The trailer for Rob Marshall's Nine debuts.

If the YouTube goes down, here's a lovely Quicktime version.
Wow, Daniel Day Lewis must be extra crazy these days. The man has been going five years between mainstream projects (right as the shoe-crafting madness is taking hold), but now he'll have two in just two years. Anyway, this adaptation of the Broadway musical adaptation of Fellini's 8 1/2 looks likes loads of snazzy 'jazz hands' fun, although once again the trailer seems to be hiding that the fact that it's a full on musical. Free tip Weinsteins, don't do that. People who unwittingly walk into a musical will be quite upset and will tell their friends. Just ask Tim Burton. Anyway, this has a relatively large cast (Day Lews, Judi Dench, Penelope Cruz, Nicole Kidman, Kate Hudson, Marion Cotillard, Sophia Loren, and Stacy Ferguson), and a prime Oscar release date of November 25th, 2009. Twenty bucks says that Judi Dench gets an Oscar nom whether she deserves it or not. I didn't care much for Chicago (too much razzle-dazzle, not enough substance), but I'm certainly willing to give this a try.

Scott Mendelson

Trailer, poster for Sundance sensation Precious (formally 'Push'). Presented by Tyler Perry and Oprah Winfrey

Thanks to Glen for the tip on the embed version.

The film was originally called Push, but the title was changed to avoid confusion with the Chris Evans/Dakota Fanning sci-fi flick from earlier this year. This was an alleged knockout of a drama at Sundance, so good on Tyler Perry and Oprah Winfrey for putting their names behind it to get the film a proper theatrical release. Lionsgate puts this one out on November 6th.

Scott Mendelson

Review: Big Man Japan (2009)

Big Man Japan
2009
113 minutes
Rated PG-13

By Scott Mendelson

Big Man Japan is the rare picture that has such a delightful premise that it would hardly matter if the film worked or not. Fortunately for fans of offbeat, quirky cinema, the picture does maintain a certain down to Earth charm. This Japanese import is a genuine original and actually works as a comedic deconstruction of the Japanese monster movie genre, much as Hancock operated as a skewed take on American superhero sagas (for the record, this film was released in Japan in 2007, a full year before Hancock). While the picture never aims for the emotional heights of that Peter Berg gem, it is awfully funny, with a surprisingly potent bit of social commentary just underneath the quirkiness.

A token amount of plot - This mockumentary concerns the exploits of one Daisato (Hitoshi Matsumoto), who appears to be your every day middle-aged slacker. But his actual occupation is one of great importance to Japan. Whenever a monster attacks, Daisato rushes to a government facility, where he is shocked by bolts of lightening, transforming him into a several-stories high giant, capable of defending the fair citizens of Japan from monstrous peril. The latest in a long family line of monster fighters, Daisato is treated not with the reverence of his predecessors, but with scorn and ridicule by a populous who complains about property destruction and noise. In short, Big Man Japan is about a superhero who is viewed as anything but by family and bystanders alike.

That's all you need in regards to the story. Like a Charlie Kaufman comedy, the film is shot in the usual mockumentary style, giving a realism and deadpan feel to the out of this world storytelling. While the special effects are crude, they are absolutely appropriate for this material and are exactly as good as they need to be for this kind of film. Director Hitoshi Matsumoto never goes for the easy joke or the cheap laugh, instead building a certain sympathy for this pathetic would-be champion. The acting is always above board and no one ever winks or acknowledges the absurdity of this situation. The picture takes its time developing its primary characters in between the comical monster mashes, which makes the smack downs that much more rewarding. The film slowly develops into a sad tale of a pathetic and lonely man who exists only to engage in crowd-pleasing battle royales with various life-threatening adversaries. Yes, the film is a bit long, but the token emotional investment is a welcome note from a film that could have been a campy one-joke comedy.

Big Man Japan is a true delight, a charming variation on any number of beloved genres. It is probably one of the more original films you will see this year, both in concept and in execution. It is funny, thoughtful, and occasionally touching. While probably destined for limited theatrical release, it is just the sort of picture to attain cult status once it hits DVD. Big Man Japan is just plain big fun.

Grade: B+

Not just a trailer for Angels & Demons... it's a HYPER Trailer! Wave of the future?

