The box office legacy of Jurassic Park, 20 years later...

It would be all too easy to detail the ways in which Steven Spielberg's Jurassic Park was a game changer in the realm of summer blockbusters and major-studio releases in general.  Its June 1993 release shattered a number of box office records and kicked off the glorious second act of Steven Spielberg's illustrious career.  But the story is more complicated than that.  Jurassic Park was a movie precisely of its time.  In some ways it did lead the charge in terms of how films were made and released.  In other ways, quite frankly, it was one of the last of its kind.  Jurassic Park is perhaps a defining example of the perfect combination of newfangled and old-school blockbuster film-making.  It represented both a preview of what was to come and the last gasp of traditional mainstream movie-making in one glorious concoction.

Scott Mendelson: On seeing Jurassic Park 20 years ago...

I'll make this simple.  My first theatrical viewing of Jurassic Park remains, without question, the best theatrical movie going experience of my life. It encapsulated pretty much everything good about the theatrical experience, including any number of elements that are perhaps non-replicable in today's film culture.  The viewing was an unexpected advance-night screening, back before every movie opened on Thursday at 12:00 am, if not 10:00 pm or earlier.  Jurassic Park had a whole slate of advance screenings on Thursday the 10th of June, starting at I believe 8:00 pm.  I had presumed I would be seeing it sometime that weekend, but my mother informed me that my dad was coming home from a business trip and he was picking me up in time for a 10:00 pm screening.  Obviously excited, I hurriedly rushed to finish the original Michael Crichton novel that I had been blazing through.  We got to the theater early enough and the auditorium, as well as the auditoriums around us, were absolutely jammed packed.  Everyone was excited to be there, but nobody really knew what they were in for.

R.L. Shaffer: On seeing Jurassic Park 20 years ago...

This is the second of a handful of essays regarding your first (and second and/or third) viewing of
Jurassic Park twenty summers ago, as we brace ourselves for the film's 3D IMAX rerelease this Friday.  I'm sure every single one of my readers has such a memory so feel free to share them in the comments section below.

Memories of Jurassic Park:

By R.L Shaffer

I was a mere 12 years old when I first visited Jurassic Park.

From the very first teaser (seen above) I was hooked. As a self-professed lover of dinosaurs (or dino-sars as Jeff Goldblum's Ian Malcolm pronounced it), it would be my duty to see any film about these mysterious creatures. I didn't know what I was going to get, either, but if director Steven Spielberg was going to take me there, I was more than willing to enjoy the ride.

Brandon Peters: On seeing Jurassic Park 20 years ago...

This is one of two of three essays regarding your first (and second and/or third) viewing of Jurassic Park twenty summers ago, as we brace ourselves for the film's 3D IMAX rerelease this Friday.  I'm sure every single one of my readers has such a memory so feel free to share them in the comments section below.

Jurassic Park Memories

Brandon Peters

Yes, that photo supporting the article is ridiculous…but I just kinda “had to” use it. Hilariously, its one of those images that sticks in your head from the movie.

Jurassic Park was one of those films that comes along once every 8-10 years that just restores your faith and fulfill the magic of seeing a film in a theater to the highest level.  There was an absolute joy and “level up-ing" of my love for cinema after viewing this movie.  An event movie in the greatest sense. And man, was there a craze following it.

Weekend Box Office (11/18/12): Twilight Saga: Breaking Dawn 2 scores $141m while Lincoln impresses with $21m.

The Twilight Saga ended as it began, kicking James Bond's ass to the curb with a massive opening weekend.  The fifth and final Twilight film debuted with $141 million over the weekend.  That's a touch higher than the $138 million debut of Breaking Dawn part 1 and just under the $142 million opening of New Moon over this weekend in 2011 and 2009 respectively, but we're still talking the kind of consistency that the Saw franchise would envy.  There are just ten films that have opened above $135 million and three of them are Twilight films.  Twilight 2, 4, and 5 now holds the 7th, 9th, and 8th biggest opening weekend respectively. Yes it was possible that Breaking Dawn part 2 (review/essay) would get a sort of series finale-bump over opening weekend, but in retrospect it was not entirely realistic.  This series frankly only plays to the fans at this point, with even casual fans coming out on opening weekend.  This isn't a series like Harry Potter, where fans who maybe missed an entry or two along the way and/or saw the prior films in theaters later in their respective runs rushed out to catch the finale on opening weekend.  If you wanted to see the newest Twilight, you were probably a hardened fan who absolutely ventured out on opening weekend every time.  So yeah, this isn't a series that gained new fans after the second installment so there wasn't much room for growth even for this caper (it played 79% female and 50% over 25 years old).  There also isn't much to discuss in terms of domestic totals.  The series has infamously short legs, and so it's probable that the picture did 50% of its business already.  So let's presume a $285-295 million domestic total.  Worldwide, the film has already grossed $340 million globally putting it on track to equal the over/under $700 million totals of the last three pictures.  

