Monday, November 5, 2007

Sweeney Todd: Best Picture Shoo-In?


By Katey Rich

There's been a downright funny back-and-forth happening on a series of Oscar blogs in the last few days, after the Los Angeles Times' Tom O'Neil predicted, sight-unseen, that Sweeney Todd would walk away with Best Picture come Oscar time. A number of bloggers, remembering O'Neil's hosannas of praise for Dreamgirls last winter, immediately called him crazy, with New York magazine's Culture Vulture blog laughing off O'Neil's comparison to the merry-murderesses of Chicago: "We think it's a little silly to compare the glossy, glitzy, cartoony babes in Chicago with the pale, Victorian, Burtonized Johnny Depp and Helena Bonham Carter in Sweeney Todd." Hollywood Elsewhere compares him to Network's Howard Beale, who was crazy, but hey, ahead of his time.



I, like O'Neil, haven't seen Sweeney Todd, and I also never saw the musical. I know many of its prophets, however-- my friend Jess described it as "a really spectacular, well-told revenge tale, [...] totally epic," which sounds like Oscar bait to me. But still: a Tim Burton film for Best Picture? A Tim Burton film about a serial killer? (You'd think the one about a sweet-tempered topiary trimmer would have had a better chance) Harry Knowles at Ain't It Cool has posted the first review of the film, and even though he's not exactly in the highest echelon of critics (he uses the word "friggin'", for example), he loved it. "One of the most lush and beautifully captured films I've seen [...] At every level the film works. I feel this was one of those perfect material, perfect cast [projects,] resulting in the best work from Burton in over a decade. And that's a great thing for all of us."



Compared to the reviews that were called "raves" of There WIll Be Blood, Knowles' review is kissing Sweeney's feet. It still doesn't convince me, though, that Sweeney Todd can be anything but a much-beloved movie musical that still doesn't translate to major awards. Sure, the Golden Globes have a whole category for musical and comedy, but even there Sweeney will be facing tough competition from Juno. And even in a season full of dark Oscar contenders (Sweeney can't possibly be more violent than No Country for Old Men), Burton's gothic style has never particularly appealed to the Academy.



I'm prepared to, and would be happy to, eat my words on this one, but for now I'm not getting my hopes up. If I'm right, though, I'll look forward to Tom O'Neil standing up and screaming to the Academy "I'm mad as hell, and I'm not gonna take it anymore!"



Weekend Roundup: Gangsters Steal the Money From Honey!


By Katey Rich

I guess I owe Denzel Washington an apology: when predicting the weekend box office last Friday, I barely gave American Gangster a fighting chance against Bee Movie, figuring the cartoon's massive marketing budget and wide appeal would overcome a gritty 70s-era crime movie. It turns out, though, despite all the naysayers of this fall who think that adult film have lost their appeal, grown-ups still go to the movies for something other than torture porn! Gangster ruled the box office with a $46 million haul, $7 million more than Bee Movie and the best opening for a crime drama ever (so there, Scorsese!).



Those two hits brought the weekend's total gross to above that of this period last year for the first time in six weeks, possibly ending studio hand-wringing that this summer's success was just a fluke. The only other wide release this weekend, Martian Child, barely made an impact, with a $3.6 million take from over 2,000 screens. Holdovers, however, continued to perform: Saw IV slipped 60% from last weekend but still managed to come in at #3 with $11 million, and Dan in Real Life stayed right behind it at #4 (#2 last week) with $8 million. 30 Days of Night came in at #5, even though it lost 230 theatres, indicating the vampire story's opening-weekend success was probably only possible in a pre-Saw IV world. And even with Bee Movie out there, people continued wanting to see the family-friendly The Game Plan, helping it land that #6 slot with $3.8 million.



This is yet another weekend in which I don't get the complaining about George Clooney's star appeal; Michael Clayton continues holding steady in the top 10 in its fifth weekend, earning $2.9 million to put it at #8. And the other grown-up crime drama out there, Gone Baby Gone, is also holding in there at #10, having taken in $2.4 million. I don't like the idea that it's slipping out of the top 10, and already losing theaters; a movie with this kind of wide appeal doesn't deserve to be relegated to Oscar prognostication and nothing else so early in its run.



