The Wolverine gets two halfway decent trailers...

After two days of ridiculous teasing in the form of "tweasers" and the like, Fox finally dropped the actual trailer, perhaps rewarding movie nerds for their patience with two trailers, a domestic cut and a longer, slightly superior international one.  This doesn't look like it's going to reinvent the comic book movie, but it looks like a halfway decent, if highly generic, action star-vehicle.  The train scene looks pretty neat and having this take place after X-Men: The Last Stand allows for a token amount of suspense, although even a seemingly de-powered Wolverine isn't going to die at the end of a movie titled The Wolverine.  Anyway, James Mangold's The Wolverine opens on July 26th.  As always, we'll see.

Scott Mendelson

The Wolverine gets two hilariously terrible posters...

Well if you're not going to make a great poster, you might as well go the other route and make a piece of marketing art so terrible that everyone will *still* be talking about it all day.  There isn't much more to say other than to point and laugh.  The trailer drops on Wednesday.  Anyway, enjoy...

Scott Mendelson

Weekend Box Office (03/24/13) part I: The Croods isn't Dreamworks' comeback because they weren't in free-fall.

What a difference three years and an deflated expectations make.  Three years ago this weekend, Dreamworks had to eat a token amount of crow when How To Train Your Dragon opened with *just* $43 million.  Coming off the $59 million debut of Monsters vs. Aliens a year prior and elevated expectations due to the "new-found" popularity of 3D, the film was written off initially as a slight disappointment with the hopes that strong reviews and word-of-mouth would keep it alive.  Of course, the film had insane legs and eventually ended up with $217 million domestic, but that's another story.  Now, coming off the somewhat disappointing Rise of the Guardians ($303 million worldwide), a series of company lay-offs, and the delaying and/or cancellation of a few projects (like Me and My Shadow), Dreamworks is now trying to sell the (estimated as of this writing) $44 million debut of The Croods as a comeback and/or a massive win for the company.  But not only is this not a comeback, but I would argue that Dreamworks doesn't have anywhere to come back from and that the perception of their failing after a single disappointing film is indicative of the fall-out of our obsession with rise/fall narratives where they don't belong.

Review: A Good Day to Die Hard (2013) dies badly.

A Good Day to Die Hard

2013
97 minutes
rated R

by Scott Mendelson 

For a retrospective of the entire series, go HERE.

As my father likes to say, if you don't quit while you're ahead, you'll never be ahead.  By all rights, Live Free or Die Hard (trailer 01) should have been terrible.  It came twelve years after the previous installment, was helmed by the likes of Len Wiseman (a man who managed to make a movie about vampires fighting werewolves boring), ended up with a PG-13, and held back from the press for as long as humanly possible.  Yet, thanks to strong action sequences and a story very much concerned with John McClane coming to terms with his metaphorical death (IE - irrelevance), the fourth entry was just good enough to justify its existence.  But the McClane luck has officially run out.  A Good Day to Die Hard is a terrible film, one of the very worst theatrical movies I have ever seen.  It's willfully stupid, lacking in basic character chemistry and narrative discipline, officially turning John McClane into a borderline insane anti-social lunatic.  It has nothing worth recommending.  A Good Day to Die Hard is basically the movie we all thought we were getting six years ago.

Brandon Peters retrospective reviews: Die Hard 5 (2013)

I was supposed to attend Tuesday's A Good Day to Die Hard screening, with the intent of having a review up Wednesday afternoon.  Alas, my wife got sick (nothing uber-serious), so I still haven't seen the film.  But thankfully Brandon Peters was kind enough to whip up a review in my absence.  I'm intending on seeing the film this weekend and will try to have a review of sorts up then, but in the meantime, let's let Brandon Peters give us his thoughts on the fifth and (for now) final Die Hard adventure...

A Good Day to Die Hard

2013

Director:  John Moore

Starring:  Bruce Willis, Jai Courtney, Sebastian Koch, Yuliya Snigir, Radivoje Bukvic, Mary Elizabeth Winstead, Cole Hauser

Rated R

97 minutes

We’re not a hugging family.

                        ~John “Jack” McClane Jr

Let’s start out like this. 

 From the director of Max Payne, The Flight of the Phoenix remake and The Omen remake.

From the writer of X-Men Origins: Wolverine, Hitman and Swordfish.

