Oct 31, 2011

Where Have All the Trailers Gone?

Am I the only one who thinks its pretty weird that there's no trailer yet for Clash of the Titans 2 (Wrath of the Titans)? The movie is set to be released March 30 but not even a teaser trailer. What kind of way is that to promote your blockbuster? And speaking of blockbusters without trailers, where's the trailer for Ridley Scott's "Prometheus"? This is one of the most anticipated sci-fi films of the last 10 years yet here we are only 7 months from release and nothing, not even a teaser. Weird.

All we currently have from Ridley Scott's "Prometheus" due out on June 8 2012

Beetlejuice sequel

A couple of personal thoughts on the momentum that's apparently building around the idea of a "Beetlejuice" sequel.

First, while Seth Grahame-Smith and David (son of Jeffrey) Katzenberg state that their proposed film would be a true sequel and not just a remake of Tim Burton's classic and that they'll only do it if Michael Keaton agrees to reprise his role as the used car salesman from hell, getting him to agree to it 23 years on would seem to be something of a challenge. Still, who knows? Maybe they'll make him an offer he can't refuse. And secondly, Burton himself would apparently not be helming the sequel which to me sounds like a good enough reason to give it a pass. What would the original have been without him? Nothing is the short answer. Burton and Beetlejuice were as much a part of each other as any director/film pairing in history. Putting someone else behind the camera to "extend" what was essentially a personal vision seems like a recipe for disaster, or at best, mediocrity. Guess we'll just have to stay tuned and see how it plays out.

Oct 29, 2011

Death on the "Expendables 2" Set

One stuntman has died and another is in serious condition in the hospital after a staged explosion on the Expendables 2 set in Bulgaria went terribly wrong. The film's production company released the following statement:

"It is with great regret that we confirm this unfortunate accident. Our hearts go out to the families and those on the production affected by this tragedy. The filmmakers are working closely with the authorities in responding to and investigating this accident."

None of the film's action stars were present on the set at the time of the accident.

Jackson' Talks "Hobbit" premiere

To absolutely no one's surprise Peter Jackson announced that the world premiere of "The Hobbit; an Unexpected Journey" will be held in New Zealand. After emerging from a sit down with Prime Minister John Key Jackson was effusive in his praise for Kiwi devotion to his little film projects stating that the over-the-top turnout for his "Return of the King" some 8 years ago (is it really that long!?) was a major reason for the studio's decision to stage the world premiere in Wellington. No firm date has been set though it's expected to be in late November 2012.

Jackson also revealed a tidbit of production news. While speaking to reporters outside a Hobbit hole about the set's future as a tourist attraction he mentioned that filming for both Middle Earth prequels was only a few days from wrapping on the Hobbiton set.

You can read the complete article on Jackson's press conference with PM Key here.

New Zealand PM John Key (left) and Hobbit director Peter Jackson (right) talk tourism and world premieres.

Oct 28, 2011

No Country For Old Men - 2007

If you're familiar with "Fargo" there's little in the Coen brother's "No Country For Old Men" that will surprise or shock you. Like that earlier effort it's violent as hell, quirky as you'd expect, and full of great actors giving understated performances. What is lacking almost entirely is a sense of humor. On the rare occasion when the characters are allowed a moment of levity it feels like they're just breaking the tension before the noose is fastened around their neck.

Llewelyn Moss (Josh Brolin) is a down on his luck guy out hunting in the Texas back country when he stumbles upon the scene of a drug deal gone wrong. Under a nearby tree he finds a man who had managed to escape the carnage before dying of his wounds. Near him lies a satchel containing 2 million dollars. Moss knows exactly what's happened and knows that somebody will soon arrive looking for the money. But he takes it anyway. And we are thereby launched on a character odyssey, one far more interested in what happens when mostly ordinary folks encounter someone who sees them the same way Moss sees a deer through his rifle scope then in who winds up with the cash.

Sheriff Ed Tom Bell is the pivotal character in the narrative, the moral center of a film about amorality run amok. Played to world weary perfection by Tommy Lee Jones he's a man who thought he'd seen it all until he gets pulled into the quagmire created by Moss when he ran off with the drug money. As the only one of the principal characters with a strong moral center he's the only one able to recognize what everyone involved is up against.

Javier Bardem's Anton Chigurh is what they're up against. A human terminator who will stop at nothing to retrieve his 2 million dollars. A black hole moving through society sucking in and destroying everything in his path. He's the embodiment of a kind of person that seems to be popping up these days with alarming regularity. If you have any doubts about this read some of the reports coming out of the drug wars in northern Mexico, the same area that spawns Chigurh in the story.