Why Did I Get Married? rounds out the top 10 at #9, with a $2.7 million take. Having brought in over $51 million so far, it's the second-biggest grosser of the top 10 (behind The Game Plan), and continues to prove that, when it comes to box office, Tyler Perry truly operates in a realm of his own.



A full list of Box Office Mojo's top 20 is after the jump. Note that We Own the Night, Elizabeth: The Golden Age, and Rendition are poised to fall off the face of the Earth any time now, while Lars and the Real Girl and Into the Wild are adding screens and holding pretty nicely in limited release (I saw Lars last night at 9:30, and it was packed! Who knew everyone would head out for some offbeat romantic comedy after the Patriots vs. Colts game?)






























































































































































































































































TWLWTitle (click to view)StudioWeekend Gross% ChangeTheater Count / ChangeAverageTotal GrossBudget*Week #
1NAmerican GangsterUni.$46,344,000-3,054-$15,174$46,344,000$1001
2NBee MovieP/DW$39,100,000-3,928-$9,954$39,100,000$1501
31Saw IVLGF$11,010,000-65.3%3,183-$3,459$51,060,000-2
42Dan in Real LifeBV$8,125,000-31.2%1,925+4$4,220$22,950,000-2
5330 Days of NightSony$4,000,000-41.7%2,627-232$1,522$34,229,000$303
64The Game PlanBV$3,853,000-37.1%2,844-498$1,354$81,957,000-6
7NMartian ChildNL$3,650,000-2,020-$1,806$3,650,000-1
86Michael ClaytonWB$2,900,000-41.1%2,107-478$1,376$33,198,000-5
95Tyler Perry's Why Did I Get MarriedLGF$2,730,000-51.6%1,403-494$1,945$51,185,000-4
107Gone Baby GoneMira.$2,400,000-37.1%1,617-96$1,484$14,948,000-3
118Tim Burton's The Nightmare Before Christmas in Disney Digital 3-D (2007 re-issue)BV$1,543,000-55.2%562-2$2,745$12,844,000-3
1210The ComebacksFoxA$1,475,000-56.3%1,632-1,180$903$11,940,000-3
Click here to find out more!
139We Own the NightSony$1,400,000-58.8%1,634-768$856$27,730,000$214
1416Into the WildParV$1,375,000-13.8%660+2$2,083$10,991,000-7
1513The Darjeeling LimitedFoxS$1,300,000-26.2%615-83$2,113$8,110,000-6
1614Across the UniverseSonR$1,125,000-33.3%822-142$1,368$21,070,000-8
1717BellaRAtt.$1,001,000-24.6%186+21$5,381$2,589,000-2
1819Lars and the Real GirlMGM$783,000-15.5%321+25$2,439$2,407,000$124
1915Elizabeth: The Golden AgeUni.$627,000-62.0%562-1,041$1,115$15,367,000-4
2011RenditionNL$590,000-75.1%609-1,641$968$9,313,000-3

Friday, November 2, 2007

Fincher Takes On Graphic Novel Adaptation-- Could This Be a Trend?


By Katey Rich

I've barely finished my breakfast, and David Fincher already has me thinking.



Killer I've spent a lot of time marveling at the huge number of graphic novel adaptations planned at Warner Bros., and at most studios really, with even some of the darkest and strangest graphic novels preparing to come to life (including one written by Guy Ritchie about a Scottish caretaker who is not Groundskeeper Willie). It's fairly clear that we're living in the era of the comic book, in which drawn heroes with or without capes dominate the box office and the cultural imagination. With 30 Days of Night still tearing up screens, Wanted getting a boatload of Internet buzz, and The Dark Knight ratcheting up its viral marketing campaign, we're bound to be seeing more and more from this genre.