I know.  How can you contain your excitement?

With that on the table, it should come as no surprise that A Good Day To Die Hard clocks in as an absolute disaster and outright failure.  That this is a film in the beloved Die Hard franchise makes it hard to stomach.  Bruce Willis shows up for a paycheck in film that seemingly goes out of its way to make the viewer dislike it.

Brandon Peters's Die Hard Rankings: Rank Harder

So as always, we do the “cool” thing and rank the films in the series from least to best.  I am going to say while there is a last place, all the Die Hards are well worth your time if you've never seen them.  Its quite easy to just sink into any one of these and enjoy the adventure.  The series features one of the most likable and charismatic leads you’ll find in any franchise, let alone action movie.  That alone makes me excited for any Die Hard film.  My lone wish for the future of the franchise would be one more McTiernan directed film, but I don’t believe that’ll happen.  If this next film is on par with the last one, I’ll be fine.  I’m not expecting it to be the best, just a fun, unique adventure featuring John McClane.

Brandon Peters retrospective review: Die Hard 4 (2007)

It's time for another comprehensive franchise discussion from Brandon Peters, this time centering around the February 14th release of A Good Day to Die Hard. As such, the fourth film on the list is obviously Live Free or Die Hard. The film has a rocky history and a rocky reputation, but I agree with most of Brandon's points below (my original review from 2007).  About that jet scene?  Here's a tip: Just skip it.  Hit the DVD skip button once and the film still flows 100% and works a good 10% better overall.  I'll leave the floor to Brandon once again...

Live Free Or Die Hard

2007

Director: Len Wiseman

Starring: Bruce Willis, Justin Long, Timothy Olymphant(astic), Maggie Q, Mary Elizabeth Winstead, Kevin Smith, Cliff Curtis

Rated PG-13 (more appropriately R-13)

What, like you a big fan of the Fett?

No, I was always more a Star Wars guy.

                        ~WAR10CK to McClane

It took twelve years for John McClane to return to the theaters around the world.  The franchise seemed a tad like it was complete.  No, With A Vengeance didn't spell out an end, but it just felt satisfactory and I think everyone kind of assumed it was the last hurrah.  Now, that didn't stop murmurs of a Die Hard 4 from popping up every so often.  Following the opening of Armageddon in 1998 came the first wind.  Willis and Armageddon co-star Ben Affleck were going to team up for it.  Affleck would play McClane’s son Jack and the film would take a minimalist “no weapons” approach taking place in the jungle. This never panned out.  Throughout the years the rumors would be there and most of them somehow including a Lucy McClane rescue.  Maybe inspired by Stallone’s revisiting of Rocky Balboa, Fox and Willis were motivated to finally get this off the ground.

Brandon Peters retrospective review: Die Hard 3 (1995).

It's time for another comprehensive franchise discussion from Brandon Peters, this time centering around the February 14th release of A Good Day to Die Hard.  As such, the third film on the list is obviously Die Hard: With A Vengeance.  Brandon, myself, and the OutNow Podcast crew did a commentary for this picture a few weeks back which just posted yesterday, so if you want a truly exhaustive and time-consuming look at the film, double-dip accordingly.  But I will say that the film's esteem has grown very much over the last 18 years, so the point where it's no longer scandalous to admit that you like it as much or more than the original.  In that sense, it's the Indiana Jones and the Last Crusade of the series.  I'll leave the floor to Brandon once again...

DIE HARD WITH A VENGEANCE

1995

Director:  John McTiernan

Starring:  Bruce Willis, Samuel L. Jackson, Jeremy Irons, Graham Greene, Colleen Camp, Larry Bryggman, Sam Phillips, Kevin Chamberlin

Rated R

Wait a minute. You mean to tell me I'm in this shit 'cause some white cop threw some white asshole's brother off a roof?

