Valentine's Day gets a trailer.

First of all, in this day and age, I see a film entitled 'Valentine's Day' and I immediately assume that it's a slasher picture set around the somewhat fake holiday. Second of all, for all the comparisons to Love Actually, with the all-star romantic comedy cast (with, deep breath: Julia Roberts, Anne Hathaway, Jessica Alba, Jessica Biel, Jennifer Garner, Shirley MacLaine, Bradley Cooper, Ashton Kutcher, Topher Grace, Emma Roberts, Hector Elizondo, Bryce Robinson, Patrick Dempsey, Eric Dane, Carter Jenkins, Jamie Foxx, Queen Latifah), this actually feels more like The Expendables of chick flicks. Needless to say, this comes out February 12th, 2010.

Scott Mendelson

Protect Insurance Companies PSA

Protect Insurance Companies PSA from Will Ferrell

The last line is beyond stupid (hehe... we're being funny, get it?), but the rest of this is a pretty solid two-step, working as comedy and a potent political action ad.

Scott Mendelson

Blu Ray Review: Ghosts of Girlfriends Past (2009)

Ghosts of Girlfriends Past
2009
100 minutes
Rated PG-13
Available on Blu-Ray, DVD, On Demand, Digital Download on Tuesday, September 22.

by Scott Mendelson

Ghosts of Girlfriends Past is a relatively okay movie, even while at its core it's pretty unremarkable. It is well acted and stylishly shot, with a brisk pace that only lags just a bit in the middle act. But it is at heart a simplistic story that purports that most people who make the choice to not have a conventional life (marriage, kids, two-car garage) are motivated not by personal choice but by deep-seated emotional scars. That may be the case for some, but couldn't we at least once have a film about a confirmed bachelor who gets to remain a bachelor by the film's climax, even if he has to become a somewhat better person?

The plot, in brief - Conner Meed (Matthew McConaughy) is a big-time fashion photographer and a full-time lothario. With a somewhat cartoonish love-em and leave-em philosophy, he embarks to his brother's wedding not with joy but merely family obligation. After arriving and making an ass out of himself in front of his family, the bride's family, and his childhood sweetheart (Jennifer Garner), he is visited by the ghost of his uncle (Michael Douglas) who advises him that he must change his promiscuous ways or risk being alone forever. What follows is a textbook variation on Charles Dickens's A Christmas Carol, as Conner is visited by three ghosts representing relationships past, present, and future. As expected, childhood trauma is revealed, secret motivations and fears are uncovered, and Conner realizes that he is controlled not by his libido but by his fears.

On the surface level, the film more or less works. Everyone in the cast is game and the film looks lovely. What's most impressive is the fact that the women in the film are actually allowed to be funny. As Dr. Jenny Perotti, Jennifer Garner is not just 'the childhood sweetheart who Conner pushed away', but a completely charming and humorous character of her own accord. In fact, it is a flaw of the film that she seems too smart and world-weary to still have feelings for the dope who cruelly left her, and her exceptional chemistry with another bachelor at the wedding (Daniel Sunjata) doesn't help the movie's grand schemes. Lacey Chambert's blushing bride is relatively amusing, with the amount of Bridezilla moments kept to a bare and reasonable minimum. In what could have been a stock role, Noureen DeWolf gives Conner's thankless secretary a sharp personality and a no-bullshit demeanor (it helps that she's arguably the only woman in the film not drawn to the cad). Emma Stone gets laughs as the 'past-tense ghost', the sixteen-year old nerd who was Conner's first conquest. Best of all is Anne Archer as the mother of the bride, who gets one of the film's best scenes during a warm flirtation moment with McConaughy. Unlike many comedies, the women actually get just as many funny lines and just as much personality as the men.

Also helping things is the low-key nature of the plot. With the exception of one painfully contrived scene involving a wedding cake, the film avoids over-the-top set pieces and pratfalls. Even the climax of the film refuses to take place at an interrupted wedding or an airport, but in a location irrelevant to the situation at hand. And said climax involves not a public confessional but a quiet conversation that is witnessed by only a few others. Furthermore, the relationship between Conner and his brother (Breckin Myer) is surprisingly thought-out, and a moment of Paul defending his older brother is the emotional highlight of the film. The supporting cast, from Robert Forster to Michael Douglas, seem to be trying their best to make this a real movie. And they pretty much succeed despite the formulaic narrative at play. It helps to have a real director, and Mark Waters (he of Mean Girls, the best movie ever made about high school girls) once again elicits terrific performances to help somewhat redeem a stock romantic comedy (re - Just Like Heaven).