The good guys in the film though they inhabit different places on the morality scale are nonetheless on the scale somewhere. Chigurh is not. When he is forced to interact with other people he's capable of drumming up a pretense of civility if he feels this will serve his purpose. But most of the time he doesn't see the point. Give me what i want or die. Or better yet, I'll just kill you and take what I want. It's in those moments when Chigurh feels it necessary to act nice in order to facilitate an extermination that Bardem's portrayal takes on its most textured and menacing air. Anyone can walk around a set emotionless, Bardem makes you believe that stone face by demonstrating beyond doubt how difficult it is for this guy to say please.

As I mentioned all the characters exhibit some level of moral development and Moss is no exception. Though he stole 2 million dollars he can't help but go back to the scene that night to bring water to the one man he encountered who had survived, although he was severely wounded and unable to move from the cab of the pickup where Moss found him. In one of the most extreme examples of the saying "no good deed goes unpunished" agents of one half of the soured drug deal arrive and Moss barely escapes with his life down a riverbed. He knows though that those men now have his license plate number which means he is f***ed in big bold capital letters.

From here events spiral out of control with Sheriff Bell hovering just behind, off to the side of and generally around the various participants, never quite able to slap the cuffs on anyone and bring the affair to an end. Woody Harrelson plays a large part in the movie's second hour as a bounty hunter hired by one of the soured deal's investors. His job is to get the money before Chigurh does but he knows that won't be easy by any definition.

The movie's open ended ending is, I suppose, necessary in order to dispel any notion that this is a "good triumphs over evil" story. The closest we come to something good coming out of all the heinous events depicted here is a somber family reunion of sorts that maybe, just maybe, marks some kind of turning point for one of the main characters. But even then any comfort to be taken from this reunion is wrapped firmly in a block of ice.

No Country For Old Men is a brutal, beautifully crafted, wonderfully acted character study in which the characters don't take kindly to being studied. I'm not sure it's a film we needed, but it's not one you are ever likely to forget.


Oct 27, 2011

The top 10 movies for the weekend of Oct 21 - Oct 23 2011

1) Paranormal Activity 3 $52.5 Million
2) Real Steel $10.8 Million
3) Footloose $10.3 Million
4) The Three Musketeers $8.6 Million
5) The Ides of March $4.8 Million
6) Dolphin Tale $4.2 Million
7) Moneyball $3.9 Million
8) Johnny English Reborn $3.8 Million
9) The Thing $3.0 Million
10) 50/50 $2.8 Million

The number one movie a year ago this week was Paranormal Activity 2 which debuted at number 1 with a $40.6 million haul. (Should we pencil in Paranormal 4 as the number one movie for this weekend next year?)

Spielberg Talks Indy 4 Regrets

Fear not those who think George Lucas lost the ability to tell a story sometime between The Empire Strikes Back and Return of the Jedi, for you are not alone. Empire magazine has an interview with Steven Spielberg where he weighs in on his lack of enthusiasm for the Lucas-penned story unpinning (many would say "undermining") Indiana Jones and the Kingdom of the Crystal Skull. At one point he states: "I didn’t want these things to be either aliens or inter-dimensional beings. But I am loyal to my best friend."

In the interview he also mentions that the on again/off again Jurassic Park 4 is apparently on again.

Oct 25, 2011

Chuck Norris joins Expendables 2

Everyone in the Shady View Retirement Home rec room will be pleased to hear that 71 year old Chuck Norris has joined the cast of "Expendables 2" alongside Stallone, Van Damme, Statham, Schwarzenegger and just about anyone else over 40 whose ever done an action flick. One notable non-returnee will be Mickey Rourke who decided he's not irrelevant quite yet and that the $$ he was being offered to return just wasn't enough.

Expendables 2 is currently shooting in Bulgaria and is due out next August.

What goes through the minds of those aging action stars?

Oct 24, 2011

Warner Bros to pull Harry Potter DVDs

With Christmas approaching Warner Bros have apparently decided to create a little faux-demand for their Harry Potter series by announcing they're yanking all HP DVDs from the shelves on Dec 29th. deadline.com has the press release here.