                        ~Zeus Carver

After a five year hiatus, Die Hard roars back…with a vengeance (*sigh* I tried, but I couldn’t resist).  And that’s literally the title.  John McTiernan resumes directorial duties and returns the franchise to the fresh original and fun that infused the original entry.  The film was a big success and went on to become the highest grossing in the series and the highest grossing film worldwide in 1995.  Instead of following the sort of “Die Hard formula”, McTiernan opens it up instead of keeping it closed in.  New York City becomes John McClane’s playground this time around.  Early on, the plans were for it to either happen on a cruise ship (that script later became Speed 2: Cruise Control) or the Los Angeles subway system.  Both ideas were scrapped for a hot script called Simon Says.  Simon Says had already been turned to down by the Lethal Weapon franchise for their third entry.  McClane was added and the script was infused with Die Hard and became Die Hard: New York.  Later as we know, the title became Die Hard: With a Vengeance.

Brandon Peters retrospective review: Die Hard 2 (1990).

It's time for another comprehensive franchise discussion from Brandon Peters, this time centering around the February 14th release of A Good Day to Die Hard.  As such, the second film on the list is obviously Die Hard 2: Die Harder.  For what it's worth, I like the film a bit more than Brandon does, although I can't disagree with many of the points he makes below.  In my favor is the fact that Roger Ebert gave it a rave review and considers it the best of the franchise.  To my discredit is the fact that my wife, devoted fan of Batman & Robin and White Chicks, also considers it the best film of the franchise.  And yes, I did actually watch this film on an airplane two years ago.  That was pretty amazing and a sign of how weird our technology has become...  Anyway, I'll leave the floor to Brandon once again...

DIE HARD 2: DIE HARDER

1990

Director: Renny Harlin

Starring: Bruce Willis, William Sadler, Dennis Franz, Bonnie Bedelia, William Atherton, Fred Thompson, Franco Nero, John Amos, Art Evans

Rated R

Oh man, I can't fucking believe this. Another basement, another elevator. How can the same shit happen to the same guy twice?

                        ~John McClane

John McClane’s second adventure is a fun, but soulless action romp that feels more like a Die Hard knock off than a piece of the series of which it is a part of.  John McClane and the roped in characters from the first film are the things barely keeping it from being just another Die Hard rip off.  The film lacks the direction, heart and game-changing attributes the kept the first one fresh exciting and fun to revisit.  The second Die Hard bets on your nostalgic feelings of the first film with characters and sticking with a formula and beats that made the first film so great.  Just because the location has upped the ante, doesn't mean the film is breaking new ground or advancing.  Instead of advancing, it feels like running in place but with less passion and creativity than the first one.

There can only be two! A possible future where Disney and Warner Bros. dominate franchise tent-pole film making...

The news that has broken over the last couple days is not a little depressing.  While the Seven Samurai-esque Star Wars stand-alone film to be helmed by Zack Snyder was quickly denied, we have gotten word for Disney that there would indeed be stand-alone Star Wars films.  The bad news?  So far, they seem to be entirely centered around well-established characters from the original trilogy.  You want a stand-alone prequel involving Yoda?  Or how about films centered around a young Boba Fett or a young(er) Han Solo?  If so, you're going to be pretty happy over the next half-decade or so.  But if you thought that Disney was buying the Star Wars franchise to somewhat expand its universe rather than merely give us unneeded origins and/or backstories for the very characters we already know a good deal about, well this news won't make you happy.  In fact it reeks of the kind of lazy corporate thinking that gives entertainment corporations a bad name.  It's frankly the first bit of news that might make one thing that maybe Disney, which in general has been relatively good to the properties they have purchased over the years (Muppets, Marvel, etc.) might not be the perfect owner of Lucasfilm that we all thought.

Why an R-rating for A Good Day To Die Hard matters...

Bruce Willis let it be known to Harry Knowles late Friday night (and Fox confirmed sometime later) that A Good Day To Die Hard will be opening on February 14th, 2013 with an R-rating.  That's somewhat of a surprise, since Live Free Or Die Hard infamously went out as a PG-13 and still ended up as the biggest domestic grosser of the series.  On the other hand, it still earned less worldwide than Die Hard: With a Vengeance way back in 1995 and is actually the lowest-grossing entry in the series when adjusted for inflation, so it stands to reason that the PG-13 didn't make a difference either way.  Of course, cutting down a movie for a PG-13 to get the kids and then opening it on the same weekend as a Pixar movie is somewhat stupid, but I digress.  Of course, the fact that the film is going to be R-rated doesn't necessarily mean it's going to be good.  Heck, it may not mean anything other than John McClane saying "fuck" more than once amid otherwise bloodless (or hastily CGI-inserted bloody) violence.  From the sound of Willis's statement, it seems that Fox wasn't aiming for an R-rated movie, but that they are merely willing to accept the MPAA's position.  This is itself is encouraging and possibly a sign of a 'new day' for mainstream studio films.  

