Less is more. Why Marvel's decision to increase Iron Man 3's budget by $60 million may not be a net-positive.

This is old news, but it broke while I was busy and I suppose the release of the first official still is as good a time to discuss this as any.  Despite commentary running up to the release of The Avengers swearing that Shane Black's Iron Man 3 would be a scaled-back and character-centric affair, it now appears that the eye-popping success of The Avengers has changed the template over at Marvel.  The film's budget of $140 million has now been raised by a whopping $60 million, so that it will now cost $200 million assuming everything gets done on time and on schedule.  Instead of promising a low-key character drama loosely based on "Extremis", Iron Man 3 is now intended to be the biggest Marvel movie yet!  Iron Man 2 cost $200 million and still felt incredibly small-scale and the $140 million Captain America was the only pre-Avengers film that actually felt 'big'.  It's not that money can't buy quality or anything obvious like that, it's the idea that money wrongly applied and/or given to a film purely because it can be sometimes does more harm than good.

Money for nothing: A commercial (not artistic) defense of Paramount's decision to convert GI Joe Retaliation to 3D.

As most of you know, Paramount has announced that it is moving one of its three major summer releases, G.I. Joe: Retaliation, from June 29th, 2012 to March 29th, 2013.  The official reason for this date change is not quality issues with the film, the need for reshoots, problems with the marketing, or the desire to 'unkill Channing Tatum due to his increased visibility/profile. but purely because they want to take the extra nine months to convert the film to 3D for theatrical release.  Obviously most of the film punditry world is crying foul over this decision and as someone who was looking forward to the film I sympathize.  But putting aside the "I want to see it *now*!" and the "I hate needless and/or post-converted 3D!" arguments, it's tough in this current box office climate to argue that Paramount didn't make the right call.  Since Avatar kick-started the 3D trend 2.5 years ago, there has been a flurry of would-be tentpole films going the 3D route and an equal number of would-be blockbusters choosing to renounce the gimmick and go out as 2D only.  While we can all appreciate the filmmakers who stuck to their artistic guns in the face of box office pressure, the truth of the matter is that in today's marketplace, where a big-budget film's financial fate is often decided by overseas dollars, it's almost fiscal self-injury not to make the call.  For anywhere from $10 million to $20 million extra, you can add around 15-20% to your opening weekend grosses and around 15% to your total domestic box office, with an un-quantifiable upshot for foreign grosses.  For numbers like that, why *wouldn't* you convert your purely commercial popcorn adventure film to 3D?

Pet Peeve of the day: Attention movie bloggers/writers - Stop spoiling unreleased films by discussing what does or doesn't happen in the sequel!

I don't mean to keep picking on John Carter, I really don't.  In fact, if nothing else, this article gives me an excuse to embed the above fan-made trailer (that Devin Faraci brought to my attention) which is not only a much better trailer than any of the official ones cut by Disney, but actually makes the movie look somewhat impressive.  But I am again discussing John Carter because I happened to scan the headline for an interview with an actor who stars in the picture.  I'm not going to name the actor/actress, but I will link to the piece out of fairness to the original writers over at the otherwise esteemed The Playlist.  Said headline (and article) contains what would arguably be considered a massive spoiler.  What does said actor reveal in the interview?  Well, merely that said thespian is indeed signed for a sequel or two to John Carter should the film's box office performance merit a sequel.  So, purely from the basis on that statement, we know that at least one of the major characters in John Carter does indeed live to see a sequel.

The 2011 movie year in box office trends part II: 3D matters, except when it doesn't.

I generally dislike trend pieces. I'm a strong proponent of the idea that how well a film does is specific to the movie itself.  That having been said, there were a handful of interesting patterns that did rear their ugly or not-so ugly heads this year.  These pieces will be more about box office trends and what they may mean for the future.  Without further ado, here we go...

3D matters, except when it doesn't!

I wrote about this back when summer ended, but the last four months of 2011 reiterated the same message: It's the movie!  3D cannot make a would-be flop into a hit.  But where it can (and did) help this year is in getting predestined blockbusters to greater heights of would-be box office glory.  Without 3D, it stands to reason that Pirates of the Caribbean: On Stranger Tides would have barely made it past $200 million, that Green Lantern would have struggled to top $100 million, and Transformers: Dark of the Moon would have ended up closer to the first film's $319 million gross.  Thor and Captain America ended up with $175-180 million at least partially due to the 3D ticket-price bump, without which they would have ended up closer to the $130-155 million grosses of Ghost Rider, Fantastic Four, and/or The Incredible Hulk.  Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows part II broke the opening weekend box office record partially because of the 3D-bump, as even just 43% of opening weekend ticket-buyers making that choice was enough to put it past The Dark Knight's $158 million debut (in just 2D, barring other variables, Harry Potter 7.2 would have debuted at just over $150 million, or good for third place on the list).