Oct 23, 2011

Wachowskis "Jupiter Ascending" sets sights on 2012 production launch

After laying low for nearly a decade following the utter humiliations of Matrix 2 and 3 the Wachowski brothers (more accurately the Wachowski 'siblings' since Larry is now "Lana") are ready to make a new foray into self-authored sci-fi. The project, dubbed "Jupiter Ascending" could begin production as early as spring 2012. No one has yet been cast for the film and no details of the story are known as of this writing though it's said to have a lot of sequel potential (gulp).

Until that project gets underway the siblings are keeping themselves busy with a big screen adaptation of the David Mitchell novel "Cloud Atlas", starring Tom Hanks, Hugo Weaving and Halle Berry among others.

Lana (left) and Andy Wachowski remind us that they once made a good film.

Where for art thou Sin City 2?

Could it be that Sin City 2 might finally see the light of day? In an interview with MTV Frank Miller says that he's nearly finished writing the script which will combine Sin City narratives "Just Another Saturday Night" with "A Dame to Kill For" and that there will also be new material written specifically for the movie and intended to tie the various elements together.

Just who will wind up being cast for the sequel (and indeed whether ANYONE from the first film will be back) is still up in the air. It's conceivable that this film could have an entirely new cast. For example: "A Dame To Kill For" is about Dwight, which would seem to indicate that Clive Owen will be back to reprise his role from the first film, but it's not a given that will happen. In Miller's comic book Dwight undergoes drastic facial reconstruction between events in "A Dame To Kill For" and "The Big Fat Kill" (which was the source of his Sin City 1 story line). So the film makers could easily choose to go with someone else and not have any explaining to do. Likewise it's no given that Mickey Rourke will return to play Marv for the "Just Another Saturday Night" segment since the actor has expressed frustration with the way the film has been hung up in development and said he's moving on with other things. While the thought of a Sin City sequel without those two actors doesn't make me particularly happy there was one cast member from the first film I certainly hope gets kicked to the curb. Jessica Alba was so terribly miscast as Nancy the stripper that if she winds up sitting out the sequel it can only make for a better film.

So, for about the 50th time in the past 6 or 7 years we're told that Sin City 2 is on the way. While I'd like to believe it I'm afraid I'm not holding my breath at this point. We'll have to just wait and see.

"So you gonna make this movie or what?" "Patience my son, patience."

Oct 21, 2011

Star Wars Episode Two Attack of the Clones - 2002

Star Wars II Attack of the Clones is one of the worst movies of the 21st century, and I have no doubt it's going to retain that distinction as the next 89 years or so are played out. It's illogical as well as atrociously written and acted; though to be fair you can't blame actors for saying the garbage lines they're given or for doing what the talentless director tells them to. I had high hopes for this film, thinking "Surely George Lucas has learned from his mistakes with Phantom Menace" but no. The only thing he apparently learned was that he could put together any old piece of trash, attach "Star Wars" to it and make himself another billion dollars in box office and merchandising.

The story itself isn't worth recounting because, as far as I can tell, there isn't one. I'm never made to understand what anyone is fighting about. Why don't the "guardians of peace and justice" work feverishly behind the scenes in an effort to find moderate elements in both camps that would be willing to compromise? Isn't that how diplomacy works? And isn't that the Jedi's job; to avoid conflict and promote peace? Here all they seem to do is look for the next excuse to kick butt. Sure, it would have been harder to write a compelling story about the Jedi's attempts to head off civil war with diplomacy and Gandhi style non-violent civil disobedience but you set the terms George not me so don't expect me to simply buy it when you then turn those "guardians of peace and justice" into a clueless, light saber wielding mob.

Here's a few more questions that arise from the muck that is AOTC: Where did Doodoo come from and why should I hate him? What's a "sith" lord? Why do Obi Wan and Anikin hate each other? Aren't they supposed to be good friends? Doesn't murdering innocent women and children by the score and then not showing a cintilla of regret count as 'turning to the dark side'? And if it does, why do we need the third movie? Doesn't Padme's knowledge of Annikin's genocide and her subsequent silence make her an enemy of peace and (especially) justice an accessory after the fact and a candidate for the gallows? Doesn't anyone notice that the emperor looks an awful lot like Palpatine in a black hood? Why didn't the robot at Padme's window just drop a huge bomb into her apartment and be done with her?