Press Release: A GOOD DAY TO DIE HARD to go IMAX.

TWENTIETH CENTURY FOX’S A GOOD DAY TO DIE HARD

TO OPEN IN IMAX^® THEATRES WORLDWIDE FEBRUARY 2013

LOS ANGELES – Dec. 14, 2012 – IMAX Corporation (NYSE:IMAX; TSX:IMX) today announced that A Good Day to Die Hard, the fifth installment in Twentieth Century Fox’s enduring action-thriller series starring Bruce Willis, will be digitally re-mastered into the immersive IMAX^®  format. The film will be released in IMAX^® theatres internationally starting Feb. 7 and domestically beginning Feb. 14. This is the first IMAX installment of the Die Hard film franchise.

"The exhilarating action sequences that are the hallmark of the Die Hard franchise, as well as its global setting, make it a perfect fit for The IMAX Experience®,” said Greg Foster, Chairman and President of IMAX Filmed Entertainment. “We’re thrilled to partner again with the great team at Fox and for audiences worldwide to experience this franchise in IMAX for the first time.”

The IMAX release of A Good Day to Die Hard will be digitally re-mastered into the image and sound quality of The IMAX Experience^® with proprietary IMAX DMR^® (Digital Re-mastering) technology. The crystal-clear images, coupled with IMAX’s customized theatre geometry and powerful digital audio, create a unique environment that will make audiences feel as if they are in the movie.

About A Good Day to Die Hard

John McClane goes global. For the first time, the New York City cop, played by Bruce Willis, finds himself on an international stage – as a fish out of water in Moscow. The film introduces McClane’s estranged son Jack, an apple who hasn’t fallen far from the tree, and who may even be more of a hard-ass than his father. John and Jack must put aside their personal and professional differences, and work together to keep each other alive … and stop the Moscow underworld from controlling nuclear weapons.

About IMAX Corporation

IMAX, an innovator in entertainment technology, combines proprietary software, architecture and equipment to create experiences that take you beyond the edge of your seat to a world you’ve never imagined. Top filmmakers and studios are utilizing IMAX theatres to connect with audiences in extraordinary ways, and, as such, IMAX’s network is among the most important and successful theatrical distribution platforms for major event films around the globe.

IMAX is headquartered in New York, Toronto and Los Angeles, with offices in London, Tokyo, Shanghai and Beijing.  As of Sept. 30, 2012, there were 689 IMAX theatres (556 commercial multiplex, 20 commercial destination and 113 institutional) in 52 countries.

IMAX®, IMAX® 3D, IMAX DMR®, Experience It In IMAX®, An IMAX 3D Experience®, The IMAX Experience® and IMAX Is Believing® are trademarks of IMAX Corporation. More information about the Company can be found at www.imax.com. You may also connect with IMAX on Facebook (www.facebook.com/imax), Twitter (www.twitter.com/imax) and YouTube (www.youtube.com/imaxmovies).

Fox takes its shot at the animation crown with an Epic trailer.

Putting aside the unfortunate "comic relief" of Aziz Ansari's wisecracking slug, this looks quite promising.  The film looks gorgeous and there does seem to be an attempt to tell a mostly serious adventure story.  I missed the earlier, nearly wordless teaser from awhile back, but both previews use Snow Patrol's "What If the Storm Ends?" to rather powerful effect, similar to how well 20th Century Fox used Creed's "Higher" for their Titan A.E. campaign thirteen years ago.  I could do with a little less celebrity casting (Christoph Waltz is distracting as the heavy), but a female protagonist in a film like this is always a plus. Also a plus: Danny Elfman is doing the score.  What's curious is how much this feels like a Dreamworks film, in a good way of course.  For years every wise-cracking animal cartoon was accused of ripping off Dreamworks even as DWA made but a single such movie, Over the Hedge (arguably the best such film in that sub-genre), which came out right at the same time as the likes of Open Season, Barnyard: The Original Party Animals, and The Ant Bully.  This feels more like an attempt to capture the, well, epic adventure found in the Rise of the Guardians, How to Train Your Dragon, the Kung Fu Panda series, and Puss In Boots.  Still, say what you will about the diminishing creative returns for the Ice Age series, Rio was a genuinely entertaining and arguably original animated feature.  As I said a few weeks ago, the holes in Pixar's armor has allowed its competitors to come out in full force.  This seems to be Fox taking its best shot.  Epic opens May 24th, 2013.  As always, we'll see.

