Desperate times, big box office, Happy Fourth
OK, it's hardly a secret, but this 4th weekend is primed to bring in major box office bucks.
After only two days plus in theaters it looks like "Hancock" is going to bring in $100 million or more by Sunday, while "WALL-E" should make another $50 million and "Wanted" could take in $40 million. Even "Kit Ketteridge" could pull $20 million and she's just a little girl.
All in all, this may be the one of the most critically and financially successful Fourth weekends ever. That's what happens when Hollywood makes good versions of the kind of movies people actually want to see. All four of those movies spell fun.
And what could be more American than fun? It may not please the artistes and many of the critics, but for the most part people want entertainment that's entertaining.
For the challenging stuff all people have to do is turn on the news, read the paper, look in their wallets or study their own souls. The success of "Hancock" may be the perfect reflection of America's current state of desperation.
Will "WALL-E" be golden?
There's been quite a bit of buzz going on concerning "WALL-E" and Oscar.
A good deal of it has to do with there being no Oscar buzz on anything else that's hit the screen so far this year. By this time last year there was at least some indie sleeper potential with "Once" (worked) and "Waitress" (didn't).
But so far, nada except for the little robot who could. Obviously it helps that "WALL-E" is the best reviewed film of the year so far, with 97 percent aopproval on Rotten Tomatoes, and likely to stay that way.
So of course that adds up to a best animated feature Oscar. The question is, could it add up to a best picture of any kind nomination?
History, obviously, is against it. Cartoons don't get best pic nominations, and neither do sci fi flicks. "WALL-E" is both.
Then again, fantasy films don't get best picture noms either, and yet "Lord of the Rings" walked off with the Oscar a few years back.
Of course the Oscar went to the third and final chapter as acknowledgment of the trilogy's overall achievment.
Then again, a nomination -- or win -- for "WALL-E" would be acknowledgment of Pixar's overall achievment.
We're only halfway through the year, and Oscar tends to forget everything before September, but it's still an interesting question.
WOW-E
The words quality and blockbuster don't go together very often, but this weekend they do and it looks like Hollywood, and movie audiences, are striking gold.
"WALL-E," the brilliant new Pixar release which has critics (including me)tripping all over themselves to come up fresh hosannas, went bonkers on Friday and brought in more than $23 million. That should push it well over $60 million for the weekend.
At the same time kids, families and cinephiles are rushing to see "WALL-E" though, bang-bang action crowds are mobbing "Wanted," which also drew big critical hurrahs (me too, again). It made somewhere around $18 million Friday and should end up with more than $50 million for the weekend, far exceeding its expected $35 million opening.
If you make good movies, they will come. Unless those movies have to do with Iraq, politics, the economy or anything too close to reality to be comfortable.
The way to deal with serious issues, apparently, is to have a cutesie robot deliver the message. Hey, whatever works.
Hollywood's off-color vision
OK, here's a depressing reality. Tomorrow I have a story running on young, lesser-known actors and actresses on the brink of success and stardom in Hollywood.
I couldn't find more than one minority to include in the group, and he was a stretch. There were at least five other white actor/actresses I could easily have included.
Understand, this has nothing to do with talent and everything to do with opportunity. Every one of the actors I mention has multiple projects lined up that promise either critical or commercial success, often both.
I could not find one young Hispanic or black actor who was being offered such roles. I checked out who Spike Lee is working with, looked at Denzel's projects, talked to minority colleagues. No luck.
The most promising young black actress I've seen in a while was Jurnee Smollett from "The Great Debaters." Checking out her IMDB profile, she has had one appearance on "Grey's Anatomy" post-"Debaters." That's it. No other movie projects listed at all.
In comparison, Channing Tatum has films lined up working with Lasse Hallstrom, Michael Mann and Oliver Stone, among others.
Now Tatum seems to be a talented young guy, but no way should he be drowning in opportunities while Smolett's looking for work.
Something's off here, and it's the same thing that's been off for Hollywood's (and America's) entire history. Despite the rise in minority numbers in the US, the faces we see on screens remain blindingly white.
Yes, I'm always somewhat aware of this, and yes, the reasons are as complex as they are frustrating. But every once in a while the inequity of the American image leaps out and bothers the heck out of me. This was one of those times.
The 300 club, year to year
The good news for Hollywood: "Iron Man" will fly past the $300 million mark this weekend, the first film to do so in 2008.