There are dozens more questions like these that beg for answers but what's the point? Instead I just want to talk about Hayden Christensen for a moment. Is there a worse actor on the planet? Does this guy know how to do anything except pout and puff up his cheeks? Watching him, (especially in his interactions with Natalie Portman as Padme), is one of the most painful experiences I've ever had at the movies. It's as though George Lucas got drunk, went wandering the streets in his drunken stupor and cast the first person he threw up on to play Anikan. In fact I'm certain that if Lucas had used that casting method he would have found a better actor. Christensen makes Andy Serkis seem like Laurence Olivier. I'm willing to accept that some of the blame rests on the shoulders of the no-talent director, but I don't think even Martin Scorsese could have coaxed a passable performance out of this guy. He's that bad.

In the end this is a film for 7 year olds that don't ask questions about plot inconsistencies and don't care about bad acting; they just want their General Grievous action figure for Christmas. So if you're reading this and you're not 7 years old and you haven't seen the prequels and you're thinking about spending your hard-earned money on DVD or BlueRay versions, all I can say is watch it on youtube first. I'm pretty sure you'll wind up keeping that money in your pocket.

"The galaxy is so stoopid!"

Oct 20, 2011

Sherlock Holmes 2 trailer

The new trailer for Sherlock Holmes 2 is out. Looks amazing. Look for the film to hit theaters on December 16th.

Two Transformers Sequels on the Way

Variety has a report that Paramount and Hasbro are in talks with Michael (gag) Bay and Steven Spielberg to develop two more Transformers sequels. That by itself is no big shock considering how much moolah the franchise has raked in already. What is a bit surprising is that they're apparently going to be made without Shia LaBeouf. Maybe Paramount is tired of their star getting punched out in bar fights (see image below).

After getting his butt kicked SB is informed he's out of the Transformers sequels.
 Read the whole report on Variety.

Oct 17, 2011

Inglorious Basterds - 2009

If Quentin Tarantino's "Inglorious Basterds" has a point I suppose it's this: the triumph of principle over opportunism. Then again maybe it's this: that principle and opportunism are strange but frequent bedfellows. Or, maybe it's this: we won the war, we'll (re)write it any damn way we want.

And rewrite it he does, blithely creating an entirely new ending for the war, tossing out the biographies of the war's major players and carving along the way a special niche for himself in the pantheon of WWII-related media right up there next to "Hogan's Heroes". And that, to be sure, is the closest parallel available though to Hogan's Heroes' credit they never made the mistake of venturing into holocaust history to get their flat screen jollies. With Inglorious Basterds Tarantino does just that and the results are cringe worthy.

I've heard that you have to give old Quentin a pass because what he's creating here is not a WWII story but another in whats beginning to seem like an endless series of homages to cinema past and present, foreign and domestic. That the way to approach Inglorious Basterds is not to examine its story and/or construction but to keep a note pad handy to jot down all the wonderful cinematic allusions. I'm sorry but this isn't "Kill Bill" so the story and the way it's told do matter. With Kill Bill I was willing to give him a pass and simply enjoy the technical wow of it all, because he made it explicit up front that that movie was nothing but an exercise in filming various revenge scenarios.

Inglorious Basterds though was supposed to be the film where Tarantino spread his wings a bit and showed that he was more than a one-trick pony. Well, if that's the case he fails miserably and he fails using material you shouldn't fail with. Irreverence and disrespect co-habitate in this film in a way that tastes an awful lot more like the latter than the former. I also have a nagging suspiscion that when viewing rushes during production the word "cool" was probably heard regularly around the theater emenating enthusiastically from QTs oversized lips.

Tarantino doesn't tell you what to think or feel. I'll give him that. Problem is he doesn't tell you much of anything else either. He goes to great lengths to set up a ficticious covert operation that requires introducing a number of new characters (including an appallingly bad cameo by one Mike Myers) and then kills everyone involved off in a shootout only a third grader didn't see coming in a scene that takes nearly a half hour to get to the point. And what exactly is the point? Is he telling me that war is hell? Well I kinda already knew that. Is he telling me some kind of parable; "the best laid plans of mice and men..."? It's tempting to think so, but I'm not buying it.

As Goebells and his lapdog Leni Riefenstahl knew images are power. Turning the holocaust, which so many have struggled so long to make sure we remember, into raw material for a cinematic romp seems, lets be kind and say "ill-advised". Believe it or not there are young people out there (a lot of them actually) who don't know much about the apocalypse that was WWII or the holocaust that was its most egregious element. Spin em a yarn about a Tennessee hick scalping nazi's and blowing away the entire German high command in one fell swoop and some of them are gonna swallow it hook line and sinker. From there its not too far to the top of that slipperiest of slopes: forgetting. After all, if there's no consensus about what really happened, why bother believing it happened at all? How would this film have been received if it had been made by a German or an Iranian? I guarantee you it would not have received the blind accolades it did, and rightfully so. Unfettered by their love for Tarantino critics would have been able to see the danger here.