Click on the above picture for something Sony and National Cinema Media are touting as a 'hyper trailer'. Basically, this particular variation of the standard Angels & Demons trailer allows you to branch off into several related behind the scenes clips as the watch the preview. It's a neat little gimmick that's worth playing with for a few moments. Nothing out of this world, but I appreciated the token effort in basically making the website function more like a DVD/Blu Ray supplemental feature. I'm sure we'll see more of this kind of 'seamless branching' for film websites in the near future. The site also features 'red carpet premiere footage' and 'an exclusive clip revealing the first clue', for those into that kind of thing. As for the movie, so far it's at a decent 60% fresh on Rotten Tomatoes. I'm waiting till opening night for the sake of convenience, so I'll let you know on Saturday morning if it's any better than The Da Vinci Code.

Scott Mendelson

Sure to be my wife's very favorite film of 2009: Mega Shark Vs. Giant Octopus

Movie Trailers - Movies Blog

No question, this will be Wendy's favorite movie of the year, if not of all time.

As far as cheese ball monster movies goes, this looks kinda awesome. Unlike certain examples of this... sort of thing (think Ice Spiders) this one actually seems to deliver plenty of what it promises. Will it get the Mega Snake seal of approval? I have no idea, but I guarantee I will end up being forced to see - I mean - have the pleasure of viewing this film as soon as it is released (it comes out next Tuesday on DVD). Come what may, this may be the very definition of a 'great Wendy pick'. Hopefully Allison can watch with us and helpfully exclaim 'uh-oh!' when the shark eats a bridge or the octopus destroys a boat. Don't tell the spouse, but one of the best parts of being married to her is having a fool-proof excuse ('it's for my wife') to watch drek like this.

Scott Mendelson

Star Trek grosses $79 million for the weekend. Mendelson's Memos weekend box office in review (05/10/09).

Here's something I bet you didn't know. Back in 1979 and 1982, Star Trek: The Motion Picture and Star Trek II: The Wrath of Khan broke the opening weekend record with $11.9 million and $14.3 million respectively. So, yes, for a brief period, the Star Trek franchise really was in the same kind of company as Batman and Jurassic Park. Along with Jaws, those three franchises are the only ones ever to have their first two pictures break the opening weekend record consecutively (Batman did it thrice in a row, a still un-bested mark). Indiana Jones did it with films two and three, while Spider-Man did it with films one and three (I'd argue that Spider-Man 2 only missed because Sony chose to open it over the long July 4th weekend). The re-release of Star Wars broke the record in 1978, and Return of the Jedi smashed through the $20 million barrier in the three-day portion of its Memorial Day weekend in 1983. Another neat fact? Every Which Way But Loose was the first film to break the $10 million barrier and Star Wars actually took the weekend box office record from Jaws in its 11th week of original release. So yes, Star Trek used to be very much at or near the top of the short-term box office heap. And, if history is any indication, it'll return again when Star Trek II: Attack of the Klingons is released in summer 2012.

The most shocking thing about Star Trek's weekend performance isn't the alleged $79.2 million in 3.5 days. That's a great number, a nearly three million more than the estimates. No, the shocking part is that, unlike nearly every live-action genre tent pole picture in recent memory, Star Trek's Saturday business actually increased by a token amount from it's opening Friday. The reboot's maiden voyage grossed $27.4 million on Saturday (the pure Friday numbers, including midnight showings, were $26.8 million, meaning it's now the third biggest Friday of 2009). That's an amazing accomplishment in this day and age. In the old days (think anytime before the last six years or so), a film opened on Friday, went up a bit on Saturday, then dipped a little below the Friday number on Saturday. Solid 3x multipliers were common and anything less was a sign of trouble. That's now a thing of the past for anything that is even remotely 'eagerly awaited', with the exception of family-centered animated films (Monsters Vs. Aliens) and/or explicitly grown up entertainment (like The Bourne Ultimatum). Today it's a front-loaded opening day, followed by a token fall on Saturday and Sunday. Long story short, plenty of non-geeks and grown ups decided to check out Star Trek after opening day, and everyone from Friday told their pals to see it. Iron Man was the most recent event picture to pull that off, and we all know how well it held up over the summer.

