WEEKEND REVIEW

What can one say about the second weekend of Spider-Man?  

Sony’s reported 37 percent drop from the opening weekend is extraordinary in and of itself, forget about the various records.   Some writers have suggested that there is something problematic about 50-percent-plus drop-offs after massive opening weekends in the last few years.  The problem is the massive start and how it affects the cost of releasing films and shortens the life of each movie.  But the idea that there are a lot more than 15 million or so people out there who are going to rush to see any film in the first two weekends would be to ask for the extraordinary on a regular basis.  Over 30 million people have paid to see Spider-Man already.

But I’ll tell you something…I still don’t feel it.  It’s no insult to the movie or Sony or anyone.  But I lived through Jaws and Star Wars and Indiana Jones and Batman.  And while the numbers cannot be argued with, this Spider-Man experience is something different.  Who knows?  Attack of the Clones may be something different too.  While I still expect the latest Star Wars film to end up on top this year, I don’t expect it to charge to $200 million in nine days.  (For the record, I don’t believe that Spider-Man did get to the mark in nine days, but in ten days.  Still amazing, especially when you consider that weekend two of Spider-Man will have grossed more than all but five of the biggest opening weekends in history, even after the final numbers are scrawled in the Big Book of Bucks.   So this is not an issue that I am really sweating.) 

A few more stats for those of you who feel I am writing off a major phenom… Spider-Man is the twenty-third movie in history to open domestically to more than $50 million.  The mark was passed for the first time in 1994 with the original Jurassic Park.  Six more films beat the mark between then and June 1998.  So that’s seven times in history until then, all in five years.  In the just under three years since May 24, 1999, there have been sixteen films that have opened over $50 million.  Nine of them have opened over $60 million.  (The Lost World is the sole $60 million-plus opener from before 1999.) 

And look at the list of films: Spider-Man, The Lost World, Harry Potter, Pearl Harbor, Mission: Impossible 2, Planet of the Apes, The Mummy Returns, Rush Hour 2, The Phantom Menace & Monsters, Inc.   How many of these movies would you pay to see again, as opposed to not changing the channel when they show up on cable?  I would say that Spider-Man and Monsters, Inc. are the only ones on my list.  How many of these films parlayed these record-breaking openings into $300 million domestic?  Only Harry Potter and,  presumably, Spider-Man. 

So let’s all take a deep breath of hype-free fresh air and wait for a little perspective.  As much as I would like to tell you that I know exactly what this last two box office weekends mean, I can’t.  Because I don’t.  Not yet.  And anyone who tells you that they do is either just yakking because they get paid to or don’t understand that this is more than another box office moment that can be compared to every other box office record.  The significance of Spider-Man’s box office run will be made clear first by the rest of the summer and then, in far clearer etching, by next summer’s box office, particularly in April and May. 

THE REST OF THE B.O.:  The results for Fox’s Unfaithful and Sony’s The New Guy were mixed.  Unfaithful’s $14.2 million start wasn’t bad, particularly when you consider that it is basically a word-of-mouth movie.  Adrian Lyne is a bigger box office draw than either Richard Gere or Diane Lane and this is an actual movie for adults.  But even in releasing it as an alternative to Spider-Man, Fox may see the film fall hard because parents are still taking kids to Spider-Man and Star Wars is coming on Thursday.  It may be a death hammock.

Sony is already writing The New Guy off, telling journalists that the $9.5 million start is fine because the movie is so cheap.  And that is true.  It’s not particularly respectful to the film, but it is true. 

Is there a non-Spidey message in the box office year to date?  Well, it’s ugly, but the combined domestic grosses of Murder by Numbers, Life Or Something Like It and Unfaithful – three films fronted by strong women - look like they will be outgrossed by The Rock in The Scorpion King.  Perhaps the unhappy lesson is that movies fronted by female stars working outside of their well-established images don’t do business… unless the actress is Jodie Foster, who seems to be above any rules.

THREE OLD FILMS:  I recently ran into three older films that have taken me places that were unexpected.  The first was 3000 Miles To Graceland, a flop that’s been used in many quarters to beat the heck out of Kevin Costner.  But when I actually took the time to watch the film as it, indeed, passed through my satellite box, I found that it wasn’t Kevin Costner picking a bad role or a bad script or a bad idea that caused this film to be a car wreck… and it is a car wreck.  The idea is clever.  The role, as a bad, bad man, was an excellent choice for Costner.  And the script was often clever and original.  The problem was clear… director Demian Lichtenstein.  Apparently, Mr. Lichtenstein is a skilled director of videos and commercials.  But he shot this movie like he was a hyperactive 4-year-old whose Ritalin was replaced by speed-laced cocaine.  I can only assume that the conversation after the dailies every day was, “Oh, he’s got his own vision… it’ll come together in post.”  Had he allowed anyone in the movie to actually give their performance, this could have been not only a decent film, but a small guilty-pleasure hit.  Geez, with this cast, if he had just set up the camera for wide shots and let them work, he would have had a better movie.  Instead, there needs to be a warning to epileptics at the front of the film.  But my apologies to Kevin… you did try… and for a change, you should have gotten the director fired.

I also caught, after starting it and turning away a couple of times, Freddy Got Fingered.  Okay.  So I had it on Tivo and fast-forwarded through much of the movie.  When I was at the Ebertfest in 2001, Roger was having a field day, shredding this film every time he had a chance.  And I, being the contrarian I can be, figured that it was bad, but that it couldn’t be THAT bad.  I was wrong.  Tom Green did surprisingly well moving the camera.  But the content… oh my God… it may actually be the worst studio film ever made.  I mean, it’s right up there.  It was slightly amusing to see Rip Torn allowed to chew scenery and curse like a sailor, but not enough so to be anything but embarrassing to an actor with a long and distinguished career. 

Finally, I caught a little of Batman Returns on Sunday afternoon.  And you know what?  I think that it is not only best Batman movie, but perhaps the best comic book movie ever made.  And it’s for many of the same reasons that the ongoing Star Wars saga is driving some critics nuts… Batman Returns is a movie made for adults.  Scene after scene, line after line, the film is an underappreciated masterwork.  Has there been a better big-movie role for a woman in the last decade than this film’s Catwoman, except perhaps for Erin Brockovich?  Can you imagine a new comic movie with a self-described freak hitting on busty blondes, assaulting them with his flipper?  Can you imagine a director with the balls to have a Grand Guinol funeral procession with giant King penguins?  How about Chris Walken’s Max Shreck, who would rather push his secretary out the window instead of just firing her?  And Michael Keaton is still the best Batman for me… small but wiry, dependent on his tools, moody and melancholic.  (I think Clooney, given a better script, could have been great too… but Batman & Robin sucked… not his fault.)  Anyway, I do love the film and I look forward to a critical revival (ha ha ha) for it’s tenth anniversary. 

PAGE TWO:  “Trailing Sony & ROTD-A-Rama”