Category: News (Page 200 of 401)

This Weekend’s Box Office: A Test of Star Power (Updated)

I’m trying to get out of the house this evening for a change, so I hope you’ll forgive me if I jump the gun slightly on this week’s b.o. preview. That means we won’t be hearing from Bullz-Eye critics this week or some of my other usual suspects, though updates are not impossible if something earth shattering grabs my attention.

Anyhow, we’ve got an interesting weekend shaping up as two superstar vehicles, starring a total of three veteran megastars, do battle with yet another ultra-powerful Pixar/Disney feature, “Up,” and a genuine sleeper, “The Hangover.” In fact, the modest, no-star, R-rated comedy surprised almost everyone last week by narrowly defeating the wildly popular PG Pixar film.

The HangoverAs the Hollywood Reporter‘s Carl DiOrio reminds us, the well-received comedy did about twice as well as it was expected to do (and it was already expected to do quite well), grabbing $45 million on its opening weekend and additionally doing strong business during the week, when some of us adults decide to hit the movies. Variety says largely the same thing.

Still, there is one potential powerhouse this week in what, again per DiOrio, turns out to be the third version of the NYC subway thriller, “The Taking of Pelham 123,” first seen in 1974 with Walter Matthau and Robert Shaw, and then again in a 1998 TV movie with Edward James Olmos and Vincent D’Onofrio. This a fifty-something superstar two-for-one package in which Denzel Washington’s transit nerd will face off against badass hijacker John Travolta, backed up by a very strong supporting cast led by James Gandolfini, who seems to be getting the best reviews of anyone connected with the film.

Indeed, the critical consensus on this one is not especially kind, perhaps hurt by the recent resurgence of interest/respect for the original film by those of us in the Filmgeek-American community. Critics can’t help comparing it to the compelling and blackly humorous original. The Onion‘s always interesting Nathan Rabin has hard words for “L.A. Confidential” screenwriter Brian Helgeland (stepping into the shoes of Peter Stone, one of the wittiest screen-scribes of his day), hyper-maximalist director Tony Scott, and especially the former Vinnie Barbarino:

John Travolta’s wildly successful post-comeback crusade to become synonymous with crap continues with…Tony Scott’s bracingly awful remake/desecration of the classic ‘70s thriller. The miscalculations begin with Travolta’s distractingly Tetris-shaped facial hair—long rectangular sideburns paired with a geometric Fu Manchu—and extend to every facet of the production. Cursed with following in the outsized footsteps of world-class heavy Robert Shaw, Travolta devours the scenery; his performance is 0% inspiration, 100% perspiration.

Nevertheless, a picture like this is not made or broken by reviews, though word of mouth (or word of Blackberry and text message or cell phone) is another story. It’s expected to do well, and possibly hit the #2 spot, but I wouldn’t bet on it doing any better.  On the other hand, it’s got Denzel Washington, who should never be discounted. (And, for pity’s sake, read my new Bullz-Eye feature on the actor’s back catalog: “Washington Insiders.” Plug, plug, plug.)

Expectations are more modest for a new family vehicle for Eddie Murphy from Nickelodeon, “Imagine That.” The film pairs Murphy in a comedic father-daughter situation with young Yara Shahidi. Between a rather soft premise and that Nickelodeon imprimatur, especially with a sub-meh 36% on RT, it’s hard to imagine this one having much appeal outside of pre-tween girls, die-hard Eddie fans, and families who’ve already seen “Up” five times. Still, the family mojo is always good for something. Let’s see if our nation’s dutiful parents push this one into the top five or six… [Update: I also note, via our own now-linked to review by David Medsker, that the premise is somewhat simliar to both “Up” (which I haven’t seen yet) and the Adam Sandler vehicle “Bedtime Stories” (which I will likely never see, not matter how accurate Dave is when he says that Keri Russell “oozes cuteness”…if she oozes anything, that would be it). Though Dave has some mild kind words for the Murphy film, I don’t think that it helps with its’ appeal much, either.]