In 3.5 days, Star Trek has out grossed every single Star Trek picture except for Star Trek: The Motion Picture ($82 million), Star Trek: First Contact ($92 million), and Star Trek IV: The Voyage Home ($109 million). By today, it will be the third highest grossing Trek picture and it'll easily surpass the franchise record by Saturday at the absolute latest. Obviously inflation is not figured into these numbers. No real point complaining, but I'd argue that the Sunday total ($21 million) would probably be higher if not for the fact that today is Mother's Day. It sounds like the film is truly playing like an across-the-board, all-audiences smash hit. This is a big win for Paramount, especially if it plays like a mainstream reboot (Batman Begins, Casino Royale) and less like... well, a Star Trek film. As for final domestic take, I'm thinking $230 million at this point, maybe more if Terminator: Salvation underwhelms (in which case Star Trek has the genre field all to itself for a full month). As it is, solid word of mouth and positive press coverage now makes Star Trek the second choice for most movie goers for a good chunk of June, which is a very nice place to be. To Paramount's credit, they have publicly stated that they are in this for the long haul (which theoretically justifies the film's alleged $200 million+ final cost). They knew that had an audience-pleaser on their hands. Regardless of the final domestic gross, Paramount knew that the series would be in prime position to capitalize on the goodwill of this first picture. Like past 'better than I expected' first films (Austin Powers: International Man Of Mystery, X-Men, The Bourne Identity, Pirates of the Caribbean: Curse of the Black Pearl, Batman Begins, and Casino Royale), the inevitable sequel could nearly double this film's opening weekend take. Right here, right now, I'm calling $100 million+ for the opening weekend of the second Star Trek 2.0 picture.

Wolverine plummeted 69% to $26.4 million ($129 million at ten days out). This is the second biggest drop for any film opening above $50 million (the 69.7% plunge for Ang Lee's Hulk is still tops). Although the film will still be long term profitable for Fox (the worldwide total is already $210 million), I still question the wisdom of the various green-lit spin offs. If Fox can keep X-Men Origins: Magneto or X-Men Origins: Deadpool under $100 million, then they should be OK. But since no studio seems to be able to control budgets these days, I'd be very nervous for the future of the X-Men franchise right now. There is no way in hell that any of these spin-offs is going to open anywhere close to the $85 million that Wolverine opened to, so if they spend the same kind of money, they are just asking for a world of financial hurt. I'd say Fox should just do the X-Men: First Class film, change the young mutants to present day ones, and just call it X-Men 4: First Class. Ghosts of Girlfriends Past dropped a decent 32%, bringing its ten day total to $30 million. Battle For Terra dropped 83%, which stinks for this surprising little gem. It's not perfect, but there are moments of visual poetry and the voice acting is superb (Brian Cox in particular turns in a chillingly low-key turn as a desperate, genocidal villain). More news next weekend as Angels & Demons tries desperately to avoid the 'Tomb Raider trap'. Well, Star Trek did just undo the 'second weekend of summer' death trap, so anything is possible.

Scott Mendelson

The first trailer for The Princess and the Frog: Walt Disney's return to 2D animation.

If the YouTube video is taken down, please go here for an official Quicktime version.

First of all, YAY for one bloody cartoon that isn't in 3D this year. Granted, 3D is neat, but I'd like to start taking my daughter to the movies during off-times, but I fear what the 3D effects (or watching a 3D movie without the glasses) will do to her eyes. Second of all, this looks like oodles of old fashioned fun, very much in the vein of the Disney 1990s epics that redefined them following a thirty-five year slump. The animation is rich, the characters seem well, charactery, and the New Orleans setting should provide plenty of distinct local color. Speaking of color, the film is getting press for featuring Disney's first African American lead 'princess' character. Fair enough, but I do find it curious that said breakthrough occurs in a film where the female lead apparently spends at least 2/3 of the film as a frog (something that the trailer tries very hard to hide). No biggie, this still looks like an old-fashioned winner from the studio that more or less invented the art form.

Scott Mendelson

A franchise opening weekend record, in just over a day! Star Trek banks $31 million in 1.5 days.

Well, I guess Sylar is staying 'dead' for the near future. Yay for Adrian Pasdar's continued employment.

So it's $24 million for Friday and $7 million for Thursday (starting at 7pm), which puts the first 'day' of Star Trek just over the record $30.7 million that Star Trek: First Contact scored on its opening three days in November, 1996. Sounds like a 'second film of summer' curse has just been rendered null and void. Remember all that stuff I wrote last year about how Paramount was crazy to spend $150 million, and it was crazy to move it out of Christmas, and it was crazy to open on the second weekend of summer? You don't? Good, because I never, ever said such things.

