Weekend Box Office (10-28-12): Skyfall kills overseas as Argo tops four weak new releases.

There were four wide releases opening domestically this weekend and not one of them made any real impact at the box office.  The big news was the overseas debut of Skyfall (review) which opened in the UK two weeks ahead of its US debut.  The 23rd official James Bond film earned a massive $77 million in the 25 markets it debuted in.  The film earned a massive $32 million in the UK alone, for the second-biggest UK debut weekend of all time, behind the 3D-enhanced Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows part II.  It earned far more initially than Casino Royale ($21 million) and Quantum of Solace ($24 million), setting the stage for a massive US debut and what will surely be the biggest 007 film yet domestic and worldwide.  I don't think it's the best 007 film or that it should be an Oscar contender, but it's a darn good movie and anyone merely wanting a top-flight bit of action will be thrilled with this entry.  I can't imagine it not opening huge and playing for a rather long time, especially as it will be unopposed in the mega-blockbuster department (Twilight Saga: Breaking Dawn II will play exclusively to its fanbase, massive as it is) for a month until The Hobbit part 1 of 30 opens on December 14th.  

Review: Cloud Atlas (2012) says little but does so beautifully.

Cloud Atlas

2012
165 minutes
rated R

by Scott Mendelson

At a glance, Cloud Atlas is exactly the kind of movie we say we want from mainstream Hollywood.  It is a grandly ambitious and visually dynamic adventure story, filled with a parade of fine actors and often unexpected plot turns.  It is a piece not about things but about ideas, delivered with high style and in a mostly entertaining fashion.  But if I am honest with myself and with you, I must confess that the many nuggets of wisdom to be found in Lana Wachowski, Andy Wachowski, and Tom Tykwer's sprawling epic don't amount to much.  There is little to challenge the mind and nothing beyond fortune cookie platitudes and the philosophy seems to explicitly apply to the main characters.  But if the philosophy doesn't dig any deeper than "Everything is connected." or "What is an ocean, but a multitude of drops?", the film is indeed a mostly entertaining piece of unconventional popcorn cinema.  There is much to admire and appreciate in the world of Cloud Atlas, even if it doesn't amount to a hill of beans.

Trailer Analysis: Visually dazzling Cloud Atlas seems like the exact sort of ambitious film-making we claim we want.

Wow... just wow.  This went up a few days ago in a bootleg form, but it was worth the wait for the pristine 1080p version.  This is exactly the kind of film that we claim Hollywood lacks the nerve to make and yet here it is.  It's based on an acclaimed science fiction novel.  It stars the likes of Tom Hanks, Halle Berry, Hugo Weaving, Jim Sturges, Susan Sarandon, Hugh Grant, Keith David, Jim Broadbent, and James D'Arcy.  It cost $100 million to make yet looks like it cost $500 million.  It's rated R.  It runs 164 minutes.  For those who claim that Hollywood doesn't make movies for adults anymore, you kinda have a duty to check this out in three months.  Tom Tykwer and the Wachowskis are co-directing this Warner Bros pick-up and it looks pretty spectacular to say the least.  Since I have not read the 2004 book that this film is based on, I cannot say how spoiler-ish this footage is, but considering how under-the-radar this picture is 90 days before its debut, I'd argue that this is a necessary marketing tool to get people talking.  Long story short, this looks spectacular and instantly shoots to the upper-realms of my 'must-see' list for fall/winter 2012.  To be fair my secret wish is for Cloud Atlas to be so good that it causes people to reevaluate the inexplicably undervalued brilliance of Speed Racer and even (to a lesser extent) the Matrix sequels.  Cloud Atlas opens on October 26th.  I suppose 'we'll see', but yeah, go see it regardless.

Scott Mendelson      

Oscar Speculation - Last but not least - Extremely Loud and Incredibly Close wants to be the Million Dollar Baby (or the John Kerry) of the 2011 Oscar race.

There was much speculation over the last couple of days over Warner Bros' decision not to make sure that Stephen Daldry's 9/11 drama Extremely Loud and Incredibly Close in time for the first batch of critics' awards.  The first official screening will be December 2nd (no, I probably won't be attending that early), which means that the Tom Hanks/Sandra Bullock drama won't be eligible for consideration for the National Board of Review or the New York Film Critics Circle, both of which are so consumed with being 'the first' to announce their year-end plaudits that they aren't even waiting until the last month of the year.  The rumblings run the gamut from 'it won't be done in time' to 'it's not that good' to 'we want to capitalize on positive audience word of mouth'.  All or none of those could be true.  But I think that Warner Bros. is playing a slightly different game.

Extremely Loud and Incredibly Close gets extremely cloying and incredibly pandering Oscar-bait trailer.