That’s pretty much it except for three interesting films in limited release. For starters, we have a well-reviewed (though not ecstatically so), moody science fiction film called “Moon” from Duncan Jones — who can’t escape being David Bowie‘s son — with Sam Rockwell as a cloned astronaut and Kevin Spacey as the voice of a HAL-9000/Marvin-the-Paranoid-Android-esque ship’s computer. Film geeks will also be curious about a new film from filmic godfather Francis Ford Coppola, “Tetro” which has been getting a mixed response. (Currently 50% at RT — that’s pretty precisely mixed.) It’s opening just on the coasts.

It’s also only opening in L.A. and New York, but look to be hearing more about the new RT 95 percenter documentary “Food, Inc.“, on the hot topic of the politics of what we’re all eating, as the year wears on. It’s also got a great trailer — the notional tomatoes are on me.

The Further Adventures of Ari, the Agent

If you’re like a lot of people, myself definitely included, you kind of wish “Entourage” were all about Ari the agent. The lovable a-hole played by Jeremy “insert sushi joke here” Piven.

I’ve got no “in” with the producers of the show, who may already feel they have enough Piven in their lives, but Ari Gold’s famed real-life doppelganger, super-agent Ari Emanuel, has apparently pulled off the kind of power-consolidating coup that would no doubt have his fictional equivalent furious with envy and heaping extra abuse on his long-suffering assistant, Lloyd. The short version is that his agency, Endeavor, has taken over the venerable, but declining, William Morris — once by far the world’s best known agency — and reportedly fired many of its staff while hanging on to most of Endeavor’s.

It’s just slightly like Marilyn Manson staking over Capitol Records. And, oh yeah, one of his brothers runs the White House, whose tough/manic rep could probably be the basis of an entertaining cable series of its own.

I’m an old-school guy who feels that it’s kind of an inevitable travesty that agents like Emmanuel wield as much power as they do, even if it’s now less than what they had not so long ago; I largely blame them, in part and as a group, mind you (I don’t want Ari mad at me!) for the steep decline in the quality of mainstream studio “product” since the early eighties. Of course, it’s not just agents who are behind the “filmed deal” school of moviemaking, it’s also lawyers and producers. Two more widely beloved professions.

Moreover, the references to ex-super agent Michael Ovitz, who maybe did more than anyone to enshrine a new level of douchiness as part of Hollywood culture in his day, don’t warm my heart. On the other hand, at least Ari and I have similar politics. Still, the problem of movies-as-deals rather than movies-as-movies goes back at least as far as original super-agent Lew Wasserman, who as questionable as he often was, was really only filling a power vacuum left by the decline of the studio system, and his work occasionally certainly resulted in some great movies too. (Oh, and by the way, was a purported liberal who wound up helping ex-actor Ronald Reagan to become president. Thanks for all your help to the cause, Lew.) Let’s face it, complaining about agents in Hollywood is a little bit like complaining about L.A. traffic — it’s an inevitable part of existence, an unavoidable flaw in the local ecosystem, until we figure out something better.

There’s much more to be read via Kim Masters, Sharon Waxman, and the New York Times. Anne Thompson also has a very good piece up on last week’s “Produced By” conference, including comments from Clint Eastwood, which I think is sort of related.

Weinstein’s Cash Problems to Trouble “Basterds”? …And the Genesis of a “Hangover”

Someday, I’m going to have to write post apologizing to Nikki Finke for all the mean things I’ve thought about her in the wake of some of the mean things she’s written in her still extant column for the quickly crumbling L.A. Weekly. But the fact remains that her blog is absolutely invaluable and mostly avoids the sort of editorializing that used to drive me crazy — even if her commenters still drive me up the wall. Also, today, she helped me learn about two breaking stories which will be very much of interest to PH readers.

* As is being reported by The New York Times among many others, the Weinstein Company appears to be facing some serious financial issues. Of most immediate interest to film fans, particularly those of us who may confess to a certain amount of fanboyism, is how the reported restructuring may affect the release of Quentin Tarantino’s extremely long-awaited “Inglourious Basterds” (I think he spent a year developing the misspellings alone.) The amazing Ms. Finke reports, however, that things may be even worse than the NYT implied, and the company may have issues releasing any film.

Meanwhile, Sharon Waxman is claiming that the ubiquitous Harvey is pressuring Tarantino to cut 40 minutes or so from the currently 160 minute war flick, which got all-over-the-map reviews and comments at Cannes. While reporting a quote from brother Bob Weinstein placing the apparent financial crisis in perspective (i.e., the financial deaths of the Weinsteins have been reported more than once before), she also mentions another lavish production that could be effected: Rob Marshall’s intriguing looking “Nine.”