The bad news for Hollywood? By this time last year three movies -- "Spider-Man 3" ($336.5 million), "Shrek the Third" ($322.7 million), and "Pirates of the Caribbean: At World's End" ($309.4 million) -- had opened.
Right now the only other film out that should reach the 300 club is "Indiana Jones." Nothing else is even threatening the 200 mark (which is the same as last year).
So when it comes to mega-players, Tinsel Town is one down. And that's even with ticket prices up.
By the way, last year saw a total of four $300 million movies, with the July 4 opening of "Transformers." Look for this year's July 4 opening, "Hancock," to be the third 300 player of 2008.
Freebie and what?
They only share one brief scene, I believe, but the most noteworthy thing about "Get Smart" this week may be that it reunites the stars of "Freebie and the Bean."
What, you may ask (especially if you're under the age of 40), is "Freebie and the Bean"?
"F&B" was a film starring "Smart" supporting actors Alan Arkin and James Caan back in 1974, when they were at the peak of their popularity. Actually, it probably was the peak of their popularity.
It was a buddy cop flick and its crude mix of car crashes, dumb humor and general noise had critics howling in pain and horror even as it filled movie houses.
I haven't seen it in decades, but I'm sure these days it would play like "Citizen Kane" alongside something like "The Love Guru." Still, at the time it was seen as the beginning of the end for intelligent films when two fine young actors would get involved in such an obvious piece of trash. Remember, you're talking stars of "The Godfather" and "Catch-22" here.
And the movie's success did likely grease the wheels for "The Blues Brothers," the career of Michael Bay and the downfall of civilization, not to mention every subsequent odd couple cop movie, which means literally thousands of flicks.
All of which has pretty much been forgotten by now.
Arkin regained his status, Caan never quite recovered, but that had more to do with his demanding personality. "Freebie" became one of those influential films nobody can remember, mainly thanks to the advent of "Jaws" and "Star Wars," two other thanks-for-that films which altered everything about the business.
But every time you see an over-the-top dumb-bunny cop buddy car chase flick, you're seeing a bit of "Freebie and the Bean."
In truth, Caan and Arkin may have reunited in other films since. But seeing them in "Get Smart" brought back the memories. For better or worse -- OK, probably worse -- they once changed the path of American cinema together.
Brace yourself for "Weeds: The Movie"
TV or not TV?
That is the question most likely running through the heads of many Hollywood producers this week.
Three weeks back the number one film at the box office was "Sex and the City," a TV show turned into a movie. Last week's top film was "The Incredible Hulk," a TV show turned into a movie.
And chances are this week's top flick will be "Get Smart," a TV show turned into a movie.
This is no fluke. Over the past five years Hollywood has been turning more and more to TV shows for big screen product with increasing success.
Sure there's a long history of adapted bombs, from "McHale's Navy" to "The Mod Squad" to "Bewitched." But lately that seems to be changing.
Five years ago, in 2003, only one TV adaptation was among the year's top 15 films. Incredibly, it was the first version of "The Hulk." Then in 2004 there were no TV adaptations in the top 15.
But in 2005 "Batman Begins" made the cut. And in 2006 "Superman Returns" and "Mission: Impossible III" were in the top 15.
By last year, 2007, three TV adaptations were in the top 15: "Transformers," "Alvin and the Chipmunks" and "The Simpsons Movie."
Can a film version of "Hawaii Five-O" be far off?
Let's hope so. But this summer still has another Batman movie, "The Dark Knight," coming, as well as "The X-Files: I Want to Believe" on the way. And don't forget "High School Musical 3" in October.
Well, OK, forget it if you want to. But this is not going away.
For now most of the big successes -- like most of the big successes in all of moviedom -- have been special effects, cartoony adaptations, many of which were themselves based on comic characters.
But "Sex and the City" may have broken a barrier this year. Appealing to a niche audience that doesn't usually flock to movie houses -- fashion-conscious post-feminist women -- it was an altogether odd bird.
Not only did it pursue an unorthodox audience, it also came out scant years after the show was retired, but while it was still in heavy syndication. Beyond that, it simply extended the show's storylines.
And, most importantly, it was a cable show.
Most successful TV adaptations have drawn on either prime time or syndicated shows (exceptions: "Borat" and "South Park"). "Sex and the City" evolved out of modern cable consciousness. And opening that door wider could prove a bonanza to producers in search of material.
Obviously the idea of a "Sopranos" movie has been bandied about for years now. And if ever a TV show deserved to be brought to the big screen it is HBO's remarkable "Deadwood." Both shows are now retired but easily revived with all major stars intact.
