Box Office Outlook: Horton Hears A Payday

By Katey Rich

Last weekend was pretty epic, at least in concept rather than box office figures. Filmmakers were aiming high, with prehistoric cavemen and 1930s farces and, OK, an easy Martin Lawrence comedy involving Donny Osmond and a pig. But this weekend we're looking at some pretty familiar concepts, even if they may not be all they appear to be on the surface. Another adaptation of a Dr. Seuss book, but hold the phone! It's apparently good! That plus a fighting drama that appears to have no plot, an apocalyptic thriller that really appears to have no plot, and a horror thriller that appears to be a genre exercise but turns into something much darker. I think I speak for all the critics when I say, "Is it time for Iron Man yet?"

HORTON HEARS A WHO. Opening in 3,954 theatres. Veteran Dr. Seuss voicer Jim Carrey is the title character of Horton, an elephant who seems to go a little crazy when he hears voices coming from motes of dust. Turns out there's an entire tiny civilzation living there, called Whos. No one believes Horton when he explains about the Whos, but soon he must fight to save their civilization. The book is the origin of the phrase "A person's a person, no matter how small," which caused Dr. Seuss himself to sue pro-life groups that wanted to adopt the phrase. Steve Carell, Carol Burnett, Seth Rogen, Amy Poehler and Isla Fisher, among others, also provide voices.

I think A.O. Scott at The New York Times pretty much says it all in the first line of his review: "What distinguishes "Horton Hears a Who!" from the other recent Dr. Seuss film adaptations is that it is not one of the worst movies ever made." Wait, really? How can this be?  "A felicitous group effort," writes Lisa Scharzbaum at Entertainment Weekly, "true to the Seuss vision, with a contemporary integrity that makes full use of CG power without sacrificing the delicacy of the author's springy, zingy illustrations." The Village Voice is even happy with the film's overall message: "Respect is what Horton's preaching, and that's a message to be foisted on children guilt-free." Only Variety dissents, finding the movie more like the other Seuss adaptations: "What we get is action for action's sake, cartoon violence and a whole lot of hubbub."

NEVER BACK DOWN. Opening in 2,729 theatres. It's been a long time since the first Karate Kid, so it seems it's time for a new one! That's the basic idea behind Never Back Down, a coming-of-age martial arts drama that features all the familiar faces. The new kid on the block (Sean Faris) has a run-in with the school bully (Cam Gigandet), and in order to prove himself to his family and The Girl (Amber Heard), he undergoes martial arts training with a mysterious, exotic guru (Djimon Hounsou). Cue the inspirational training montage!

Most critics saw this movie as a retread of classic tropes and not much more. "A boneheaded cliche-rama built around six-pack-ab standoffs between preening studs," scowls The Washington Post. Newsday cries foul for all the usual reasons: "Serves up the usual numbing admixture of pounding rock ditties, athlete-in-training montages and kissy-kissy with the ostensible object of Jake's affection." But the Hollywood Reporter actually kinda liked it, predicting, "It's energetic and warm-hearted enough to become a word-of-mouth hit." And the Village Voice gives faint praise by calling it "better than expected," and makes a prediction of their own: "It may be just OK now�but trust me, when it airs at 2 a.m. on Spike between male-enhancement ads, it's gonna look like The Magnificent freakin' Ambersons." Something tells me that, if Orson Welles were alive, he'd now be prepping for a martial arts match against the Voice.

DOOMSDAY. Opening in 1,936 theatres. I'll be struggling to get the details of this movie straight, since it hasn't been screened for critics and there's not much information out there about it. Apparently a mash-up between Escape from New York and Mad Max, Doomsday takes place after a virus broke out in Scotland and threatened to infect all of humanity. The English goverment responded by quarantining Scotland, but turned the entire country into a slum as a result. Now the virus is threatening to make a comeback, so several scientists must travel to walled-off Scotland to find the survivors who may be able to provide a cure.

Well... it wasn't screened for critics, so what are you really expecting? The few reviews already out there are pretty grim. Brian Orndorf calls it "A mess of lousy filmmaking and unrelenting artistic bankruptcy, smashed together to form an ear-splitting, overcooked, awfully irritating shell of an experience." PopSyndicate.com concludes it's a movie only for the fans of the films it ripped off, writing, "Fans of both Escape and Mad Max will probably enjoy this harder version of those films." But Metro Mix dares to give it a little credit: "Doomsday has no shortage of ideas and over-the-top action set-pieces. Whether that makes it an unwieldy mess or a consistently surprising guilty pleasure will be a matter of taste, but it's hardly the abomination suggested by the absence of advance critics' screenings."

FUNNY GAMES. Opening in 289 theatres. Ten years ago Michael Haneke wrote and directed Funny Games, a German-language horror thriller that deconstructed itself and, in the process, the power of movies over their audiences. Now Haneke has remade his own film, shot-by-shot, in English, as an attempt to reach the American audience at whom he feels his film is aimed. Naomi Watts and Tim Roth star as a wealthy couple whose trip to their weekend home is interrupted by two young psychopaths (Michael Pitt and Brady Corbet), who intend to torture, beat and eventually kill the couple and their young son. The boys, who insist on a veneer of politeness at all times, call their psychological torment "games." The film is also highly self-aware, and Haneke's intent is to make the audience reckon with their love of violent movies.

Oh boy. I'm going to be self-serving for a second and start with my own review, at CinemaBlend.com. "Haneke's confrontational use of film style to get across the same point [as Hitchcock] does not make him innovative or unique; it makes him childish." I worried I would be the only critic unmoved by Haneke's filmmaking talent, but it looks like many critics were just as repulsed. Dana Stevens at Slate shares my hatred of one of the killers-- "rarely have I hated a movie villain like I loathed the preening, entitled douchebag that Michael Pitt plays in this movie"-- and can't go along with Haneke's experiment: "The movie's attempt to combine cool Brechtian remove with the highly realistic depiction of physical and psychological torture ultimately backfires on its auteur." Rex Reed, never one to mince words, is more succinct: "I want to see a tall building fall on Michael Haneke." But some critics' opinions fell on the side of artistry. The Philadelphia Inquirer writes, "[Haneke] is an adept manipulator who goes one better by calling attention to his manipulations, questioning them, and then, still, managing to freak us out in the coldest, cruelest ways." And Owen Glieberman at Entertainment Weekly writes, "It's been made with brutal fascination and skill, and a kind of sick-puppy suspense."