I'm not saying "don't watch the film" because that's your decision. What I am asking is that, if you do watch it, try and forget that it's a Quentin Tarantino film and then see how you feel about it.

Clips from Spielberg's Tin Tin

Steven Spielberg finally returns to the directors chair with the Peter Jackson produced "Adventures of Tin Tin" due in theaters this December and indiewire.com has an excellent article on the upcoming self-proclaimed movie "event" with a number of clips from the film and some behind the scenes featurettes.

Check it out here.

Still from Steven Spielberg and Peter Jackson's "Adventures of Tin Tin"

Oct 15, 2011

Phantom Menace 3D a little closer to reality

George (it's my party and I'll change whatever I want whenever I want to) Lucas' long (un)anticipated 3D retrofit of The Phantom Menace is inching closer by the day. Set for release in February the hype machine shifted gears in the last few days with the release of the official promotional poster (left).

Its good to know that George is thinking about the 4 or 5 people who've been pining to experience Jar Jar in all his 3D splendor. It's that kind of attention to the fanbase that separates him from the pack.

"Avengers" trailer

The "Avengers" trailer is finally out. Looks pretty awesome to me. The movie is scheduled for release in May 2012.

Oct 14, 2011

Beowulf - 2007

Beowulf, director Robert Zemeckis' re-imagining of the 8th century epic poem, is a wonderful hybrid of a film. Live actors are motion captured and CGI'ed ala Gollum from "Lord of the Rings" and their digitized personas stylized and dropped into completely CGI sets. Its the same technique used by James Cameron in "Avatar" and in Zemeckis' earlier feature "The Polar Express" and here it finds real purpose.

The CGI landscapes go a long way in helping the imagination nestle comfortably into the world of myth, creating a medieval Denmark of fantastical and impenetrable isolation which becomes fertile ground for the terror to come. I've seen other screen adaptations of the Beowulf myth (most notably Sturla Gunnarsson's live action film from 2005) and they pale by comparison in doing the job of setting the right tone. Something about actual Nordic landscapes that simply don't speak to the same ancient part of the imagination as Zemeckis' conjured ones do.

The story told here deviates from the original poem in several areas but you don't need to know the poem to enjoy the movie. It stands on its own as a cautionary tale about the dangers of hubris and the corrosive effects of keeping secrets while at the same time doing its post-modern part in deconstructing the hero myth.

The movie stars Ray Winstone as the bellicose hero Beowulf, Anthony Hopkins as the old king Hrothgar who has a secret that's come back to haunt everyone, Crispin Glover as the creature Grendel who terrorizes the king's mead hall and its inhabitants and Angelina Jolie as the demonic mother of said creature who, when she so chooses, is able to morph into the most seductive demon-trollop ever conceived in order to get her way. She is corruption, passing from leader to leader, spoiling everything.

The movie opens with a joyous celebration in King Hrothgar's brand new Mead Hall. But the celebratory atmosphere is soon shattered as Grendel invades the hall and tears nearly everyone limb from limb before disappearing in a cloud a electric blue fog. Hrothgar puts out the call far and wide for a hero to come and rescue his kingdom from the demon who hangs over it like a perpetual stormcloud. Beowulf arrives by sea to take up the challenge and promptly tells the king to open the hall in order to bring Grendel out in to the open.

Due to a combination of moxie and luck he manages to mortally wound Grendel in the ensuing attack and rises quickly from boastful outsider to demon slayer in the eyes of the locals. After Grendel dies his mother rains revenge down upon the warriors in the mead hall. Beowulf, sensing that he may be in over his head but unable to admit it to others who've now come to believe in his omnipotence, reluctantly agrees to confront her. As it turns out he was right to doubt himself because the needs of his ego are easily leveraged by her seductive trickery. He makes a secret deal with the mother and returns to the mead hall declaring victory. Hrothgar though isn't buying it. Having eaten himself from the demon's buffet he senses Beowulf isn't telling the whole story and when Beowulf dodges the question of whether he actually killed the mother Hrothgar knows what's happened.