But in the end, it is just another story about a ladies-man learning that having tons of consensual sex with willing partners is a huge character flaw and a sign of darker personal demons. We're once again told that women aren't smart enough to know when they are just rolling in the hay with an obvious playboy, thus Conner is responsible for countless heartbreaks and tears. And once again we're led to believe that a guy would have been happy forever more if he had just married his preschool sweetheart right from the get-go (sure plenty of happy couples met that early, but must that be the finale to so many romantic comedies?). It's something that's long bugged me about romantic comedies, but at least this is a relatively entertaining variation on that old hat moral.

Grade: B-

The Blu Ray
The video quality is pretty sharp, with a saturated, but somewhat dark image that apparently replicates the original film stock. I don't have surround sound so no one cares what I think about the audio. More troubling is the lack of compelling extras. While Warner Bros used to be the leader in innovate and quality supplemental packages, they may now be the worst major studio when it comes to new release titles. We get only nine minutes of deleted scenes and three useless pr fluff pieces. There is one about how great McConaughy is, one general behind-the-scenes quickie, and one chit-chat between McConaughy and Michael Douglas about their legacy of playing onscreen Casanovas. The deleted scenes are fine, but only worth one gander if you actually liked the film. I have no idea what's on the BD-Live as I don't have an online connection for my PS3.

Ghosts of Girlfriends Past is a surprisingly entertaining presentation of a sour package. But if you know what you're getting into, it's funny and well-acted, with equal laughs for the actors and actresses both. While I wish that McConaughy would do more varied work in the vein of Frailty, Sahara, and Lone Star, this is certainly a step up from Fool's Gold and the like. For more information go to the official site.

The Movie - B-
The Video - B+
The Audio - NA
The Extras - D

Harry Potter 'Ultimate Editions' on Blu Ray trailer.

It really is amazing to see everyone when they first started. Even Alan Rickman looks that much younger, let alone Radcliffe, Watson, and Grint. And it's always a little startling to see Richard Harris as Dumbledore. I thought he was almost irreplaceable, but Michael Gambon immediately took to the role and made it his own. Having said that, I have two issues with these sets. First of all, if I knew that these would in fact be the definitive end-all-be-all editions of the Harry Potter films, I'd have no objection picking them up as they were released. The fact that they are being released a couple at a time implies that that is the intent, but you never know. Second of all, and you knew this was coming, would it kill Warner to just give us the Blu Rays themselves in an old-fashioned keep case, without the giant box and the various trinkets contained within? I understand that there is apparently a market for that, but why not offer consumers a choice of just the discs themselves?

Scott Mendelson

IMAX releases study on multiplex vs classic. Verdict - no noticeable difference in satisfaction

The IMAX company released a report this afternoon detailing a study done with Nielsen detailing the audience satisfaction levels of paying moviegoers in regards to the traditional IMAX screens and the controversial retrofitted multiplex variations that have been popping up in AMC theaters over the last year and change. The somewhat predictable result: 'There was no meaningful difference in satisfaction levels between classic design and multiplex design IMAX locations.' The only caveat I can find in the study is that just 20% of the multiplex correspondents had seen a movie in both versions of IMAX. On the other hand, that means at least 20% seemingly had a choice between the two formats and chose the multiplex variation.

Anyway, you can read the study for yourself (click on the images for legible copies) or read the official IMAX summary and statement from CEO Richard Gelfond. I had a chance to speak with Gelfond and Sarah Gormley (Vice President Corporate Communications) in advance of the official roll-out of said research results, and they filled me in on several other notes that were not in the official study. To wit -

- While many of the complaints over the new IMAX screens have involved price issues (ie - the smaller screens are no cheaper than the larger rooms), Mr. Gelfond stressed that they do not set prices for the theaters. So take it up with AMC.