Weekend Box Office (11-11-12): Skyfall opens with $90 million while Lincoln earns $900k on 11 screens.

Opening with a flurry of positive buzz and already-cemented megahit status overseas, James Bond finally returned to US theaters this weekend with San Mendes's Skyfall (review 01/review 02).  The film easily crushed the opening weekend record of the 007 series, earning a massive $90 million in its debut.  This also includes $2.2 million earned via its Thursday IMAX-only release, as the film earned $13.1 million in IMAX theaters since Thursday (the large-scale format's biggest non-summer opening ever).  The picture played 60% male and 75% over 25-years old. For comparison, the last six 007 films had the six biggest weekends of the franchise, with Pierce Brosnan's GoldenEye moving 007 into modern-day blockbuster territory back in 1995.  For the record, the numbers are $26 million (GoldenEye), $25 million (Tomorrow Never Dies), $35 million (The World Is Not Enough), $47 million (Die Another Day), $40 million (Casino Royale), and $67 million for Quantum of Solace four Novembers ago. Not only is this the biggest opening weekend for the 007 series by a long shot, it eclipsed the opening weekends of all but the last four series entries by the end of Friday (if you want to play the inflation card, it still eclipsed the openings of all-but the last six entries by the end of Friday). Even though the overall consensus on Quantum of Solace was mediocre, four years of waiting but an ability to market Skyfall using the whole "50 years of Bond" angle made this one just as much of an event, if not more so, than the last few entries.  

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.    

Skyfall (in wide release) vs. Lincoln (in limited release) in the weekend movie preview.

Skyfall is the 23rd James Bond film, and the third to feature Daniel Craig as super spy 007. Craig began his run with the 2006 release Casino Royale, having taken over from Pierce Brosnan. After finishing up work on Die Another Day, Brosnan was unsure if he would return a fifth time as he feared he would begin to be compared to Roger Moore's older turn as Bond, which had proved unpopular with some fans. Despite this, the public were still supportive of him playing Bond again and negotiations began early 2004 for Brosnan to reprise the role. But by the middle of that year, amid rumors that MGM/EON had hinted they were looking for a younger actor to play Bond (something they denied at the time), Brosnan announced he wasn't coming back. Rumors continued to persist until February 2005, when the star publicly announced he was finished with the character. The search for a new James Bond was on. While many names were bandied about, including Eric Bana, James Purefoy and Clive Owen (who clashed over contract details), it was Daniel Craig who was triumphant. In comparison to others mentioned, Craig was something of an unknown, having made his name on stage, rather than screen, though he had had a number of prominent roles before coming to Bond, including the first Tomb Raider movie, Road to Perdition and Layer Cake, the flick  rumored to have been an influence on him getting the Bond gig. EON officially announced the actor as the new James Bond in October 2005, and while public support wasn't overwhelming, each of the previous Bond players voiced their approval.

If you have the time, watch the entire 42-minute Steven Spielberg Q&A from last night's Lincoln screenings.

I will hopefully be seeing Lincoln when the regular press screenings begin, but for now here is the complete 42-minute Q&A that followed a national sneak of sorts that took place last night at various AMC theaters (the LA one started at 4:30pm, so I didn't even try to sneak in).  Spielberg and Daniel Day-Lewis were in attendance.  For now, enjoy this rather enjoyable video. if the embed crashes or doesn't work, the link is HERE.

Scott Mendelson

Why I almost cancelled my Indiana Jones blu-ray order...

As with most of the geeks here and elsewhere, Amazon will be dropping off my pre-ordered set of the Indiana Jones series on Blu Ray this afternoon.  I ordered it a few months ago, despite misgivings about it.  Misgivings, you say?  Well, here's the rub: My wife and I just watched all four films just last year.  So, and I hinted at this in last week's essay about multiple theatrical viewings, the life of an adult (job, family, etc.) leaves little time for watching movies, even favorite movies, multiple times.  My wife and I just watched Raiders of the Lost Ark, Indiana Jones and the Temple of Doom, Indiana Jones and the Last Crusade, and Indiana Jones and the Kingdom of the Crystal Skull.  What is the likelihood we are going to watch them again anytime in the next few years?  I almost didn't buy the Jaws blu ray for just this reason, as my wife isn't a Jaws fanatic and I can't imagine showing the film to my kids anytime terribly soon (my wife being my wife, she actually prefers Jaws 3 and Jaws the Revenge).  But in the end I eventually spent the $20 on Jaws and the $65 on the Indiana Jones set because I figured my wife would enjoy watch the copious new extras on the sets.  Well, I was half-right.