He also knows that his beautiful young queen is smitten by the warrior from beyond the seas and as a last spiteful dig at the two he declares he's leaving everything to Beowulf, including his queen, and then leaps to his death. Beowulf is now king and has the woman he's been longing for yet because of his deal with the devil he's unable to show her love or husbandly affection. She thinks he's simply lost interest in her. He's trying to ensure that the demon doesn't rain whoopass down upon her and the rest of his kingdom. And this speaks to an important point. Beowulf is not a bad guy. He's a simple guy with some basic principals who was given extraordinary physical gifts and experienced some good luck. He's a braggart sure, and a sucker for a pretty face, but he's not out to harm anyone; he just wants some attention.

The film is peppered with references to Christianity that at first seem curiously unnecessary. By the third act though when Beowulf is bemoaning the fact that Christianity has killed off the hero and replaced him with the martyr things make a little more sense. It's also a film that isn't afraid to poke fun at itself though it doesn't abuse the privilege.

As a whole the movie is a compelling visual experience, and though mostly somber in tone it pulls itself back from the ledge when need be with well placed bits of levity. I decided against seeing the 3D version when it was in theaters choosing instead to see if the story would stand up in standard 2D. It did. Brilliantly.


Oct 13, 2011

The Lone Ranger Back in the Saddle

Do I get to keep the dreads?
According to Variety Johnny Depp will be staying in the comfy Disney stable as that studio's on-again off-again Long Ranger film is officially back on again after all principals involved agreed to hefty cuts in their salaries/fees and producer Jerry Bruckheimer agreed to pick up any cost overruns. The film, due to be directed by Pirates of the Caribbean vet Gore Verbinski will see Depp playing the Lone Ranger's Native American sidekick Tonto and Armie Hammer as the masked one himself.

Am I the only one who finds it a bit weird that the sidekick is going to get top billing? Kind of harks back to Nicholson getting top billing for Batman over Michael Keaton who actually PLAYED Batman. Anyway, no firm release date has been set as of this writing.

Oct 12, 2011

Javier Bardem joins the cast of Bond 23

Pre-production for Bond 23 is in full swing after what seems like an eternity waiting for MGM to work out its financial problems and Entertainment Weekly is reporting that Javier Bardem has been picked to play the main villian. Sam Mendes will be directing the newest installment of 007's adventures with the new flick rumoured to be called "Skyfall". Hmmmm... not sure I like that name but can't wait for the movie, which is scheduled for release in November 2012.

Would you like to be shaken or stirred, Mr Bond?

Oct 11, 2011

The top 10 movies for the weekend of Oct 7 - Oct 9 2011

1) Real Steel $27.3 Million
2) The Ides of March $10.4 Million
3) Dolphin Tale $9.1 Million
4) MOneyball $7.4 Million
5) 50/50 $5.6 Million
6) Courageous $4.8 Million
7) The Lion King 3D $4.5 Million
8) Dream House $4.4 Million
9) What's Your Number? $3.1 Million
10) Contagion $2.9 Million

The number one movie a year ago this week was The Social Network which held the top spot for the second weekend in a row with a $15.4 Million haul.

Oct 9, 2011

Top 10 foreign box office hits of the 21st century

Over the past decade North American movie attendance has been getting smaller and smaller while at the same time attendance in the rest of the world has exploded as modern theaters have sprung up all over what used to be considered the 'developing world'. In fact "foreign", (non-North American), box office has become such a huge factor these days that a movie like "Pirates of the Caribbean - On Stranger Tides" can be a genuine disappointment at the domestic box office yet still gross more than a billion dollars worldwide because of its gi-normous foreign haul.

So here are the top 10 foreign box office hits of the 21st century (to date).

Title Year Non-North American Earnings
1) Avatar 2009-10 $2.02 Billion
2) Harry Potter - DH2 2011 $947 million
3) Pirates of the Caribbean - OST 2011 $798 million
4) Transformers 3 2011 $767 million
5) Lord of the Rings - ROTK 2003 $742 million
6) Ice Age - DotD 2009 $690 million
7) Alice in Wonderland 2010 $690 million
8) Harry Potter - DH1 2010 $660 million
9) Harry Potter - SS 2001 $657 million
10) Pirates of the Caribbean - AWE 2007 $654 million

Oct 8, 2011

A.I. Artificial Intelligence - 2001

A.I. is a curious film to say the least. Part Stanley Kubrick, part Steven Spielberg it ultimately winds up belonging to the actors and special effects.