Regardless of my feelings for the picture, this is a terrific performance for a franchise reboot that was a huge question mark going into the weekend. Sure the buzz was there and the reviews were super positive, but would casual movie goers dare enter into this most tight-knit of cult communities? Um... yes. Kirk, Spock, and the gang... welcome to the grown ups table. Harry Potter and Bruce Wayne want to say hi. While the opening day and opening weekend won't shatter any non Star Trek-related records (the Friday number is fourth for 2009 behind Watchmen, Fast & Furious, and X-Men Origins: Wolverine), it is still a home run performance on a weekend that has often brought death to dreams of blockbuster-dom. This is no Poseidon, no Speed Racer, nor even a Troy.

As for records, I'm guessing if Paramount wanted an opening day record, they wouldn't have opened it on Thursday at 7pm. But Paramount is playing long-ball with this film and this franchise (to which I say good for them). With word of mouth running quite high (I'm so lonely...), there could be a higher than normal weekend multiplier, maybe something approaching 2.8x. Yes, Star Trek is a genre franchise, so front loaded demand is expected, but the film is gaining fans from all forms of movie goers, so it could very well see only a small drop on Saturday. Worst case scenario gives it $67 million for the weekend, best case gives it about $75 million. Paramount will be delighted with either/or. But that's all speculation until tomorrow. Congratulations to Paramount for running a flawless ad campaign and congratulations to J.J. Abrams for... um... well, hopefully I'll like the sequel more.

X-Men Origins: Wolverine dropped an expectedly large 76% from its opening $35 million Friday. Negating the midnight screenings, the drop is a 'more reasonable' 72%. Either way, this is the complete collapse that everyone and their brother expected. The picture crossed the $100 million mark on Thursday so now the goal is making it to $160 million before Memorial Day weekend. So long, good riddance. I may not have thought that Star Trek was a Ruth Chris fillet mignon, but I know the difference between a Sizzler sirloin and a McDonald's Steak and Egg McMuffin. Better luck next time with X-Men Origins: Deadpool, X-Men Origins: Magneto, and/or X-Men Origins: Wolverine 2: This Time It's the Japanese Storyline That Fans Actually Wanted to See!

Oh, and alas Battle For Terra vanished off the face of the Earth. That's a shame. I saw it yesterday and it's a pretty compelling, artfully poetic little 3D science fiction film. It's no masterpiece, but it goes to some dark places, the vocal cast is excellently low-key, and there is true visual beauty throughout. That's about all the news fit to print for the moment. More can be discussed when the weekend numbers are released.

Scott Mendelson

Land of the Lost trailer 02 goes online.

In case the YouTube link goes bust, here's the legit version. I must say, I've heard better buzz than expected, with the implication that it's closer in tone to Ghostbusters than The Haunted Mansion. And this trailer has several genuinely funny moments (the opening bit with the classroom, the gamesmanship with the T-Rex). I'm starting to wish I had attended Wednesday's screening after all. This is starting to look like quite a bit of fun.

Scott Mendelson

Review: Star Trek (2009)

Star Trek
2009
126 minutes
Rated PG-13

by Scott Mendelson

“You will always be a part of two worlds. And fully capable of deciding your own destiny. The question you face is which path will you choose.”

JJ Abrams's ambitious Star Trek reboot desperately tries to have it both ways. Not confident enough to choose its path, it straddles between affectionately campy homage and its own franchise. Like Bryan Singer's Superman Returns, it is too afraid to boldly chart its own destiny, but refusing to be a true extension of the original franchise. While it portends to separate itself from the Star Trek mythology that inspired it, the picture completely counts on said mythology for any and all emotional impact.

A token amount of plot - Born on the very day his father died aboard a star ship, James T. Kirk (Chris Pine) is adrift on Earth, unable or unwilling to decide what to do with his life. Fate intercedes when Captain Christopher Pike (Bruce Greenwood) challenges him to live up to the courage shown by the George Kirk so many years prior. Meanwhile, on the planet Vulcan, the half-human, half-Vulcan Spock (Zachary Quinto) is torn between his destiny as a Vulcan, and his desire to embrace his human side and join Starfleet. Their destinies will soon intertwine, and the rest of our favorite USS Enterprise crew members will join in a maiden adventure that will test and define them and their novice crew.

