though it’s made only a pittance so far, relatively speaking, “War, Inc.” is hanging in there as it steadily goes wider each week, despite being a film with predominantly poor reviews in a niche where critics are usually important. Some of that is no doubt due to the star appeal of John Cusack, but some credit must be due to the ongoing publicity efforts of Cusack himself. If you’re of a liberal/progressive bent, you’ve probably gotten an e-mail from Cusack and probably seen articles by and about him at various places. I don’t doubt his sincerity, but it’s an interesting kind of marketing and I’m curious to see how far it’ll take the movie.

This weekend is all about second chances, with two tarnished movie names seeking just a little bit of box-office redemption. The results don’t seem all that hard to predict….

* As noted by our own Jason Zingale, the rebooted “The Incredible Hulk” was marked by back stage power struggles, not a new phenomenon when actor and semi-inevitable pseudonymous co-screenwriter Edward Norton is involved in a production. Still, from the sound of things, the film will be a hit. While Norton has admitted to fighting Marvel Studios on behalf of his and director Louis Leterrier’s somewhat longer original cut of the film, it sounds now as if that fuss will only add to the film’s commercial potential when the inevitable DVD director’s/star’s cut makes it way to your local big-box outlet just in time for a big green Christmas. The second film from the now self-contained superhero filmmaking outfit really does look like another box-office winner, turning the financial frowns generated by Ang Lee’s uneven “The Hulk” upside down.

Specifically, while reviews don’t drive superhero flicks, good ones certainly didn’t hurt “Iron Man.” In this case, the positive response is likely somewhat boosted by low expectations — generated not only by the prior film, but also by the fact that director Leterrier is no critical fave. Most critics seem pleasantly surprised, but make a point of emphasizing that “The Incredible Hulk” is not quite up to the same level of quality of director as Jon Favreau’s likably character-driven superhero hit — A.O. Scott calls this “the Adequate Hulk” and Robert Wilonsky, a bit more positive deems it “the Pretty Good Hulk.” (The headline writer came up with “The Not-Terrible Hulk.”) Nevertheless, between the reviews and the studio tracking reported by Variety, the film clearly appears to be a more than acceptable means of separating fanboys and more general audiences from their entertainment dollars, while generating interest in a later DVD purchase — or two. All in all, it spells good times for Marvel Studios and Big Greenie.

* Fiscal redemption may be a lot harder to come by for this weekend’s other major new release, “The Happening,” in which people spontaneously off themselves for reasons unknown. The newest film from the most famous director ever with an unpronounceable/unspellable name, acclaimed tyro writer-director turned critical punching bag M. Night Shyamalan, stands unreviewed by Bullz-Eye, though from what the mighty Tomatometer tells us, it sounds like our critics might not be missing much. On the other hand, Manohla Dargis finally persuades me she really is as good a writer as my fellow cinephiles say she is, with her spirited, if qualified, defense and this crackerjack doozy of an opening graph:

The knives had been out and sharpened long before M. Night Shyamalan’s latest movie, “The Happening,” opened on Friday. A fine craftsman with aspirations to the canon, this would-be auteur has, in the last few years, experienced a sensational fall from critical and commercial grace, partly through his own doing — by making bad movies and then, even after those movies failed, by continuing to feed his ego publicly — and partly through the entertainment media that, once they smell weakness, will always bite the hand they once slathered in drool.

Accurately stated, I fear, when it comes to the gentlefolk of the press. As for audiences, while the still rising star of Mark Wahlberg and the genuine appeal of costars John Leguizamo and the usually wonderful Zooey Deschanel (not so much here, says Dargis and every other review I looked at) won’t hurt, I’m sixth-sensing another big disappointment here. Certainly, it’s a little strange to hear the studio making a big deal in their advertising about this being Shyamalan’s first R-rated film, as if a little extra blood and maybe an F-word or two was reason enough to plop down $10-15.

It’s a classic case of trying to turn a liability into an asset, but with Shymalan’s brand set as a not quite master of politely old-fashioned thrills and chills, the gorehounds aren’t going to be coming out for this one. Also, there’s the issue of the title and a certain lesser-known hit by the Supremes sure to kill any sense of horror in those who grew up hearing it, which I discuss over at my other blogging home. In any case, there are any number of strong flicks in competition, most especially the well-regarded family-friendly “Kung Fu Panda,” so “The Happening” will be lucky to come in the top 5.

* It’s looking like a quiet Father’s Day weekend in Lake Indiewood, where the men are not always good looking but the reviews are all above average. However, the (so far) 100% Tomatometer latest from the Duplass Brothers looks promising. Their “The Puffy Chair” is one of the cornerstones of the so-called mumblecore movement, and “Baghead” the comedic, semi-horror flick about the indie film biz, debuting in — where else — Austin, Texas — sounds like fun, if only for another chance to see the fetching Greta Gerwig from the controversially low-key “Hannah Takes the Stairs.” Say what you will about the film (which I quite liked but I could imagine hating, if I disliked the sound of neurotic people talking), she’s a cutie.