Kubrick labored to bring the story to the screen for 25 years but was never able to come up with a screenplay that worked for him. Several times the movie seemed on the verge of production only to have Kubrick wind up pulling the rug out from under it at the last minute. He even tried to pawn it off on Spielberg in 1994, though Spielberg respectfully declined to take it on at the time. Finally after Kubrick died in 1999 Spielberg agreed to make the picture out of respect for his late friend and wound up rewriting the script himself.

That script has at its heart a seemingly complex philosophical question: Are we responsible for the broken heart of a robot that we've programmed to mimic love? Like I said it seems like a complex question but at its core is an invalid conceit: that a robot can have a broken heart to begin with. If I were to believe that I'd also have to believe that I'm violating the civil rights of a lightbulb if I forget to turn if off when I go out. The fact that Spielberg's heavy, deep and real seeming question can be pretty effectively brushed aside by invoking the difference between man and his tools is at the heart of what's wrong with A.I. Spielberg is using the material to ask the wrong questions.

If instead of attempting to reinvent the emotional wheel Spielberg had used the robot David as a device to shed some light on the plight of parentless children adrift in a complicated and increasingly dangerous and exploitative world then he might have had a significantly moving and even important film on his hands. Instead he tries in vain to convince us that love is no more special than seeing or hearing and that a machine can be made to experience it just as a machine can be built and programmed to 'see'.

But does he really believe that himself? Does he really believe love can be reproduced using binary code and a couple of circuit boards? I have to think he doesn't based on the preponderence of his work. Nonetheless he tries his damnedest over the course of the movie to convince us with his efforts yielding naught but the feeling of a director trying to convince himself instead.

While it would be tempting to buy into the simplistic notion of love Spielberg seems to posit here the unfortunate fact is that its just not that simple. Love is one of the great mysteries of existence. It's also an incredibly fragile and often ephemeral thing. Two people who are swimming in the molasses of love one day might just as easily be coldly trying to destroy each other in court the next day. Former lovers move on, parents and children drift apart, we forget yet we retain the ability to love again. The fact that David never moves on demonstrates fairly convincingly that he isn't experiencing love, but rather that his hard drive has crashed and the screen is frozen.

And so with naive and unsatisfactory signals coming from the narrative and director the movie has little choice but to hand itself over to the actors and special effects artists and for the most part they comport themselves beautifully. Haley Joe Osment does a terrific job playing a life-like machine. Frances O'Conner and Sam Robarbs likewise are first rate as the emotionally conflicted parents and William Hurt embues the corporate slimeball with appropriate amounts of phony earnestness and cold-hearted calculation. The special effects are equally excellent and the cinematography compelling to the extent that you wish there were something going on on the screen that would take advantage of it.

But alas, Spielberg's heart never seems to be in this movie. Its one of the few cases I can think of where he just doesn't seem to be on top of what he's doing, maybe because he realized only too late that he'd turned down a dead end street with his interpretation. Or maybe he felt somehow forced to make this 'homage' to Kubrick. Or maybe his mind was on the several other projects he had on the board at the time he made this. Whatever the true reason for his disconnect the fact is that he could have had a Blade Runner type success on his hands but instead asked the wrong questions in a search for easy answers and failed.

Oct 6, 2011

Steve Jobs, guiding force behind Pixar, dies at 56

In 1986 after being ousted by the Apple board, Steve Jobs was looking for something to invest in and wound up buying George Lucas's fledgling graphics division, The Graphics Group, for $10 million. At first the company struggled to find a niche for itself but eventually Jobs signed a production and distribution deal with Disney to produce animated films. At the same time The Graphics Group changed its name to Pixar. Pixar's first effort was Toy Story, a monster hit in 1995. In the years since Pixar has gone on to produce a slew of other blockbuster hits including Toy Story 2 and 3, Finding Nemo and Wall-E.

In 2006 Disney purchased Pixar outright in a deal that made Jobs a billionaire. He became the single largest stock holder in Disney, owning nearly 7% of all shares. Up until his death today at the age of 56 he continued to sit on the board of Disney and was part of a steering committee that oversaw Pixar projects.

Whether you are a fan of Pixar's brand of animation or not, no one can deny Jobs turned the studio into a Hollywood powerhouse that produced a string of animated films that have become manna to an entire generation of kids around the world.