The Avengers trailer delivers kaboom, but it looks oddly small, soulless, artless.

Well, this is indeed a teaser for The Avengers.  I don't expect to see a ton of new footage behind what was teased in the Captain America credits sequence last July, but I am weary that this trailer is actually a perfect example of what I discussed yesterday.  While the film seems action packed, you'll notice that 80% of the action beats seem to be from the same exterior sequence, which is indeed the finale of the picture (with the remaining 20% apparently from a second-act invasion of the 'hall of justice').  With a budget of $220 million, only $20 million more than the nearly action-less Iron Man 2, will the film be mostly set-up for one giant battle in the last 20-30 minutes?  What we do see looks fine, if a bit small in scale and lacking any real sense of art or purpose.  Yes the special effects are not done, and I wonder if we'll see alien ships in that big shot of the randomly exploding cars in the final cut, but what's there pales in comparison to the sense of scale found in any number of big tentpoles of late (Transformers: Dark of the Moon, Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows part II, even Battle: Los Angeles).  It's characters we know and love basically posing for the camera (with Johansson again causing an explosion with her farting) and trying to convince us, the already converted, how bad-ass these heroes allegedly are.

Avengers assemble in poorly-photoshopped Entertainment Weekly cover.

It's no great tragedy, but the photo-shopping on display is pretty terrible.  The only real harm is that this poorly constructed and awkward Entertainment Weekly cover will probably count as a 'first look' for a large number of general moviegoers, just the sort that need to be intrigued to get this sure-to-be expensive comic book epic over the $185 million mark that seems to be the ceiling that non-Iron Man Marvel Studios projects seem to be reaching for.  Of course, Tony Stark is in this picture, but it really isn't going to be Iron Man 3 (especially since Thor and Captain America both did well this summer).  Anyway, enjoy Mark Ruffalo giving his best 'blue steel' look.  Derek Zoolander would approve.

Scott Mendelson

Weekend Box Office (07/31/11) part II: Attack the Block scores in limited release, Captain America tumbles, Harry Potter 7.2 crosses $1 billion worldwide.

Meanwhile, a little farther down the chart, the much-anticipated and raved-about by geek critics Attack the Block was released on just eight screens by Screen Gems, with respectable results.  The film earned $130,000 for a solid $16,307 per-screen average.  Of course, this means little in terms of the film's mainstream play ability, and I do not yet know the expansion plans for the British alien invasion import.  But every movie geek on my Twitter feed has been begging everyone else to see this one.  As for me, I'm hoping that it goes to the much closer Arclight Sherman Oaks next weekend (as opposed to the much farther Arclight Hollywood).  I'm also a little nervous about those allegedly thick British accents, as I'm a little hard of hearing and am debating on waiting for the subtitled-DVD.  But for those unafraid of accents, everyone I know seems to have really enjoyed this one.  Also debuting in limited release was The Devil's Double ($95,000 on five screens) and The Guard ($80,000 on four screens).

The movie or the marketing? Will going from Paramount to Disney help or hurt Marvel Studios' upcoming films?

It is a clear case of quitting while you're ahead.  Paramount pulled off another $65 million+ opening weekend for another Marvel property, this time with the somewhat more questionable Captain America.  Despite opening in the middle of summer and without the IMAX advantage, Captain America still opened with almost identical numbers to Thor's debut last May ($100,000 more as of this writing).  And that's all she wrote for the three-year long distribution relationship between Marvel Studios and Paramount.  Thanks to a deal whereby Paramount basically sold the distribution rights to any Marvel characters they had dibs on (The Avengers, Captain America, Thor, Iron Man, etc) to Disney for $115 million late last year, the fate of the ongoing Marvel movie mythology rests with The Mouse House.  As you recall, Disney bought Marvel Studios for $4 billion just under two years ago, but many of the most popular Marvel properties (X-Men, Spider-Man, Daredevil, Fantastic Four, Ghost Rider, etc) belonged to other studios.  Disney grabbing back Paramount's key properties was a major step in bringing the Marvel universe under one studio roof (and likely the last step for awhile, as I imagine that Fox and Sony will keep rebooting or remaking their respective properties until doomsday).  But for now the question is simply: Will the Marvel Studios film universe suffer without the seemingly unbeatable Paramount marketing team?

