Weekend Box Office (02-10-13): Identity Thief cements Melissa McCarthy's stardom while Side Effects clarifies Channing Tatum's box office drawing power.

Melissa McCarthy is officially a comedy mega-star.  There can be little dispute of that after this weekend.  Identity Thief topped the box office this weekend with an astonishing $36.5 million and I'm at a loss to think of any reasons it would do so well aside from Ms. McCarthy.  Jason Bateman is a terrific actor and a fine foil, but he's box office poison as a lead (The Switch opened with $8.4 million, Extract opened to $4.3 million, and The Change-Up debuted with $13 million).  The film's simple and self-explanatory title, along with the clever expository tagline ("She's having the time of his life.") surely helped, as did the lack of any big comedies in the current marketplace.  Parental Guidance and This Is Forty are both doing stealthy strong business, with $74 million and $67 million thus far respectively, but this is the first big star comic vehicle in awhile and it delivered in spades.

This was McCarthy's first big test of her alleged stardom.  Identity Thief was completely sold on McCarthy's new-found stardom.  The core imagery was basically her face on the poster, slipping a Slurpee next to a befuddled Jason Bateman. This is a much larger debut than Bridesmaids, the film which catapulted her to fame and proverbial glory back in May, 2011.  This is among the ten-best R-rated comedy debuts ever and the fifth-best for a non-sequel.  Heck, it opened bigger than the PG-13 Couples Retreat, which had a proverbial whos-who of comedy players (Vince Vaughn, Jason Bateman, Jon Favreau, Malin Akerman, Kristin Davis, and Kristen Bell) and managed a $34 million debut back in October 2009. Fox has to be thrilled at the moment, knowing that they have a plausible gold-mine in the Melissa McCarthy/Sandra Bullock action-comedy The Heat waiting in the wings for June of this summer.

Daniel Craig doesn't deserve a raise for The Girl Who Played With Fire because Daniel Craig is not a box office draw...

This one is pretty simple.  Daniel Craig allegedly (Hollywood Reporter) wants a raise for his appearance in Sony's planned The Girl Who Played With Fire.  Sony is refusing and may even be trying to wrangle a pay cut.  Sony is allegedly digging its heels out of the desire to cut costs, as the first film grossed $232 million worldwide yet still barely broken even due to its frankly absurd $90 million budget.  Had the film cost a more reasonable $60-$70 million, it would have been quite profitable for Sony.  But it didn't so it wasn't.  If we must see the two other chapters in the original series, then they damn-well shouldn't cost nearly $100 million apiece. You could argue that Rooney Mara is an essential component of any sequel and should be hired even at a token higher cost this time around.  But everyone else involved is expendable.  Daniel Craig, whose character was as bland a male lead as you can ask for, is not a box office draw, period. If Sony sees fit to write out his journalist protagonist, I imagine it won't affect the film's financial fortunes one iota.  Daniel Craig is one of countless actors who do just fine in a marquee role or a popular franchise but flounder elsewhere.  If Daniel Craig wants a raise from Sony, he is welcome to ask for one for the next James Bond film.   But outside of the 007 series, Daniel Craig isn't a box office draw, period.

Make war, not love. Why do we mock actors who romance while lionizing those who do violence?

It's worth noting the deluge of praise that has greeted Matthew McConaughy over the last 18 months as he's basically cast off the high-profile romantic comedies of the last decade in favor of theoretically more serious work.  When Matthew McConaughy appeared in mainstream romantic comedies, he was a sell-out movie star, not a real actor.  Regardless of whether he was actually effective in said films (Yes - How to Lose A Guy In Ten Days and Ghosts of Girlfriends Past; No - The Wedding Planner, Failure To Launch, and  Fool's Gold), the idea that McConaughy was headlining relatively popular and often profitable entertainments was considered a net loss because he was using his talents in a disreputable genre.  But now that he's appearing in legal thrillers (The Lincoln Lawyer), male-centric dramas (Magic Mike), and ultra-violent crime pictures (Killer Joe), *now* he's being proclaimed as a real actor worthy of discussion. In short, McConaughy made films that were embraced by mostly female audiences and was derided for it.  Yet when he moved into male-centric genres, he's suddenly a respectable actor turning over a new leaf.

So, why isn't The Girl With the Dragon Tattoo a hit yet? Oh right...