Steve Jobs addresses the troops at Pixar

Oct 4, 2011

The Top 10 Movies for the Weekend of Sept 30 - Oct 2, 2011

1) Dolphin Tale $13.9 Million
2) Moneyball $12 Million
3) Lion King 3D $10.6 Million
4) Courageous $9.1 Million
5) 50/50 $8.6 Million
6) Dream House $8.1 Million
7) Abduction $5.6 Million
8) What's Your Number? $5.4 Million
9) Contagion $4.9 Million
10) Killer Elite $4.9 Million

The number one movie a year ago this weekend was The Social Network that debuted with a $22.4 Million haul.

Oct 3, 2011

Sin City - 2005

Robert Rodriguez seems to have sensed something when he pondered making a movie out of Frank Miller's noir graphic novel Sin City. His instincts here seem so spot on its hard for me to imagine he simply took the job 'cause he liked the book. I have to believe it runs deeper than that. The finished product is so seamless and confidently executed that he must have known exactly why he wanted to make this movie. Perhaps what he sensed was a chance to reinvent film noir in a way that could introduce this old form to a new, 21st century audience. If that was his goal he succeeded spectacularly. To say that this is the best comic book to movie adaptation I've ever seen would be an understatement. There isn't anything else even close, though Tim Burton's "Batman" might at least be in the same discussion.

Rodriguez has not attempted to recreate the panels of the graphic novel on screen, instead he's distilled their noir essence and re-imagined them using the larger more expansive medium. In the process he's put green screen/CGI to the most effective use I've seen to date at the movies. Painting with these tools, not trying to create photo-realistic effects with them. This leaves room for something comic books are great at leaving room for but movies have pushed to the curb: your imagination.

The story begins with Detective Hartigan (Bruce Willis) on his way into retirement. Before he moves on into that long night though he has one last case to wrap up. A young girl named Nancy has been kidnapped by the demented son of a US Senator and he needs to save her before she disappears into the lecher's hell like so many before her. His quest will cover many years, stretch his sense of duty to the limit and finally require him to do the unthinkable in order to guarantee Nancy's long term survival.

Once Hartigan's story is set up we fast forward to what passes for the present day in this world and pick up the tale of Marv, a local thug who's been inhabiting his life of late like a bad dream he can't wake from. When he's set up for the murder of the one woman who wasn't afraid to show him her vulnerable side, he finds purpose for his life: vengance. Mickey Rourke's performance is a wonder to behold as he somehow manages to humanize this walking caricature, creating in the process an urban anti-hero for the ages.

Next we meet Dwight (Clive Owen) who has returned to Sin City after extensive plastic surgery meant to hide him from the police who want him for some unexplained murder from an earlier day. Dwight can change his face but he can't change who he is and as a result he allows himself to get caught between a barmaid who he's sweet on and her abusive boyfriend. His unfortunate proclivity for doing the right thing will result in lots of blood being spilled.

This is not a movie for sensitive types. There is stylized blood shed by the gallon, beheadings, torture, nudity, drug abuse, alcohol abuse, castration and lots more. Curiously though, as down and gritty as the proceedings are, there's nary a common profanity anywhere to be heard. These characters don't need them. They live profane lives.

The ensemble cast is rounded out by the sumptuous Carla Gugino, the beautiful Jamie King (pulling double duty as a pair of twin sisters), the (possibly miscast) Jessica Alba (who seems to think stripping is a fairly modest profession), Michael Madsen as a corrupt cop, Elijah Wood as a serial killing cannibal (!), Rutger Hauer as the cannibal's protector, Benecio Del Toro as yet another corrupt cop, Rosario Dawson as the unofficial queen of Old Town and Brittany Murphy in her last substantive role.

Yet as impressive as the cast is it's never a distraction; testament to the abilities of the the actor's involved as well as the fact that the story - being from a kind of parallel universe and buttressed by the constant visual splendor - demands you pay attention even if it is, at its core, standard noir fare. Rodriguez also deserves much credit for successfully managing what might have turned into an ego-overload situation in the hands of a less confident director.

Sin City is so good, so unique in its treatment of the movie screen that it may turn out to be a one-off. Any attempts to emulate it will look like just that. It will require a creative director indeed to take what Rodriguez has done here and use it as a point of departure for something newer still. In the meantime though we have Sin City: dark, enigmatic, terribly beautiful, evocative and ground breaking. I don't know what else a person can ask of a film.

The Dark Knight Rises - video

The Dark Knight Rises is shooting in Los Angeles and video from some eyewitnesses has surfaced online.



source: Christian Hall - Batman-News.com


I'm keeping my fingers crossed this movie will be better than the last one.