Weekend Box Office: (07/24/11): Captain America opens with $65m, Friends With Benefits opens to $19m, Harry Potter 7.2 drops 72% but dominates worldwide..

Captain America: The First Avenger (review) debuted at number one this weekend, earning a rock-solid $65.1 million.  The opening puts it just behind Thor ($65.7 million) for the second-biggest superhero debut of the year.  The film scored an A- from Cinemascore and had an okay 2.52x weekend multiplier.  It played 64% male and 57% over-25 (I don't have 3D stats yet).  I had hopes for a higher opening weekend after the $4 million midnight debut (bigger than any non-sequel this year), but in the end it played like every other super hero film this year.  On a personal note, I'm a little disappointed that the film didn't play better to women, as Hayley Atwell's Peggy Carter ranks as one of the best female lead/love interest characters in comic book movie history (IE - she's an authoritative ass-kicker whose general bad ass-ness is taken completely for granted and whose eventual romance with Steve Rogers actually has emotional weight).  Still the large over-25 percentage implies that the film is playing well to older audiences who were drawn in more by the period and the older actors (Tommy Lee Jones, Stanley Tucci, etc) than the comic book genre or character popularity.  Still those older audiences are being heavily targeted by Universal's campaign for Cowboys and Aliens (also based on a comic book, albeit a relatively cult one), which hopes to lasso non-geeks with the James Bond (Daniel Craig) teams with Indiana Jones (Harrison Ford) gimmick.  Barring unexpected collapse, it should go toe-to-toe with Thor, which just crossed $180 million this weekend.  Overseas numbers are a bigger question (the movie doesn't expand much internationally for a couple weeks), as Paramount is emphasizing the international nature of Captain America's 'Howling Commandos' as well as the fact that the primary threat isn't nation-specific (IE - Red Skull is too crazy even for the Nazis!).  But for now, this is a dynamite debut for one of the summer's biggest question marks, fitting for a movie that turned out to be far better than most were expecting (and if you're that idiot who wants to assign the movie to a specific ideology, READ THIS first).  

Midnight movie math: Captain America: The First Avenger scores $4 million at 12:01am, setting the stage for a dynamite $61-88 million opening weekend.

Captain America: The First Avenger grossed $4 million at midnight alone, scoring the fifth-biggest midnight gross of the year, behind Pirates of the Caribbean: On Stranger Tides ($4.6 million), Transformers: Dark of the Moon ($8 million in midnight tickets, plus $5.5 million in advance-night showings), The Hangover II ($10 million on a Wednesday night), and Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows part II ($43.5 million).  So Captain America has the biggest midnight haul for a non-sequel in 2011.  As you know if you've been following all summer, most genre movies that aren't insanely anticipated (IE - not a Harry Potter film or a Twilight sequel) do between 4.5% and 6.5% of their opening weekend at those12:01am showings.  That puts Captain America: The First Avenger on a course for at least $61 million, with as much as $88 million over the next three days.  Predicting how front loaded it will be in relation to the midnight gross is merely an educated guess at this point.  One would presume that the strong reviews, World War II setting, and recognizable grown-up actors (Tommy Lee Jones, Stanley Tucci) would bring out certain audience segments not otherwise inclined to check out yet another comic book film.  So the % we're dealing with is probably closer to the 5.2% of Pirates 4 than the 6.4% of Green Lantern.  For now, let's call it at 5% and predict a $80 million opening weekend for Captain America: The First Avenger.  Obviously we'll know more in about 12 hours.

Scott Mendelson    

Review: Captain America (2011) saves best pre-Avengers film for last, offering wonderful characterization and old-school adventure.

Captain America: The First Avenger
2011
124 minutes
rated PG-13

by Scott Mendelson

Joe Johnston's Captain America is a gloriously old-fashioned bit of shoe-leather adventure. While there are plenty of elaborate special effects, the emphasis remains on character and narrative. Like the best of the recent comic book films, this is a genre film first and a comic book adaptation second. It is, at its core, a genuine World War II action picture that happens to be based on a comic book. It is filled with terrific actors doing wonderful character turns. It is filled with colorful heroes and dastardly villains, plus dames who have more important things to do than stand around and look pretty. It has a wonderful score, a variety of exciting locations, and a number of solid action sequences that feel real even when we can see the strings. It is, to put it simply, a real movie, a genuine piece of pop-art that is the kind of comic book film built for those who generally aren't in to comic book movies.