When Variety announced this morning that David Fincher would be taking on a graphic novel adaptation--The Killer by Matz-- I was intrigued mostly because it was the first time I had heard of a major, established director (and an arthouse-skewing director at that) moving into the graphic novel realm. When I found this list on Wikipedia, though, I realized I was dead wrong. Who knew that Sam Mendes' Road to Perdition was based on a graphic novel? How about David Cronenberg's A History of Violence? And, OK, I have no good excuse for forgetting about Ang Lee doing Hulk, or Christopher Nolan making Batman Begins, or hell, Tim Burton making Batman to begin with (though, to be fair, taking on the Caped Crusader was the first big-budget project for the latter two directors).



David Fincher, on the other hand... that's an interesting match. There's no question he already appeals the sweet spot of graphic novel fandom, intelligent young men with a taste for violence paired with a little bit of thought. The Killer seems right up Fincher's alley, a French story about a ruthless hitman on the run whose cold-hearted crimes start catching up with him. We all know Fincher can do killers (Se7en, Zodiac) and psychology (Fight Club), so maybe the only question is whether this graphic novel was written with Fincher in mind.



It'll be interesting to see how Fincher's gritty, urban visuals translate to the stylized world of graphic novels, though given the subject matter I imagine it'll be a nice transition. Though Zack Snyder and Frank Miller may be dominating the big-budget adaptation news these days, seeing Fincher give it a shot makes me think we might be seeing some other major directors try their hands at the genre. What if the Coen Brothers did a Batman? Ron Howard already adapted The Da Vinci Code, so why not try something intentionally cartoony? (zing!) Who knows how long before graphic novel adaptations expand beyond their target audience of young men, but with intelligent directors tackling intelligent material, we're already taking the right steps.



Box Office Outlook: Jerry Seinfeld is Master of This Domain


By Katey Rich

This weekend, "B" is for "Box Office," at least in the case of one movie that seems to "B" everywhere and has "bee"-n getting on my nerves with its nonstop ads since September. I'm talking, of course, about Bee Movie, that little movie you might have heard of starring a washed-up sitcom actor from the '90s.



Yeah, pretty much nothing stands a chance against Bee Movie this weekend, even with middling reviews (more on that later) and a strong outlook for American Gangster. When it comes down to it, a period crime drama about smuggling heroin in the coffins of dead soldiers just isn't the fun-for-the-whole-family kind of thing that rakes in the bucks.



Bee_movie BEE MOVIE. Nine years after the end of his sitcom, Jerry Seinfeld is hitting the big screen for the first time as Barry B. Benson, a worker bee who escapes the hive in search of a better life in the big world. He befriends a florist (Renee Zellweger) but runs into trouble when he discovers that humans have been appropriating the bees' greatest product--honey--for their own uses. Barry decides to take the matter to court, but discovers the importance of human-bee cooperation along the way. Patrick Warburton, Chris Rock, Matthew Broderick, Kathy Bates, John Goodman and plenty of others also lend their voices to the effort.



While some critics enjoyed themselves, many are frustrated with Seinfeld's first attempt at a screenplay. "The film labors too hard for its comic moments and never discovers a cartoon logic that will allow bees and humans to interact," writes Kirk Honeycutt at The Hollywood Reporter. He adds, "When Bee Movie opens, honey will equal money for the first week, but repeat business, so vital for animated films, is not likely to be heavy." "Enough already," writes the succinct Associated Press. Rex Reed, on the other hand, points out a number of the film's flaws but is still compelled to add a "LOL" (seriously) to his review: "You have to laugh. You also have to go away from Bee Movie with a revitalized respect for bees." Owen Glieberman at Entertainment Weekly was charmed too: "Seinfeld, voice rising to that nifty incredulous whine, perfectly channels our hero's dismay." And our Kevin Lally chimes in, "There's just enough of [Seinfeld's] singular personality to engage fans and enough buzzy action to delight the holiday kid audience."