There is a Law and Order episode from late 2002 that deals with a woman who was murdered right before 9/11 and dumped around the World Trader Center wreckage, creating the impression that she was another victim of said terror attacks.  As the truth slowly comes out, there is resistance from the victim's mother, who doesn't want to believe that her daughter was merely a victim of infidelity gone wrong.  Point being, the grieving mother wants to believe that her daughter died in the 9/11 attacks, as if that specific violent end would give her death more importance than if she were merely a victim on a 'normal' murder.  I bring this up because the trailer above, as well as the hoopla surrounding it, is a prime example of what is arguably '9/11 porn'.  In that, I merely mean that it (this trailer and apparently the original Jonathan Safran Foer book as well) uses the 9/11 attacks to add a level of 'importance and prestige' that the story itself does not earn.  Whether the movie is good or not, ask yourself this: Would the film be getting the same sheer amount of preordained Oscar buzz and/or presumptions that it's a 'very important movie' if Tom Hank's character was shot to death in a convenience store robbery?

Weekend Box Office (07/04/11): Transformers 3 crushes July 4th records, Larry Crowne underwhelms, Cars 2 crashes, Bridesmaids and Pirates 4 hit milestones.

As expected, Transformers: Dark of the Moon (review) dominated the long Fourth-of-July holiday frame this weekend.  The film had a Fri-Sun debut of $97 million and thus far sits with $161 million since opening late Tuesday night.  It netted a 6.25-day opening of $180 million, with a worldwide six-day opening weekend of $418 million.  There are those who will scream "DISAPPOINTMENT!" because Transformers: Revenge of the Fallen opened with $200 million in its first five days two years ago.  If $180 million in six days is disappointment, sign me up for failure anytime.  The film played 62% male and 55% under-25.  Oddly enough, the picture scored an A- from males and an A from females in Cinemascore polling.  I'm sure pundits will find sexist explanations for that finding ("Oh, the girls just LOVED that LeBeouf goes into a war-torn Chicago to save his girlfriend."), but I'll just chalk it up to the fact that any woman who walks into a Transformers movie likes robot-smashing and explosions as much as the stereotypical guy.  The picture sold 60% of its tickets in 3D, which is an uptick from the usual 45/55 2D advantage over the last few months.  Point being, if you give teens and older audiences something worth seeing in 3D (as opposed to families with really young kids), they will make the choice to plunk down the extra $3.

Box Office (07/01/11): Transformers: Dark of the Moon picks up the pace ($32.9m), while Larry Crowne underwhelms and Cars 2 crashes.

First, the good news... Transformers: Dark of the Moon grossed a massive $32.9 million on Friday.  That's $11 more than the first Transformers film grossed on its first Friday and just $4 million less than Revenge of the Fallen (despite the first sequel having a $20 million-bigger opening day than this latest installment).  It went up about 50% from Thursday to Friday, the biggest such jump in the franchise.  It's also the third-biggest non-opening Friday in history, behind Transformers: Revenge of the Fallen ($36 million) and Star Wars: Episode III: Revenge of the Sith ($33.5 million).  Point being, it's clear that many fans (and general moviegoers) were just waiting for the regular weekend to check out the latest installment.  The film has grossed $97 million since Wednesday, making it technically the biggest three-day gross of 2011.  It has an outside shot at becoming the first $100 million Fri-Sun debut, especially as Monday is a holiday (hence Sunday acts like Saturday).  But whether it ends up with $165 million by Monday or $185 million by Monday, the film is also doing gangbusters business overseas.  The total worldwide six-day debut looks to be in the neighborhood of $400 million.

Hoping for yesterday: why Tom Hanks, Harrison Ford, and the big movie stars of our generation are not going to magically reclaim their past stardom.

This is a slightly updated version of an essay I wrote back in late May.

This Fourth of July holiday, we have seen the release of Larry Crowne, a poorly reviewed romantic comedy starring Julia Roberts and Tom Hanks.  The film will not top $20 million over the four-day weekend (on just a $30 million budget, natch), which will countless pundits to wonder why Hanks and Roberts aren't mega stars anymore.  Two months ago, we saw the wide release of Jodie Foster's flawed-but-interesting drama The Beaver, which failed to even gross $1 million for a variety of factors (mixed reviews, weird premise, a terrible trailer, etc).  But the film is being held to the perhaps unfair standard of determining whether or not Mel Gibson can return to his former box office glory.  Never mind that the film should no more be expected to perform like Lethal Weapon 4 than The Man Without A Face, the media has been abuzz with articles along the lines of 'Can The Beaver save Mel Gibson?"  This year will see much hand-wringing about the sustainable stardom of some of the very biggest 1980s/1990s stars.  Over 2011, we have seen or will see the alleged box office comebacks of Mel Gibson, Tom Hanks, Julia Roberts, Harrison Ford, Jim Carrey, and Tom Cruise, plus the continuing saga of Arnold Schwarzenegger's post-'governator' movie plans.  Without obsessing too much on certain offscreen behaviors that jeopardize the popularity of a few of those names, the question is: Why should we be expecting these former mega-stars to still be at the peak of their stardom?