- 25% of correspondents who saw Transformers: Revenge of the Fallen in IMAX came back to see it in IMAX a second time. 10% of the total survey members were repeat customers in general, having seen the film in 35mm first.

- IMAX hopes to have 250 auditoriums up and running for the release of Avatar.

- Like many corporations, IMAX only announces when everything is set in stone, which explains why IMAX appeared to be the last to know about the Harry Potter 6 date-change, as well as why the announcement that Tron 2.0 would be in IMAX 3D was breaking news twice (once when it was casually announced at Comic-Con, and again last week when IMAX officially announced it).

- Contrary to what I had guessed in an earlier post, IMAX is still a few years away from having enough theaters to have split engagements of major releases. They will continue booking one major film at a time, preferably for at least a three-week engagement. But exceptions will be made under certain circumstances, such as the two week Star Trek run (which then had certain theaters offering midnight Star Trek IMAX showings after Night At The Museum 2 had already debuted).

And that's all for now. There were a few interesting off-the-record bits and pieces, but I'll wait for clearance before posting said tidbits (nothing scandalous, just good news for IMAX fans).

Scott Mendelson

Exclusive - Paramount confirms, explains The Lovely Bones date change.

In response to last week's post about the shocking and under-the-radar date change of Peter Jackson's The Lovely Bones, a Paramount spokesperson has contacted me, confirming the switch.

"We did initially date the wide film as of Dec. 11. In analyzing the marketplace (and after seeing an early cut of the film), we determined a roll out strategy would take advantage of the positive word of mouth and critical buzz we anticipate for the film. We're essentially following the Grand Torino plan (which btw out grossed all movies released wide last December)."

Sounds logical to me. And yes, at $148 million, Gran Torino was Warner Bros' second-highest domestic grosser of the year (behind Harry Potter 6 and The Hangover) and scored the fourth-biggest January opening weekend of all time. This despite the month of limited-release play and the rampant availability of DVD-quality bootlegs ripped from awards screeners (something I'm sure Paramount has factored in as a risk). We'll see if lightning strikes twice.

Scott Mendelson

Cloud With a Chance Of Meatballs wins crowded weekend, as Jennifer Aniston and Jennifer's Body flop. Weekend box office in review for 09/20/09.

The most talked about movie is not the number one movie of the weekend. The number one movie is (shocker...) a well-reviewed 3D animated family adventure based on a classic childrens' book. Anyone who didn't see that coming... Anyway, Cloudy With a Chance of Meatballs opened to $30 million, a whopping 3.7x multiplier. The surprisingly well-reviewed film had 59% of its theaters in the 3D format, so most of its money was accumulated accordingly. It also did about 8% of its business in IMAX theaters. This is Sony's highest opening for an animated film, although the difference between this and the $23 million opening of Open Season can pretty much be chalked up to general inflation and the 15% 3D ticket uptick. Still, this is the third-biggest September opening weekend and only the fourth to reach $30 million. Unless something goes awry, this should be Sony's first $100 million+ domestic animated film. All in all, a solid result for an allegedly quite-clever family film.

Number two went to Steven Soderbergh's The Informant!. This $22-million Warner Bros cheapie opened with $10.5 million, or a rare live-action multiplier of 2.9x. In other words, this played like an old-fashioned grown-ups movie, which is what it was. This is actually Soderbergh's biggest opening weekend outside of the Ocean's trilogy. Word of mouth is allegedly lousy, which is somewhat surprising as the quirky and offbeat trailer did an accurate job of selling this offbeat and exquisitely cast character-driven comedy. Still, it's a good opening and this will be a good investment for Warner, and a promising start for the beleaguered Soderbergh (Che parts 1 and 2 and The Girlfriend Experience have all tanked). This is also a strong showing of Matt Damon's star power, as this is as far from the Bourne trilogy as you can get. Like George Clooney, he can take movies that theoretically wouldn't have opened at all and get them to a $10 million start. Anyway, I can't call the final gross on this until next weekend, but Matt Damon has moved that much closer to a deserved Oscar nomination.