Amergangsterposter1 AMERICAN GANGSTER. In Harlem in the 1970s, Frank Lucas (Denzel Washington) changed his method of drug-dealing by circumventing the Mafia and getting his drugs directly from Thailand, using coffins of American soldiers coming back from Vietnam to transport the goods. Lucas became a kingpin and attracted the attention of the authorities, who sent straight arrow detective Richie Roberts (Russell Crowe) on Lucas' tail. Roberts deals with a corrupt police force as he tracks down Lucas, who flies under the radar even when his drugs turn out to be so pure that junkies constantly overdose. Ridley Scott directs a huge cast, including Chiwetel Ejiofor, Cuba Cooding, Jr., Josh Brolin and Ruby Dee.


Reviews are overwhelmingly positive for American Gangster, with a number of the Oscar horse race blogs already putting it in the running for the top prize. "Denzel Washington dazzles in his best screen performance to date," writes the New York Post, calling the film "one of the year's best movies." Peter Travers at Rolling Stone is similarly enchanted by the performances: "Washington and Crowe clash like titans -- they're something to see. Ditto the movie." "Ruby Dee, now in her feisty 80's, is alone worth the price of admission," adds Andrew Sarris. Our Rex Roberts goes so far as to compare the film to the killer drugs it features: "American Gangster, like a packet of "Blue Magic," guarantees a rush�pleasurable and ephemeral." Manohla Dargis at the New York Times, while praising much of the film, is a bit more cautious: "Greatness hovers just outside American Gangster, knocking, angling to be let in."


Martian MARTIAN CHILD. The third wide release this weekend is a family drama with a distinct sci-fi twist. John Cusack plays a science fiction writer who, after the death of his wife, adopts a young boy (Bobby Coleman) with a unique eccentricity: he believes that he's from Mars. As father and son adjust to each another, the rest of the world weighs in, with a disapproving sister (Joan Cusack) and social worker (Richard Schiff) saying "nay" while a beautiful friend (Amanda Peet) says yes. Eventually the boy learns to live like an Earthling and the man learns how to be a father. Sniffles are included.


Well, that's the idea at least. Martian Child left a majority of critics cold, myself included: "An entirely ordinary film featuring an entirely ordinary performance from Cusack, who may as well be on autopilot." The Associated Press isn't falling for the tearjerker either: "Martian Child can squeeze out Hollywood sniffles, the gooey sort that'll be gone and forgotten by the time you reach the theater parking lot." "Pure pop-psychology pablum," accuses Time Out New York, adding that Cusack's "fine performance [is] undercut by banal storytelling." Manohla Dargir says it pretty well: "[Meyjes] lets Mr. Cusack cut loose and go lazy, while the support team (Joan Cusack, Oliver Platt, Amana Peet) smilingly basks in the star's glow. You might think that Bobby Coleman wouldn't stand a chance, but this kid bats his lashes like Joan Fontaine. The audience wept; I just cried uncle." My only question is, which press screening did Dargis attend where they actually shed tears?


Thursday, November 1, 2007

There Will Be Reviews of There Will Be Blood!


By Katey Rich

Blood



I've been reading a lot of Oscar blogs in the last few days, namely the ones run by the Los Angeles Times and Variety, and what's interested me most is how much speculation is going on even when several potential contenders haven't even been seen yet. One of the biggest question marks was There Will Be Blood, which was under review embargo until Monday after sneak screenings in Austin and in Los Angeles.



Variety's Todd McCarthy, somehow, has gotten around the embargo and has posted the first full review of the film. It's absurdly long for a Variety review-- 1200 words!-- and gets into a lot of details about the story, but never seems to come up with a "Yay! I loved it!" or "Boo! I hated it!" line. The closest is the expected praise for Daniel Day-Lewis, who stars as diabolical Texas oil man Daniel Plainview: "Day-Lewis, who, as always, seems so completely absorbed in his role that it's difficult to imagine him emerging between takes as just an actor playing a part. Daniel is a man who will stop at nothing to achieve the unnatural state of becoming an island onto himself, and Day-Lewis makes him his own." Paul Dano, who plays Eli Sunday, a preacher who squares off against Plainview, gets praise as well: "Dano ranges from politely deferential to frothingly enraptured in a powerful performance as the young man of God," McCarthy writes.