New (and slightly silly) international Captain America poster again sells Steve Rogers unmasked, highlights supporting ensemble.

This time around, it's the supporting cast that merits notice.  They are (roll call!): J.J. Feild as James Montgomery Farnsworth, Sebastian Stan as Bucky Barnes, Tommy Lee Jones as Col. Chester Phillips, Hayley Atwell as Peggy Carter, and Neal McDonough as Dum Dum Dugan. I didn't even realize McDonough was in this picture.  Obviously that big red head watching them is Hugo Weaving as The Red Skull.  And oddly missing from this ensemble is Stanley Tucci.  As for the art itself, it's a bit goofy, but A) it captures the gee-wiz adventure that's been a cornerstone of the ad campaign thus far and B) it's still better than the awful Batman-centric Dark Knight posters from three years back (where the main poster art had a giant wheel as its center of attention).  Anyway, Captain America drops on July 22nd, so expect to start seeing long-lead screenings sometime towards the end of next week, with resulting reviews to start leaking just in time to try to steal geek press away from Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows part II.  I'm sure I'll see it at the All-Media on the Monday or Tuesday before opening, like all the other 'regular critics'.

Scott Mendelson

Captain America gets a terrific trailer, selling old-school patriotism and adventure.

First of all, the tagline ('heroes are made in America') is a nice touch, showing that Paramount is unafraid of actually selling the fact that the lead character is indeed code-named Captain 'America'.  As for the footage, it frankly looks spectacular.  This is the first big-scale comic book adaptation in a good-long while that actually feels like an actual adventure.  While I'm sure there is plenty of CGI-enhanced material throughout (and as long as it works, why not?), the feeling is predominantly old-school.  With Steve Rogers ziplining into battle, racing aboard a snow-covered train, and swinging into harm's way, Joe Johnston seems to remember that super heroes should generally engage in super heroics.  It is also the first of the Marvel movies that doesn't look kinda cheap thus far.  This one drops July 22nd so, as always, we'll see...

Scott Mendelson

Captain America gets another Steve Rogers-centric poster. Paramount and Marvel are smartly selling the man, not the myth.

Only two real thoughts here (other than it's a nice colorful poster).  A) It's nice that, at least in America, they are playing down that whole 'the first avenger' silliness.  B) It's worth noting that Marvel and Paramount has been so far selling this less as a 'Captain America adventure' than as a 'Steve Rogers adventure'.  It's a smart move, as we all know that once you have the audience caring about the man behind the mask, they'll care all the more about the larger-than-life theatrics that take place.  This one allegedly screened last week to rapturous buzz, so we'll see if Paramount plans to truly long-lead this one, and if I can sneak into anything sooner than the All Media.  And yes, even my wife is wondering why the hell Paramount isn't opening this thing next weekend.  Why indeed... Share your thoughts below.

Scott Mendelson

Yes, this new retro Captain America poster (a gift for cast/crew) sure is swell!

This probably won't sell a single ticket to the younger audiences, but it's a shame that Marvel/Paramount didn't take a chance using art like this to rope in older moviegoers.  Anyway, there is allegedly a new trailer debuting sometime next week.

Scott Mendelson

3D isn't dying, it's just leveling out. Why consumers choosing 2D is a good for the 3D format and good for the industry.

The sky is not falling in the realm of 3D films.  There has been much handwringing over the last couple weeks as moviegoers have embraced their right to choose to see the latest summer tentpoles in 2D over the higher-priced 3D venues.  For the record, over the last two weekends, audiences purchased tickets to Kung Fu Panda 2 and Pirates of the Caribbean: On Stranger Tides in their respective 2D formats at a rate of 55/45.  So, despite those films playing in majority 3D theaters (around 65%), 3D ticket sales made up only 45% of the box office for their respective opening weekends.  This is not a new issue and it is not cause for panic or rebuttal.  Rather, it is a healthy sign that audiences are making an informed choice and that studios are offering a wide swath of moviegoers a genuine option when it comes to their 3D franchise pictures.