Steven Spielberg's Lincoln gets a very typical biopic trailer.

Other than the lack of a second act montage detailing Abraham Lincoln's struggles with drugs and/or alcohol, this looks like a pretty conventional biopic.  But of course, A) it's a very conventional biopic trailer and B) War Horse turned out to be a far darker and somber film than it's somewhat upbeat marketing campaign suggested.  Still, and I'll gladly eat crow if I'm wrong, I can't imagine what new commentary or insights an Abraham Lincoln biopic has to offer at this point in time, especially one seemingly crafted so as to not offend those who understandably revere the man.  At the very least, I can only presume that Lincoln will be a splendid acting treat, with major turns by Daniel Day Lewis and about a bazillion others (check out 1:43, for a look at Jared Harris as Ulysses S. Grant next to someone who looks *a lot* like Seth Meyers).  The film may turn out to be a haloagraphy, and perhaps there is no fault in that.  But come what may, this one will be worth seeing purely for the performances on display, as well as the sheer fact that Steven Spielberg is still determined to matter this much 41 years after Duel.  I underestimated War Horse.  I can only hope I'm underestimating Lincoln.  Anyway, this one drops November 9th in limited release before expanding on November 16th.  As always, we'll see.

Scott Mendelson    

Steven Spielberg's Lincoln gets a poster and a synopsis...

I still wish Spielberg was willing to actually release this film prior to the election, and the fact that he won't points to a certain apolitcal tone to the film which would be unfortunate, if not outright gutless.  Still, Spielberg is on a roll of late and this is clearly one of the must-see films of the season.  I presume a trailer will follow pretty soon. The synopsis is after the jump.

Scott Mendelson

Weird summer 2013 release date silliness leaves two summer events in the wrong slot. Why Jurassic Park 3D and Man of Steel should play musical chairs.

As somewhat expected, Universal announced today (via Jeff Snyder of Variety) that they would be releasing Jurassic Park in 3D next summer, in time for the film's 20th anniversary.  Fine, whatever, I'm sure it will look just as 'eye-poppingly' cool as The Phantom Menace did earlier this year (read - not at all from reliable sources).  The 20th anniversary of Jurassic Park is indeed somewhat of a milestone, as it was one of the last old-school blockbusters, a genuine word-of-mouth sensation that played in theaters for over a year and whose domestic and international dominance paved the way for the modern four-quadrant tentpole.  It was also the last notable hit film to actually play for longer than six months or so (Titanic played for around six months), as it came around just as the second run theater business was dying.  But this isn't about waxing nostalgic for Steven Spielberg's epic dinosaur horror adventure.  This is about the beyond weird release date.  The film is not opening on June 14th, 2013, which would approximate the 20th anniversary of its June 11th, 1993 theatrical debut (when it became the first film to score $50 million on its opening weekend).  Instead it's opening on July 19th, 2013.  So what's opening on June 14th, 2013?  Well Zack Snyder's Man of Steel, of course!  So let me get this straight.  Jurassic Park can't open on its actual 20th anniversary because that slot is taken with Warner Bros' Superman reboot.  So instead Universal is opening on an empty weekend that was once Warner Bros' prime summer opening weekend slot for six straight years.

Indiana Jones blu-ray collection gets a trailer...

Not much to expound upon here, but Paramount will be releasing all four Indiana Jones films on blu-ray sometime this fall (probably in late September/early October, so they can do a secondary discount during the holidays).  All I can say is that the trailer above is unusual in that it outright hides most of the supporting cast of the last two pictures (no Sean Connery, no Shia LeBeouf, etc).  On the plus side, it doesn't skimp on footage from Indiana Jones and the Kingdom of the Crystal Skull out of misplaced embarrassment.  Anyway, enjoy the above teaser. 

Weekend Box Office (01/08/11): Devil Inside kicks off 2012 with $34m debut.