The top of the review highlights the difficult of marketing the film, and some of McCarthy's key phrases definitely make that clear: "Foregrounded by an electronic sound that soars to an almost unbearable pitch, the first 15 minutes unfold with essentially no dialogue"..."The unashamedly declarative talk [...]brings to mind a bracing fusion of Eugene O'Neill and John Dos Passos"... "The sweeping, surging, constantly surprising score by Radiohead's Jonny Greenwood [...] could be described as avant-garde symphonic." Pjew. Those are definitely not phrases you're going to slap up on a one-sheet.



UPDATE: Kristopher Tatley, who writes Variety's "Red Carpet District'" blog, has posted his review as well. He hits on a lot of the same points as McCarthy, which each of them seeming to conclude that the film offers a lot to think about, a phenomenal performance from Day-Lewis, but maybe not quite the crowd-pleasing sweep some people were looking for. Tatley, who also keeps a running tally of Oscar contenders, has removed There WIll Be Blood from contention entirely.



I'm anxious to read some more reviews to see if this turns into a consensus, that There WIll Be Blood is interesting but inaccesible. If that's the case I can't possibly imagine it'll hit with Academy voters, or audiences at large, and may wind up like P.T. Anderson's Magnolia, appreciated but never properly rewarded.



UPDATE UPDATE: Anne Thompson has chimed in as well, and she's calling McCarthy's review a rave. Not my choice of words, but Thompson loved it too.



Streep, Adams, & Ephron Cook Up A Chick Flick


By Katey Rich

Merylstreep Amyadamspicture1



There's been a huge trend lately with people getting their blogs turned into books, and within that, a subgenre of blogs/books about "For one year I will cook dinner for my family every night/Not use any plastic/Have no impact on the environment." Julie and Julia was one of the earliest, a blog started back in 2003, before Facebook, before "blog" was picked as 2004's "word of the year." The blog followed the struggles of Julie Powell, who challenged herself to cook every single recipe in Julia Child's classic Mastering the Art of French Cooking over the course of a year. Hilarity, frustration, and lessons learned naturally ensued.



I read Julie and Julia the book last fall, and I have to say, it annoyed the hell out of me. Which is why I can't exactly jump for joy that a movie version is coming up, starring Amy Adams as the frustrated cook Powell and Meryl Streep as Child. Nora Ephron is directing--of course!-- and will also adapt the screenplay.



Child isn't actually in the book-- Powell never met her-- but will presumably appear as a guiding force. It will probably be fun to see Streep let loose as the energetic Child, especially a good number of buttoned-up roles of late (Miranda Priestly may have been funny, but she sure didn't know how to crack a joke). Adams is always loveable and entertaining, and can probably make the trials and tribulations of the challenge more charming than Powell did. And really, Ephron's spin on this story will probably be more enjoyable than the book in general, making it a bit more fairy-tale-ish and less description of how the author berates her husban for not wanting to eat her bizarre French concoctions.



So, I take it back-- I guess I'm a little happy this project exists. If nothing else, this might just be the first blog turned book turned movie, and for the rest of us typing away into the Internet-- hi there!-- it's a little spring of hope.



X-Files Movie Coming Way Sooner Than You Expected


By Katey Rich

Xfiles Wait, seriously? Just days after David Duchovny confirmed that he and Gillian Anderson would be returning for the second X-Files movie, 20th Century Fox has announced a release date: July 25, 2008. As in, 9 months from now.



They're starting shooting in December. Presumably the movie will involve at least some special effects, though I guess the 'X-Files' TV show was always heavier on spooky atmospherics than giant bugs/robots/pirate ships etc. Duchovny and Anderson are rumored to have not gotten along terribly well back in their TV days; will production be delayed by someone refusing to come out of their trailer? Basically I have to wonder: how on earth are they going to finish this one on time?



July 25, 2008 is currently occupied by two other projects: Step Brothers, starring Will Ferrell and John C. Reilly (a team that proved unbeatable last summer with Talladega Nights), and Untitled Ice Cube Family Comedy (presumably that's the working title). I guess it wouldn't have been a summer weekend without a movie based on something else that contains sci-fi elements, so hey, bring it on, Mulder and Scully.