For the record, Chris Pine, Zachary Quinto, and the rest of the gang are all in ship-shape form. While Karl Urban comes on a little strong right out of the gate as Dr. McCoy, his character works better once he actually has more to do than complain. With the exception of one first-act scene, Pine keeps the frat-boy rebel cliches to a bare minimum. Quinto gives an impressive interior performance when the script isn't forcing him to give on the nose speeches and engage in plot-mandated emotional outbursts (although I will concede that the follow up to said outburst is an affective and moving scene). The rest of the gang is barely sketched in, but our memory of the original actors does most of the work for us. Sulu's (John Cho) main character beat is cribbed from Galaxy Quest, although he does gets a major action scene. Chekov (Anton Yelchin) speaks in an ultra-thick Russian accent for comic relief and little else, making him the prime candidate to die in the sequel. Scotty (Simon Pegg) shows up fully formed, while Nyota Uhura (Zoe Saldana) is allowed to take her character in some surprising directions.

Taken on their own, many of these characters are paper thin, and the film depends on our affection for their prior legacies in order for us to care about what happens to them. Further more, great pains are made to allow the plot to both set out on its own course while allowing to the prior Star Trek continuity to remain intact. While I won't reveal the details, the film eventually becomes the equivalent of an 'elseworld', except the characters are pretty much the same as they are in the regular Star Trek universe. The film lacks the courage to either stand firmly within Star Trek continuity or completely break free and tell its own story. As it is, we are stuck wondering why we should care about the exploits of basically the Enterprise crew of 'Earth-2'.

Let's put aside the film's lack of courage in picking a path and my distaste for the concept of the 'multiverse'. Taking as its own thing, does the film work? Not really. The villain, played by Eric Bana, is the least interesting adversary in any tent pole adventure film that I can remember. While he is given token 'motivation' against Spock, it doesn't make much sense (had Spock actually been indirectly responsible for Nero's grievance, it would have made more sense and helped the drama), and he is given so little to do that the character becomes 'insert antagonist here'.

Despite the huge budget and attempt at scope, the film is shot mainly in close up, leaving the film feeling more claustrophobic than epic. While the film never, ever stops moving, there is actually very little actual action. Said action beats fail to excite because most of the action involves people running in panic from one room of a star ship to another, or arbitrary scenes of one ship annihilating another (one-sided slaughter isn't action, it's just violence). Plus, much of it is shot and edited in that super-tight, million-edits a second fashion that only Steven Spielberg, John Singleton, and Martin Campbell seem able to avoid. Only a pointless but frightening chase involving a snowy monster and a swashbuckling duel involving Sulu atop a giant drill elicit any sense of excitement. By the time a climactic phaser shoot out occurs, I couldn't help thinking how much more emotionally involved I was in said shoot out at the end of, yes, Galaxy Quest.

There are countless comic callbacks to the original franchise, but most of them feel so forced, out of place, and on the nose that they take us right out of the picture. Various lines of dialogue, action beats, and character moments are rudely inserted from previous films and television episodes. They do not feel organic and imply Abrams's lack of confidence in his own ability to please the Trek fans without resorting to 'oh, that's from that movie/episode' moments. Furthermore, the insertion of the fabled 'Kobayashi Maru' test takes up valuable screen time while seemingly missing the point of the original story. In this variation, Kirk is a cocky punk who cheats out of entitlement, rather than a stubborn refusal to fail. Ironically the best nod to the original show is the subtlest, involving the unspoken destiny of Chief Engineer Olsen.

The biggest 'callback' (this could be considered a spoiler) involves the second act appearance of a major character from the prior franchise. Without going into details, said character becomes an hour long deus ex machina. He constantly offers helpful plot exposition, tells the characters exactly what they need to do in order to progress, and then tells the characters what they should do once the film is complete. Said character comes off not as one imparting wisdom, but rather as one who has already read the script. This element by itself kills much of the dramatic tension in the third act of the picture.

In the end, despite fine acting, several moments of potent drama, solid production values, and high ambitions, Star Trek comes off as a 'Star Trek for dummies' variation on the fabled story. Similar to X-Files: Fight the Future, this film is Star Trek for people who have never seen the shows or the movies, and furthermore need their characters drawn in broad strokes and the philosophies explicitly explained in monologue. Maybe if I had no prior knowledge of the franchise I could take it all at face value and simply acknowledge that it is a broadly drawn big-budget B-movie with an incredibly weak villain and some poorly staged action beats. But because the film continuously reminds us of its legacy, I have no choice but to judge it in comparison to its predecessors. There is potential for a solid franchise with these actors, after all the even-numbered sequels are almost always the best. But, despite all the pomp and circumstance, J.J. Abrams's Star Trek remains merely another disappointing odd-numbered Star Trek picture.

Grade: C+