More often than not, especially when dealing with big numbers, opening weekends are about marketing, not the quality of the film.  So don't be too shocked when you hear that Paramount's The Devil Inside opened with $34.5 million this weekend.  Yes, the film is allegedly terrible.  Yes, audiences nationwide have allegedly been booing at the (allegedly atrocious) finale.  But sometimes it's about a popular genre, a solid trailer, and the good luck of following up a recent smash hit.  Exorcism and religious-themed movies have always been popular.  The simple reason is that, along with the usual horror junkies, they attract more religious/spiritual moviegoers that otherwise disdain horror pictures.  We've over/under $20 million openings from the likes of Stigmata (whose $18 million opening in September 1999 would equal about $28 million today), Exorcist: The Beginning ($18 million in August 2004), The Unborn ($19 million in January 2009), The Last Exorcism ($20 million in August 2010), and The Rite ($18 million last January).  The anamoly that The Devil Inside most resembles is the somewhat surprising $30 million debut of The Exorcism of Emily Rose back in late 2005.  But that film had both a PG-13 (like The Rite and The Last Exorcism) and a prestigious adult cast (Laura Linney, Tom Wilkinson, etc).  Heck, throw in the $22-24 million debuts of various supernatural horror films (White Noise, The Haunting In Connecticut, The Amityville Horror, etc) and you can see that, when adjusted for inflation and a few other factors, a $34.5 million debut for The Devil Inside is quite impressive (it is indeed the biggest debut for a religious horror picture) but not a complete surprise.

On the inherent darkness and pessimism of Steven Spielberg's body of work, and why he is more than just ET: The Extra Terrestrial.

This essay has been slightly updated since the 2011 Oscar nominations were announced.

In the aftermath of the Oscar nominations (analysis HERE), there has been much hand-wringing over the notion that the Academy has embraced 'feel-good' entertainment over darker and more introspective work.  The prime example of this false argument (which insists that you ignore the relatively downbeat finales of The Help and Moneyball, among others) is the Best Picture nomination for Steven Spielberg's War Horse (review).  Many of the reviews, especially the negative ones, for Steven Spielberg's War Horse have emphasized the melodramatic 'boy and his horse' narrative, accusing the film of wallowing in sentimentality.  Moreover, they basically accuse the picture of being 'conventional Spielberg', again citing the classic meme that Steven Spielberg isn't capable of truly playing in on the dark side.  Both arguments are hogwash.  For as long as I can remember (early-80s, natch), Steven Spielberg has had a reputation as the "Mr. Mass Audience", the guy who, film-making chops aside, was looked down upon because of his reputation as a purveyor of mainstream feel-good sentiment.  He was the guy who made general audiences tear-up on cue, but still walk out feeling good.  But looking over his filmography, not only are his 'dark and adult' pictures more frequent than you might realize, his entire reputation as a softy basically stems from one single incredibly popular (and critically-acclaimed) film that he made in 1982.  On a film-by-film basis, Spielberg is far more likely to scare you or deeply disturb you than leave you with a nasty case of the warm-and-fuzzies.  

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: War Horse (2011) is pure, unapologetic old-school melodrama.

War Horse

2011
145 minutes
rated PG-13

by Scott Mendelson

It would almost be lazy to say that War Horse is 'the kind of movie they just don't make anymore', but it would also be explicitly accurate.  It is a grand, sweeping melodrama complete with wide vistas, long takes, and soaring music that is intended to stir the soul.  It is a simple tale that happens to take place during complicated times, and it touches upon the tragedy of its era while remaining focused on its core narrative, which is the journey of its title character.  More than any other movie since Peter Jackson's King Kong, Steven Spielberg's War Horse is arguably operates as a textbook example of what 'going to the movies' is supposed to mean.  But unlike so many recent odes to cinema or genre homages in the last few years, War Horse is an 'original' story (albeit adapted from a novel and a play) that stands on its own four hoofs.  It is a flawed film, and much of its emotional impact depends on the viewer's affinity for horses.  But when it's cooking, it's a pure, unadulterated MOVIE in the best sense of the word.

Review: The Adventures of Tintin (2011) delivers terrific animation, moments of brilliant action, but little else.

The Adventures of Tintin: The Secret of the Unicorn
2011
105 minutes
rated PG

by Scott Mendelson

I've written before about the recent quasi-trend of filmmakers spending time, effort, and money merely to concoct glorified homages to the films of yesteryear.  Most of these films contain little to no relevancy or ideas and exist merely as an exercise in nostalgia.  But The Adventures of Tintin: The Secret of the Unicorn is a curious variation on this sub-genre.  Not only is it a pure homage to the old-fashioned adventure films best represented by the Indiana Jones series (and the serials and pulp novels such as this series that inspired them), it is a homage directed by the man who helped create that defining series in the first place.  On the surface it is an adaption of the Georges Rémi comic book series that ran from 1929 to 1976.  But while the film certainly exists in that world, with a faithfulness that I cannot attest to one way or the other (I've been told it's quite faithful), it basically amounts to director Steven Spielberg (and producer Peter Jackson) using the motion-capture animation technique pioneered by Robert Zemeckis to craft a homage to the theoretical Steven Spielberg adventure film.  With these new crayons to play with, it's a darn shame that Spielberg couldn't think of anything better to draw than what often feels, intentional or not, like a self-administered pat-on-the-back.