Scott Mendelson        

Review: Steven Spielberg's Lincoln (2012) is a mostly engrossing, richly moral inside-baseball political drama.

Lincoln
2012
145 minutes
rated PG-13

by Scott Mendelson

In terms of long-gestating passion projects, Steven Spielberg's Lincoln (trailer/background) is much closer to Tim Burton's Sweeney Todd than Martin Scorsese's Gangs of New York.  In what may qualify as irony, the film is slightly undone mostly by its perceived duty to be incredibly important.  Yes, the film is about an very important person (Abraham Lincoln) during what may arguably be the most important portion of his life (his month-long battle to bring about a constitutional end to slavery), but Spielberg's refreshingly micro-targeted biopic is at its best when it is lightest on its feet, telling what almost amounts to a political caper set at the end of the Civil War. Tony Kushner's literate and thoughtful screenplay (based on a portion of Doris Kearns Goodwin's A Team of Rivals) stages what amounts to a 1860s-set series arc from The West Wing, as a wise president blessed with verbal diarrhea articulates grand ideas and espouses telling anecdotes while those on his staff do the political dirty work to make great things happen. As a look into how politics worked in the mid-1800s, and of course how it still works today, it's surprisingly funny and endlessly compelling.  But the need to create a defining portrait of our sixteenth president creates both needlessly solemn subplots and some narrative repetition that prevents true greatness.    

The Wolverine gets a stylized teaser poster.

Thanks to Slashfilm for the 'get'.  This is a nice piece of stylized comic book art for what is looking to be a potentially interesting comic book film.  We all know that the film will take place *after* the X-Men series and we know that James Mangold seems to be trying to craft a character study first/action film second picture that just happens to be a comic book spin-off.  Of course, there is a chance that the melodrama-in-Japan narrative will turn out being a bit silly.  I can't speak to the source material, but the episode of the otherwise superb Wolverine and the X-Men that centered around Logan's adventures in Japan is hands-down the worst episode of the 26-episode run (the creators openly make fun of it on the commentary).  Still, whether or not the world needs yet another 'Let's give Logan his own film!' entry, it does seem that the cylinders are firing a bit hotter this time around.  At the very least, it'll give us another fantastic video game spin-off.  As for when we'll see a trailer, assuming Fox actually attaches it to a Fox release, the most likely option is to hold off until the February 14th debut of A Good Day to Die Hard unless Fox can cut a green-band trailer that would be appropriate in front of Life of Pi in three weeks.  The Wolverine, as the poster states, comes out July 26th, 2013.  As always, we'll see.

Scott Mendelson

A chance to shatter a glass ceiling: Fox should hire Jane Goldman to direct X-Men: Days of Future Past.

I'm going to make this as brief as I can.  As most of you know, the industry was somewhat stunned this afternoon when it was announced that Matthew Vaughn was stepping down from directing X-Men: Days of Future Past (IE - X-Men: First Class 2).  The film is set to roll in early 2013 which means Fox will be scrambling for a replacement director.  The rumor mill suggests that none other than Bryan Singer is being lured back to the director's chair for the franchise that he started twelve years ago.  Jack and the Giant Slayer feels like a dud and Superman Returns nearly killed an iconic franchise.  You know my thoughts on directors returning to franchises they walked away from long ago after a string of disappointments and you can know admit that I was right about Ridley Scott and Prometheus.  I have another idea for who should helm the sequel.  She is the co-writer of the last X-Men First Class and this upcoming sequel and she is a frequent collaborator with Mr. Vaughn having co-written nearly all of his projects since Stardust back in 2007 while also writing The Woman In Black just this year.  If you want someone who is comfortable in the world established by Bryan Singer while also arguably offering a fresh perspective to a now-12 year old series, she's an obvious bet.  That Jane Goldman is a "she" is a bonus.

Review: Taken 2 (2012) cuts its nose to spite its face.