Third place goes to Tyler Perry's I Can Do Bad All By Myself, which plummets the usual Perry 55%+ in weekend two. Still, the $13 million picture has already amassed over $37 million, outgrossing The Family That Preys and Daddy's Little Girls in just ten days. Expect around $50 million for a final total. The allegedly terrible Universal acquisition Love Happens opened with just $8.4 million on 1898 screens. On the plus side, Universal's exposure was about $8 million, so they'll do just fine (much of the $18 million production budget was recouped via foreign sales). On the other hand, this is not a particularly great showing for Jennifer Aniston in a genre that she has put in quite a bit of time into. And, sorry Aaron Eckhart, this was a picture that Aniston was counted on to sell. Again, this is a mid-level debut for a romantic drama (it sounds like a variation on the Christian Slater stinker Bed of Roses), but it just shows that most 'stars' cannot get people into a theater to see something that they otherwise would have had no interest in (see below for more on that). Interestingly enough, the gender split for this one was a whopping 78% female.
Oh boy... this is where it gets interesting. Predicting by some to break out and possibly challenge Cloudy With A Chance of Meatballs for number 01 (was never gonna happen), Jennifer's Body debuted with just $6.8 million. Alas, Fox completely failed to sell this as a horror film directed by, written by, and starring women. They didn't sell women on any of the alleged feminist themes of the picture, or the heroic role of rising star Amanda Seyfried. Screen Gems would have sold the hell out of the female angles on this picture (even Lionsgate would have done a better job). Thus, by ignoring the women, Fox was more or less completely depending on horny teen boys to spend $11 to see a movie for the sole purpose of ogling an actress who they could stare at online free of charge. Creepy fact - I googled 'Jennifer's Body' for a picture for this article, and the first page was nothing but semi-nude paparazzi shots (hence my use of the same photos that everyone else used). I've said this a thousand times and it's still true today. In general, men will not see a movie that they are otherwise uninterested in just because the girl in it is cute or hot. On the other hand, many women will do this. It's why James Vander Beek and Freddie Prinze Jr. had big hits in the spring of 1999 (Varsity Blues and She's All That) while Sarah Michelle Gellar's vehicle (Simply Irresistible) flopped. I thought Megan Fox may have been an exception, especially considering the saturation-level PR that she got in the run-up to Transformers: Revenge of the Fallen. But I was wrong.

Regardless of the movie's quality (I have not seen it), this debut saddens me for two reasons. First of all, this gives the hen-peckers the chance to smack their hands together in glee and pronounce the deaths of both Megan Fox and Diablo Cody after one mediocre debut. I'm someone who has defended Fox's refreshingly candid interviews from misogynistic attacks. We talk about Fox and most Hollywood actresses in purely prurient terms, but when she talks about sex or the business of sex appeal in Hollywood, she's a brainless whore. Point being, for the sake of righteous indignation, I was kind of hoping she'd pull out a winner (she could still kick ass on SNL next weekend). Never mind that the film cost just $13 million and will probably be profitable in the end. Never mind that it was mismarketed by Fox and had a campaign that alienated the very females that it was aimed at (it was the last Fox Atomic release, so 20th Century Fox probably didn't give two craps about it). This relative failure will be placed squarely at the feet of an untested gossip magnet (a role that she apparently does not want) and a flavor of the month screenwriter that others have been itching to take down ever since the release of Juno two years ago. The other reason this saddens me is that it is yet another example of an original horror film flopping while terrible remakes (Friday the 13th) and atrocious sequels (The Final Destination - now at $64 million) hit paydirt. And that's to say nothing of the worthwhile horror films like From Within or Midnight Movie that go straight to DVD. Between Jennifer's Body and Drag Me To Hell, what exactly is the incentive to actually create original horror films in today's marketplace?

Anyway, there isn't much else to discuss for the weekend. The horror flops from last weekend plunged again in weekend two and neither will hit $15 million (Sorority Row cost $12.5 million while Whiteout cost $35 million). The animated 9 dropped 50% and will struggle to equal its $30 million budget in domestic grosses (it'll do just fine on DVD). Inglourious Basterds crossed $109.9 million, eclipsing Pulp Fiction ($107.5 million) as Quentin Tarantino's highest grosser. Also, in its fifth weekend, it has nearly tied the $111 million total of District 9, which is in its sixth weekend. And that's all the news that is fit to print. Join us next weekend when Bruce Willis returns to sci-fi with Jonathan Mostow's The Surrogates. Also laugh as MGM launches its Fame remake only to watch American stay home and watch Glee instead. And the horror movie with the flesh-ripping poster, Pandorum, opens wide courtesy of Overture Films. But the most interesting action may be in super-limited release, as Paramount debuts the allegedly terrifying Paranormal Activity on twelve screens nationwide while Overture Films debuts Michael Moore's Capitalism: A Love Story on just four screens. As always, for more of this madness, including the shocking date change of Peter Jackson's The Lovely Bones, go to Mendelson's Memos.