This was posted as a comment elsewhere, but it touches on something I wanted to talk about, so I'm sharing it here too...
So as of last week, David Fincher's The Girl With the Dragon Tattoo crossed $100 million in the US and $100 million overseas, giving the film a current worldwide cume of $211 million.  Yet, what should be a terrific result for what is currently an endangered species, an R-rated, hyper-violent/sexual adult thriller, is in fact something of a disappointment.  Why is that?  Simple, it cost too much.  It shouldn't have cost $90 million, end of story. I don't care how good or bad it is, I don't care how polished it looks or how splashy the 007 title sequence is, it was a film with a limited theatrical audience and should have been budgeted as such. The lesson over the last few years is that adult genre fare, even R-rated fare, can thrive as long as they don't cost anymore than $45 million. Contraband cost $25 million. The Town cost $40 million. The Lincoln Lawyer cost $40 million. Limitless cost $27 million. The Grey cost $25 million. The Girl With the Dragon Tattoo, a 2.5hr R-rated thriller that basically advertised that it wasn't appropriate for general moviegoers and had a limited international audience due to the fact they'd have to read subtitles just like the original, cost $90 million. Despite all of its negatives, it still grossed $100 million domestic off a $12 million Fri-Sun opening, showing genuine legs in a front-loaded marketplace even as a hyper-competitive January caused unexpected screen-bleeding.. But, because it cost $90 million, it will struggle to break even.  Sometimes, expectations be-damned, it's just about the math.

Scott Mendelson

Dear genre filmmakers - If you want your surprise reveals to be surprising, don't make the opening credits the ultimate spoiler.

SPOILER warning - this post contains third-act spoilers for a handful of recent and not-so recent thrillers, including Safe House, which just opened on Friday.

I'm not going to go into too many details about Safe House, but I will say that it's such a painfully conventional thriller that it could have been written in a Mad Libs book.  If I crack that it would have possibly been a riveting thriller in 1988, that's not entirely an insult.  In 1988, the film would have seemed a little less boiler-plate and its now-standard political cynicism wouldn't have been quite as formulaic.  Moreover, the picture likely would not have been shot with a puke-filter over the camera and wouldn't have been edited within an inch of its life, rendering its shoot-outs and fight scenes incomprehensible.  It's not especially more violent or action-packed than something like Andrew Davis's The Package (another genre entry that also somewhat deals with getting a dangerous prisoner from point A to point B), but the moments of action and violence were cleanly shot and coherently edited.  But its most frustrating element is something that has been a problem for decades.  Like so many thrillers over the last 20-30 years, a large chunk of the tension in Safe House depends on trying to uncover which of the alleged good guys may actually be a bad guy.  And like so many genre entries of late, the would-be mystery is anything but mysterious due to some inexplicably obvious casting.

Weekend Box Office (12/26/11): MI4 tops and War Horse makes strong Xmas day show as 10,000 movies get small piece of Christmas pie.

 Oh god, what a crowded and complicated weekend this was.  You had three major movies opening on Wednesday, one of which had been in IMAX release five days earlier and one had been racking up bucks all over Europe since October.  You had one major release on Friday and two biggies right on Christmas Day, plus a smattering of limited releases and wide expansions all throughout the weekend.  Topping the box office was the wide release of Mission: Impossible: Ghost Protocol (review), which earned $29 million over the Friday-to-Sunday portion, with $61.3 million between the Wedneday-Monday six day wide opening.  Combined with five days of IMAX-exclusive grosses ($17 million), and the fourth entry in the franchise has a solid $78 million all-told.  Those aren't insane numbers, especially when you consider that the original Mission: Impossible grossed a then-record $74 million in six days way back in 1996 and the next two sequels did $91 million and $57 million (the latter off a normal non-holiday weekend) in their first six days, but Paramount knew it was sacrificing opening weekend might in exchange for long-term play-ability.  It should be noted that aside from a few outliers (Interview With the Vampire, Minority Report, and War of the Worlds) and the first three Mission: Impossible films, Cruise's opening weekends generally fall in the $25 million range, whereby they usually slowly crawl to $100-130 million.  So while the the pure $29 million Fri-Sun number is a bit below the prior M:I entries, it's actually at the high end of Cruise's opening weekend scale.          

2011 year-end wrap-up part II: The Overrated.

 This is the second of several year-end wrap essays detailing the year in film.  This time, we're dealing with 'overrated' films.  Here is the hardest one to write, merely because it's simply a list pointing out why ten films you all loved are actually either not-that-great or actually pretty terrible.  Most are what I would consider 'bad movies' that are being hailed elsewhere as greats, while a few are merely mediocre movies that are inexplicably being given a critical pass in most circles.  Again, if you've been reading me this year you'll probably be able to guess a few of these.  As always, these will be in alphabetical order. 