Taken 2

2012

92 minutes

rated PG-13

by Scott Mendelson

Despite my best efforts, I actually saw Taken 2 last night.  Long-story short, I had time to see a film late last night and everything else I wanted to see either had inconvenient showtimes (The Perks of Being A Wallflower), was something my wife wanted to see (Sinister, Pitch Perfect), or was something that my daughter may eventually decide she wants to see after all (Frankenweenie).  And yes, as expected, Taken 2 was indeed a bad movie.  But it was bad in a rather surprising way.  First of all, unlike the lean, mean, and rather cold-hearted original, this sequel not only was edited to achieve a PG-13 in a way the first film was not (the differences in the first film's international R-rated cut and the PG-13 version were minimal), but it was pitched to a younger audience.  Gone were the moments of cruelty or out-and-out brutality.  Gone was the unrelenting determination of Liam Neeson's bad-ass, willing to shoot innocent bystanders and threaten the family of a crooked cop, replaced by a painfully generic "I have to save my wife from bad guys and mostly attack in pure self-defense or defense of others".  With a subplot involving Maggie Grace's driving test, which arguably harkens back to the much-loathed "Jeff Goldblum's daughter proves she shouldn't have been cut from the gymnastic team' gag in The Lost World, and an emphasis on reconciling a dysfunctional nuclear family, the film feels pitched to a weirdly conformist and/or younger audience.

John Gosling previews the week's new releases (08/03/12).

Staring this week, Mendelson's Memos is proud and pleased to be presenting weekly new release previews from John Gosling.  Mr. Gosling is a fellow box office nerd who does a fine weekly write-up from www.boxofficevoodoo.com. He has generously agreed to give this site his obscenely detailed previews of each of the week's major new releases. The essay below will be less about box office and more about historical context for the films being released. Each weekly piece will hopefully go up sometime between Wednesday night and Thursday night, depending on our respective schedules.  Feel free to chime in below and if you feel like offering your box office predictions, this would be the place to do it.  Gosling's contact information will be at the bottom of this piece.  Enjoy...

"Death doesn't like to be cheated." Why the Ice Age series is the Final Destination of animated franchises:

For those who wonder why I go out of my way to praise the Dreamworks Animation library, even the Madagascar films, you might want to sample Ice Age 4: Continental Drift. I'm not going to do a full review, but it's pretty terrible, a paint-by-numbers narrative (overprotective dads, boy-crazy teenage girls, damsels-in-distress, etc.) that makes Madagscar 3: Europe's Most Wanted look like The Incredibles. With another overseas haul over $225 million before the film even touches US shores, there is a good chance that the series will actually produce more sequels than The Land Before Time (13 chapters, natch). I made a comment yesterday, sight as-of-yet-unseen, that the Ice Age series was basically the Final Destination series of animation. In that I meant that both the first Ice Age and the first Final Destination films were real movies, they were thoughtful, character-driven dramas that were surprisingly somber and meditative about their core subject: death. Final Destination 2-5 and Ice Age 2-4 may have been cartoon-ish and paper-thin crowd-pleasing entertainments, but the first installments had depth, meaning, and genuine emotional engagement.  They were real films.

Good movie news in 2012: the return of R-rated movies.

Normally, I wouldn't be one to consider Abraham Lincoln: Vampire Hunter (which to be fair I have not yet seen) as a shining example of a positive trend in movie-going.  But the historical fiction action-thriller may be many things, but one thing it is not is PG-13.  Oh no, it is a mid-summer major studio spectacle that is going out into 3,000+ theaters with an honest-to-goodness R.  Said rating is officially for "violence throughout and brief sexuality".  Whether or not the film could have been edited down to a PG-13 is arguably a moot point.  20th Century Fox spent $70 million (a refreshingly reasonable sum) on a major summer production that was conceived and produced with the intent that it would indeed be R-rated.  And most shockingly, it was not even the only R-rated wide release last weekend, as Focus Features unspooled Seeking Friends at the End of the World in 1,400 theaters.  I've written/ranted for years about how the R-rating became an endangered species for major-studio releases due to the 2001 FEC regulations regarding the marketing of R-rated films, but the tide does seem to be changing over the last couple years.  And it's reached a glorious peak at this very moment, with an avalanche of R-rated wide releases filling up the multiplexes.