Note to all of my readers...

I am going to be taking a sabbatical of sorts over the next several days.  I may get a chance to write, but I can't promise and didn't want to leave anyone wondering where the heck I went.  Anyway, for those who crave new content on this site (HA!), feel free to check out the archives.  The blog's true beginnings go back to around late-April 2008, so that's a good place to start.  Anyway take care, have fun, and I'll see you when I see you.

Scott Mendelson

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.  

The 2011 movie year in box office trends part III: The box office and attendance was down, but the films were cheaper and leggier too.

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...

Box Office was down, but so were the Budgets!

This was yet another year with pundits and armchair critics whining about 'SLUMPS!' and/or complaining about how 'This weekend's total box office didn't equal the total box office of this weekend last year!', as if no one realized that different films make different amounts of money.  Because this needs to be said again, we can't whine about a steady diet of franchise pictures, animated films, and reboots but then complain when smaller pictures don't gross as much on opening weekend.  But putting that aside, total box office was down around 3.8% compared to 2010.  That's a difference of $494 million, or two or three massive unexpected smash hits (a Passion of the Christ) or a handful of major tentpole films not making quite as much as they might have been expected to make.

Follow the bouncing bat! A simple way to deal with that pesky "What the hell did Bane just say?" Dark Knight Rises issue...

There have been rumblings in the blogosphere today that Warner Bros. may or may not have stealthily replaced the Dark Knight Rises IMAX prologue audio tracks with a new mix of said sequence, one with allegedly cleaned-up audio.  This follows two weeks of breathless debate among the geek-squad about whether Chris Nolan should or shouldn't alter the vocal performance of Tom Hardy's Bane (presumably with Hardy's ADR-assistance) in order to appease fans who were unable to hear the primary villain's astute monologuing.  Nolan's position is that the muscle-bound cult leader/terrorist/Mary Sue was always intended to be slightly difficult to understand, so paying audiences can  suck it.

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).

Everytime I see a link to a Men In Black 3 behind-the-scenes story, I think I'm about to see this...

"We're leaving!"

Scott Mendelson

The 2011 movie year in box office trends part I: Sequels drop domestically, but soar internationally.

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...

Sequels grossed less here, but much more over there!

Back in the 1980s and 1990s, with a few exceptions, it was generally a foregone conclusion that sequels would cost more than the originals but gross a bit less.  Normal were sequels like Indiana Jones and the Temple of Doom ($184 million versus $242 million for Raiders of the Lost Ark) or Batman Returns ($162 million vs. $251 million for Batman).  Yes, you occasionally had a break-out franchise like Lethal Weapon ($65 million for Lethal Weapon, $147 million for Lethal Weapon 2), but the franchise growth pattern was generally closer to the likes of Beverly Hills Cop or Gremlins.  But sometime around 2001, starting with The Mummy Returns ($202 million versus $155 million for The Mummy) and Rush Hour 2 ($226m/$141m), we started a ten-year trend of sequels generally out-grossing their predecessors domestically.  You could argue the first big example was Austin Powers: The Spy Who Shagged Me, which out-grossed its predecessor in just its opening weekend in June 1999, but the general rule quickly became that a well-marketed sequel to a popular original could be expected to out-gross its immediate predecessor in America.

2011 year-end wrap-up parts I-VI, all in one spot!

For those who don't want to hunt for lists, here is a handy one-stop shopping place for my six 2011 year-end wrap-up lists.  I saw over 200 films this year and ended up writing about 70 of them. I may do a piece tomorrow about the various box office trends of the year, but for those who want just the movies, be they good, bad, or ugly, this is the place to go. So without further ado, here you go...

The Underrated films of 2011

The Overrated films of 2011

The Good films you Missed of 2011

The Worst films of 2011

The Runner-Ups of 2011

The "Best" films of 2011

Scott Mendelson

Weekend Box Office (01/01/12): Strong holdovers close out 2011 movie year.

As is often the case, the last weekend of the year is basically a repeat of last weekend, both in general ranking and numbers, as the holiday weekend tends to keep drops low, if often absent.  Mission: Impossible- Ghost Protocol led the pack of major Christmas and holiday releases that actually went up from last weekend.  The Brad Bird spy thriller earned $31 million over Fri-Sun, with an eye towards a likely $40 million four-day holiday weekend.  At the end of its third weekend, the first of which was IMAX-exclusive, the crowd-pleasing Tom Cruise vehicle will have grossed $140 million by Monday, which means it has already outgrossed the $134 million-grossing Mission: Impossible III.  Overseas, the sequel is doing even bigger business, with a worldwide total of $324 million as we close out 2011.  The $215 million gross of John Woo's Mission: Impossible II is likely out of reach, but surpassing the $181 million gross from Brian DePalma's Mission: Impossible is not only possible but plausible.  Worldwide, the film is shaping up to be $600 million earner, the respective totals, speculative as they may be now, would make this film Tom Cruise's third-biggest domestic grosser and his biggest worldwide earner ever.  MI4 already ranks ninth on both lists.