Review: Rooney Mara shines as Lisbeth Salander in David Fincher's otherwise pointless and neutered The Girl With the Dragon Tattoo (2011) remake.

The Girl With the Dragon Tattoo
2011
160 minutes
rated R

by Scott Mendelson

The Girl With the Dragon Tattoo feels like a James Patterson novel drained of all color and pulpiness while given a somber air of alleged gravity and importance.  That is not entirely an insult, as I enjoy trashy crime fiction and the kind of thrillers Paramount used to put out with regularity in the late 1990s.  So if I tell you that this film plays like a drawn-out, overly pretentious, and ice-cold extended episode of Criminal Minds, that's not quite the insult you might make it out to be.  I rather enjoy Criminal Minds and its James Patterson meets Justice League construction.  But how I wish that this film, which is less suspenseful and (by virtue of its toned down violence) less sensational then the Swedish original, embraced its pulpy roots just a bit more.  Come what may, if I may paraphrase Ty Burr, asking David Fincher to direct this material is like asking Picasso to paint a fence.  What it earns in earnestness, it loses in pure entertainment value and outright quality.

Updated! About the Girl With the Dragon Tattoo footage from last night...

Obviously, the eight-minute preview for David Fincher's The Girl With the Dragon Tattoo is not online and probably won't be at least until after the weekend (update, it just went up on 12/02/11).  I do not know if it will be playing in theaters before theatrical prints of Straw Dogs or whether it was just something to get the film critics/pundits excited.  The footage is basically a primer for those completely unfamiliar with the franchise.  We meet the main characters, we see Christopher Plummer lay out the primary mystery, and we get a look at our heroes in action, both when on the case and on their own time.  First and foremost, let me just say that the footage looks absolutely breathtaking.  While the pallette of choice is dark (think grey skies), there is a haunting and epic feel to the film that arguably surpasses its TV-movie of the week subject matter.  But, it's also the kind of specifically shot and grey-hued film that can look bloody awful when projected incorrectly.  So unless I end up attending a press screening, I'm definitely forking out Arclight money for this one.

David Fincher's The Girl With the Dragon Tattoo remake gets a second trailer.

This is actually over a minute longer than a regulation-sized 2:30 trailer.  At 3:46, it's basically a trimmed down version of the footage that the press saw last week in front of selected press screenings of Straw Dogs or Moneyball.  As such, there isn't much new to add, other than to again remark how visually dynamic the picture looks.  This thing is chock-full of character and narrative exposition, and it's good that Sony now seems unafraid to highlight the somewhat unique title character.  Otherwise, I direct you HERE to read my thoughts on the eight-minute preview from last week.

Scott Mendelson

Why I'm unimpressed by that 'bootleg' teaser for David Fincher's The Girl With the Dragon Tattoo remake.

I didn't post this yesterday because I was under the impression that it was an illegally copied bootleg.  But now I'm hearing word that it was a PR-stunt from Sony pictures, so we'll see what develops.  Anyway, the two core problems with the teaser have nothing to do with its low quality embed.  First of all, the teaser is scored to a piece of music (Immigrants' Song, I believe), and it is merely a quick, context-less cut every time there is a beat in the music.  Quite frankly, this is freshman filmschool trailer editing plain and simple.  It may be painstaking, but there is little to no actual skill involved in merely cutting every time there is a 'beat' in a song, especially when using footage that has no dialogue and no connective tissue.  It's not a trailer so much as an extended music video, one that required much time but little artistic talent or imagination.

Rooney Mara as Elizabeth Salander in The Girl With the Dragon Tattoo.

It's no secret that I think the original Millennium Trilogy is vastly overrated, and basically a bit of (literally, it appears) made-for-TV hokum that was elevated to masterpiece status by subtitles, extra kinkiness, and a desperate desire for heroines a bit outside the mainstream. And it's also no secret that I think David Fincher's The Social Network is the most overrated film of 2010. So it is with cautious optimism at best that I await Fincher's adaptation of the first film in the series, The Girl With the Dragon Tattoo. Still, for those more interested than I, here's your first official look at Rooney Mara as the title character. It certainly is a striking transformation, but that's part of the fun of playing a part like this.

Scott Mendelson