At long last, Captain America: the First Avenger gets a star-spangled trailer.

The word of the day: adventure. Joe Johnston seems to be toeing the line between serious World War II melodrama and gee-whiz bubblegum adventure. Most interesting is that this is the rare comic book adaptation that doesn't feel narratively claustrophobic. I certainly won't call the Dolph Lundgren Punisher film any kind of good movie, but one of the things I liked is that it remains one of the only modern book movies where the hero simply sets out to solve a problem that he did not create and fight a villain that he is not personally connected to. There has been so much emphasis on recent comic book films of making every conflict inherently personal that it's kinda cool that at least one comic book film was basically 'a day in the life of...'. This film seems to be an origin story, followed by what just happens to be Steve Rogers first mission.

Am I the only one excited? Albert Pyun's 1990 Captain America to get 124-minute director's cut, Blu Ray release in May.

Thanks to The Playlist who spotted this iO9 article, but it appears that I may have to put my intended random thoughts/review of the original 1990 Captain America on hold. Yes, I still have a copy of it, taped off of Cinemax or HBO in the early 1990s. Point being, yes Albert Pryun's legendary cheapo Steve Rogers epic (starring Matt Salinger, son of JD) is all kinds of bad, but I've always had a soft spot for it. Maybe it's because it's often obscenely violent for a seemingly kid-friendly PG-13 adventure film (it opens with a machine gun massacre of civilians and kills off several major characters during its 90 minute running time), maybe because Scott Paulin makes an oddly affecting Red Skull, maybe because it gets the finale just right (good guy and bad guy, both in their proper super-costumes, fighting to the death atop a castle), or maybe it's just because I was ten years old when I first saw it and I haven't been dumb enough to watch it in at least fifteen years. Anyway, according to director Albert Pyun (who was the Ewe Boll of his direct-to-VHS day) claims that there is a 124 minute director's cut, and that said version will be released on Blu Ray in May. So yes, count me as among the few (the not-so-proud) actually looking forward to getting a decent copy, in a director's cut no less, of this childhood treasure. Don't worry, I won't make Allison watch it with me. Well, not unless she REALLY misbehaves.

Scott Mendelson

Captain America gets an exciting, but poorly targeted Super Bowl teaser.

I'm not going to do a rundown of every single Super Bowl movie ad, primarily because there were just too many of them. But let's start with what was easily the most-anticipated preview of the night, Captain America: The First Avenger. Unfortunately, due to the way Marvel is selling this thing, we have to discuss the trailer on two levels. As far as the actual visual footage, it was pretty impressive. The battle footage looks real, with the exception of the 'flying into the sky' shot at 0:18, and the opening narration lent a tone of gravity to the proceedings (thank you Stanley Tucci). Aside from actually seeing Cap in action, the big tease was the reveal of Red Skull at 0:24. Technically the make-up looks better than that worn by Scott Paulin back in 1990, but it's still a guy with a red skull (my first thought was Tim Curry in Legend). The clip was exciting, even if there was no attempt made to establish the tone of this particular Marvel adventure.

Captain America: The First Avenger gets a moody, dour poster, apparently inspired by Ed Brubaker's terrific story arc.

Just two days until the teaser premieres during this Sunday's Super Bowl, Paramount has released this genuinely compelling teaser poster. The tagline 'Avenge' is a bit silly, since the plot elements relating to The Avengers are theoretically not going to come into play until the last act of the picture. Yes, we know that Marvel is desperately trying to tie in Thor and Captain America with The Avengers (and Captain America: The First Avenger will indeed be called merely 'The First Avenger' in several foreign markets), but I think most US moviegoers won't care about the six degrees of separation. They'll either line up to see a Captain America movie or they won't. Regardless, this poster is indeed modeled after the cover-art from the fourth issue of Ed Brubaker's dynamite Captain America run. The more I hear about the film using Brubaker's arc as the primary tonal basis for the picture, the more excited I get about the Joe Johnston picture. It's no secret that I'm a hardcore fan of Ed Brubaker, and let's all remember that the tone for Nolan's Batman Begins was based on the post-"No Man's Land" work from Ed Brubaker (Batman), Greg Rucka (Detective Comics), and Devin Grayson (Batman: Gotham Knights) as much as it was based on Frank Miller's Batman: Year One or Jeph Loeb's The Long Halloween. And as for his "uncredited work" on The Dark Knight, I dealt with that three years ago.

Scott Mendelson