Just as interesting, though, is the idea of taking series that failed but had the essential goods for a great movie.
The FX show "Dirt," which got clobbered to death by the writer's strike, would make for a juicy and wicked transfer. Or TNT's popular "The Closer." And a movie version of "Battlestar Galactica" seems downright inevitable.
And here's the key for producers: These are TV shows. They're cheap to make. They'd adapt to the big screen for dimes against the dollars of big, start-from-scratch movie star vehicles which have no built-in audience.
TV or not TV? Honestly, there is no question.
Tim Russert: When death becomes overkill
Hey, didja hear Tim Russert died?
I can honestly say that in 25 years of covering entertainment and media I've never seen anything as shamefully overdone as NBC and MSNBC's coverage of the death of one of our finest journalists.
The constant overkill coverage -- really, how much has there been to actually say? -- for what is now three days is precisely the wrong sort of tribute to pay to a journalist as intelligent as Russert was.
The day-of coverage was heavy, but understandable. By Saturday things were out of hand. At 10 p.m. Matt Lauer was still reporting that Russert had indeed died and beating the particulars to death. Now Sunday has become Tim Russert day on MSNBC.
I'm sorry, but was this man a head of state? Is his death so much more important than the death of every other man who passed away Friday?
Yes, it's summer and nothing's happening on TV. Yes, replaying footage of Russert costs nothing. Yes, milking the tie-in to Father's Day is precisely the kind of cheap gimmick producers are always looking for.
But come on, let the poor guy rest in peace.
There's a presidential race going on. There's a war in Iraq. The earth is slowly gagging to death on car fumes, there's a worldwide food shortage and economic disaster is around every corner.
These are the types of stories a guy like Russert would assumedly have wanted to see covered on TV over the past three days. Not nonstop grieving for a journalist.
NBC has spent three days trying to turn Tim Russert into Anna Nicole Smith to consistently ugly, maudlin effect and all this wailing has done is cheapen the man's many accomplishments.
True, the argument can be made that vultures also become carrion eventually, and what goes around comes around. But Russert seemed better than his fellow journalistic birds of prey, less bloodthirsty and hysterical.
Which is precisely why this hysterical handwringing is so inappropriate. Sorry, Tim; you deserved better. We all do.
Eastwood rumor is probably-maybe-sort-of-absolutely true
Though there's still no official-official word, it appears Clint Eastwood is indeed shooting "Gran Torino" here this summer, and that it will be released in December.
It will not, however, be a Dirty Harry movie; instead it stars Eastwood as a Korean War vet who becomes close with a family of Asian immigrants.
This comes via Anne Thompson's blog, as well as a business press release received today from a company that says it will be working with Eastwood here.
If the state of Michigan has announced all this, well, they forgot to tell the Detroit newspapers' only film critic about it, which wouldn't be surprising, but it is a bit frustrating.
Also rumored to be shooting here soon is "Whip It," with Drew Barrymore directing Ellen Page in a roller derby movie. Hey, but that's just a some-guy-told-me deal at this point.
The super-odd thing about "Gran Torino," though, is it means Eastwood would be releasing a movie in November ("The Changeling" with Angelina Jolie) and December (in time for Oscar consideration).
That is major abnormal, but then it's Clint, and he can pretty much do anything he wants.
Pandaring to the masses
Adam Sandler and the world's Panda population are happy. Fashionable women of a certain age, not so much.
"Kung Fu Panda" topped my $55 million prediction with a box office turnout of $60 million its first weekend. Kids and parents were obviously starving for a film.
Meanwhile I said Sandler's "Zohan" had to top $30 million for his comfort level; it brought home $40 million, so the "Sandman" is still in play.
"Sex and the City," though, took a major nosedive, falling 62 percent from last weekend to this one, bringing in $21 million. Again, don't feel too bad for the ladies, it still did far better than most folks expected and has made $99 million so far. But it obviously appeals to a niche audience that floods theaters and then recedes quickly.
In fact, "Sex" actually lost out to creaky old "Indiana Jones" this weekend as that chestnut pulled in $22 million (final numbers due Mondey may show the two in a dead heat). That lifts Indy's total to $253 million, which means it could squeak into the $300 mil club when all is said and done. Or not.
Next week it's a battle between two potential blockbusters, either one of which might also be a potential bomb: "The Happening" vs. "The Incredible Hulk."