* And, in a Finke exclusive, she has some possible backstory on how “The Hangover” was induced. Was it really as borderline underhanded and complicated as she makes it sound? Only her “insiders” know for sure. I will say it’s yet another sign of the truth of JFK’s pronouncement that “Victory has a thousand fathers….” (The “but defeat is an orphan” portion of the quote would no doubt relate better to why we’re not reading stories about whose brilliant idea “Land of the Lost” was.)

There is No Such Thing as a Free Movie

There is absolutely no doubt that the way we watch movies is changing, and changing fast. The film business has managed to avoid the wholesale slaughter of the music industry because of the higher bandwidth needed to convey a movie and the importance (to some of us, anyway) of picture and sound quality. Still, it’s only a matter of time before movies become easily available online, and distinctions between computers and TV sets as entertainment delivery systems is breaking down rapidly.

Hulu has become huge overnight by breaking down the barrier for TV shows and a limited but interesting selection of films despite sometimes erratic technical performance issues (at least on my iMac). Disney/ABC, Universal/NBC and, of course, the brain eating aliens are involved, though the enterprise was started by a force far more sinister and implacable: Rupert Murdoch’s NewsCorp.

Mashable’s Ben Parr today writes about Epix, which he describes as a joint venture of Paramount, Lionsgate, and MGM. Parr was allowed an early look at the site and, as a film fanboy, it sounds pretty great. If I understand it correctly, you would get the service as part of your cable TV or satellite package and would then be able to choose from a Hulu-like library to view either on television or via computer. If you’re into this stuff, you really should read for yourself. For me, one interesting aspect is that it’s unclear how deep that library would be, both because of marketing issues and because of the various confusing deals that have been struck over the years for MGM’s huge back catalog. (If you’re a masochist or just dig this stuff, here’s a Wikipedia taste.)

It all sounds great to me, except, just as there may be with Hulu, much as I enjoy the service it provides, it strikes me that there could be some anti-trust issues here. Or not. I’m only a lawyer in my mother’s fantasies. Cord Bloomquist, however, has a good rundown of the situation vis a vis Hulu from a libertarian perspective, but I’m no libertarian when it comes to megabusiness. I’m really more of a latte-sipping Hollywood (well, Anaheim) librul who thinks that media consolidation is perhaps the single most serious issue underlying all the other issues we deal with, so I’m a bit suspicious of all the studios getting into bed together for these kind of things.

Short version: Bob the liberal is wary, but Bob the movie geek is intrigued. And, let’s face it, one way or another, this the direction we’re going in. I’d just like to see more flowers blooming.

…And the Winner (Really) Is….

No, this is not a reference to last night’s Tonys. True, the movie-inspired “Billy Elliot” did take the night, continuing a “trend” for B-way musicals that go back to the classic film era, and it’s also true that host Neil Patrick Harris is a winner both for his show-closing/show-stopping musical summation, and because Empire Online has announced a couple of movie gigs for the still up-and-coming Doogie Horrible. (h/t Whedonesque).

However, it seems that the battle for the #1 box office spot discussed on my last post actually had a somewhat different result than we thought. It’s important to remember that those numbers I talk about on Sunday are really only estimates, though they are treated by press-sters as just this side of gospel. The upshot is Variety is reporting that both “The Hangover” and “Up” did better than expected business yesterday, but the former did just a little bit better better business, if you follow me. Sayeth the big V’s Pamela Mcclintock:

Final figures will show that “Hangover” grossed $45 million from 3,269 runs. “Up” should finish at $44.3 million to $44.4 million from 3,818 theaters.

I don’t suppose it really matters that much in the final analysis; nobody’s going broke here. (Well, I can’t speak for degenerate gamblers. Someone, somewhere, just lost a big bet.)

In other box office news I didn’t have time for yesterday, “Angels and Demons” cracked the $400 million mark over the weekend worldwide, sayeth the Finke. “Terminator Salvation” is not doing so badly overseas, actually. “Land of the Lost,” however, may be doing even less well than expected. Critics, you may step up your gloating.

« Older posts Newer posts »

© 2026 Premium Hollywood

Theme by Anders Noren — Up ↑