Scott Mendelson

The wide release of Peter Jackson's The Lovely Bones is apparently moved to January 15th, 2010. What does it mean for Paramount?

I'm only going by the Internet Movie Database and the more reliable Box Office Mojo. According to said page update posted last week (and unnoticed by me until yesterday), Peter Jackson's The Lovely Bones, Paramount's alleged Oscar contender, has been moved from December 11th, 2009 to January 15th, 2010.

Assuming this is true, does this mean anything besides the fact that Paramount may be putting its Oscar chips into Jason Reitman's Up In The Air? After a surprisingly dynamic debut at the Venice Film Festival, the George Clooney vehicle has emerged as a rare front-runner is this relatively dry awards season (what an awful year to have to find ten Best Picture contenders). But surely Paramount should have had the resources to nurture two major awards contenders, especially when one is a theoretically far-more commercial project (Up In The Air will likely make the usual Syriana/Michael Clayton $50 million)?

From moving Shutter Island to February 2010 partially because they allegedly couldn't afford to advertise it (or its inevitable default Oscar campaign) to the lack of DVD and Blu Ray review screeners (even for major titles like Braveheart and Gladiator) sent out to the various DVD review sites, there have been signs that Paramount has been hurting just a little more than other major studios. And their long-term plan to overspend on Star Trek and then hit paydirt on the sequel made more sense in better economic times, when they could depend on strong DVD sales to make up for weak overseas numbers (I may have been dead-wrong about its domestic sales last year, but Star Trek more or less performed like a Star Trek film overseas). Now its leading holiday box office and awards hopeful will be playing in limited release for over a full month to close out the year (it still opens in limited release on December 11th).

To be fair, this could be just a way for Paramount to boost its bottom line for 2010. With this move, they now have two major box office hopefuls in the first two months of the year (The Lovely Bones and Shutter Island), which will then be followed by two major Dreamworks animated films in March (How To Train Your Dragon) and May (Shrek: Happily Forever After). Oh, and May also contains what may be the summer's first or second-highest grossing film, Iron Man 2 (alas that's a Marvel production, but it won't hurt). The date change by itself may turn out to be a very smart play. The plan could just be for the picture to rack up rave reviews and/or year-end accolades and awards while Avatar and Sherlock Holmes run wild at the box office, then be unleashed just in time for the Oscar nominations.

On the plus side, if the studio is truly in trouble, then perhaps they will soon go back to their late 1990s/early 2000s bread-and-butter: mid-budget character-driven thrillers featuring adult stars for adult audiences (there are only about 97 more Alex Cross books to adapt into guilty-pleasure potboilers). But on a lighter note, the apparent 139-minute running time makes The Lovely Bones Peter Jackson's shortest film since The Frighteners back in August, 1996.

Scott Mendelson

Solomon Kane trailer.

This could be something interesting like The Brotherhood of the Wolf, or it could be another Pathfinder. Either way, it looks like a moody and visually entertaining sword n' sorcery epic (I enjoy the hints of fantastical creatures). It's just a shame that Pete Postlewaite apparently doesn't make it past act one. This one has no release date, which is always a good sign.

Scott Mendelson

The Princess and the Frog gets a full trailer.

The only thing wrong with this trailer is the absence of Mark Elliot. I'm sure the trailer voice over artist is a talented man who deserves every professional opportunity in the world, but if Disney is trying to create nostalgia for their The Fox and the Hound (1981) to Lilo and Stitch (2002) glory days, then they probably should have used their old reliable. Otherwise, this looks like a gloriously fun throwback, and I can't wait to hear Keith David stealing the movie.

Scott Mendelson