This continues to be a week for wheel spinning…

I’ve got much to say about Goldmember, The Country Bears and The Kid Stays in the Picture… but it has to wait for tomorrow.  I could tell you about the surprising complexities of the sexuality of Blue Crush, but I’m going to see it again tomorrow and want to think about it more over the weekend before writing about it.  Full Frontal is under full embargo rules.  Disney is showing Signs and Warner Bros. is showing Blood Work… but not to me.  And there are a couple of films that qualify for my own don’t-shred-til-opening-day rules. 

And then, summer is unofficially over. Sigh.

But before things end, one correction from yesterday’s column.  Marcus Theaters, the #9 chain in the country, is a NYSE company and also has not filed for bankruptcy protection.  My apologies for not knowing that yesterday.

RECONFIRM:  As much an announcement about a future project, Warner Bros.’ release about the greenlight for Darren Aronofsky’s next film, The Fountain, was a confirmation that Batman: Year One is off the rails for now.  I, of course, am probably a step behind on this.  In fact, Ain’t It Cool has already placed Jude Law and Colin Farrell in the Superman and Batman roles in the one superhero project at the studio that is moving forward apace, Batman vs. Superman.   

JUST WONDERING:  Is Fox’s heavily promoted new show John Doe anything more than Memento: The Series?

WSJ MISS:  With all my Orwall and Lippman butt kissing the other day, I forgot to point out the best story on the turmoil around The Alamo that anyone has done yet, combining the top level reporting of the outlet with an unusual burst of speed (given that The Alamo isn’t exactly fast breaking news).   While others have focused on personalities, Orwall gets right to the heart of the matter… the money. 

The short form is… the studio is making a movie about The Alamo, period.  They are building the sets already.  Disney isn’t willing to invest $135 million in an R-rated movie, knowing that the margins on a film that expensive are already tight, unless you become only the fourth $350 million domestic grossing movie in the last decade. 

In fact, as much as I support films made for adult audiences, I have to admit that the top end of the blockbuster chart is not R-rating friendly.  I was shocked to realize that Saving Private Ryan is the highest domestic grossing R-rated film of all time, with $216 million.  That makes it number 34 overall.  Ryan is one of only three R-rated films to ever pass the $200 million mark.  (The others are T2 and The Exorcist, which only got past the mark via a very successful re-release.)

Assuming a $65 million marketing budget – a little over half what the studio spent on Pearl Harbor – The Alamo would still be scraping to get near black ink before ancillary income.  And that’s assuming a strong foreign appeal for an American story that is not as well remembered (pun intended) as, say, Pearl Harbor. 

Figure in the R-rating and the challenge to do even that gets greater.  Then there is Howard’s regular expectation of a cut of the gross, which puts black ink even farther away for Disney.  All of which makes The Alamo a borderline economic proposition for Disney.

On the flip side, as Orwall reports, they can make a much cheaper (read: $60 million) version of The Alamo with The Rookie director John Lee Hancock.  Ironically, the studio could afford to go with an R-rated Alamo, which most would say is the right way to go, on this smaller budget.  But they won’t.  PG-13… no gross point players… significantly cheaper marketing effort… lower risk, predictable rewards.

This is the conflict at the heart of the studio system today.  Image still matters.  A lot.  And if Ron Howard’s The Alamo did $400 million worldwide, it would enhance the studio’s image, even if the profit margin were slim.  Meanwhile, some guy named John Lee Hancock made an Alamo movie that managed to do $200 million worldwide, it would be a lot more profitable for Disney and a lot more forgettable. 

Orwall’s story is here if you have a subscription to the WSJ Online.

TOUGH SELL:  Neil Travis reports that David Mamet is in Jerusalem for a tribute at the Jerusalem Film Festival (“Where Every Screening Is Potentially An Open Air Screening!”).  But there’s more… Mamet’s working on a script about the creation of the Israeli Air Force.  Who can come up with the best/worst title for the epic?  Sliced Gun?  “I feel the need… the need for Mogen David?”  The Great Waldo Haimovitz?  Air Force Aleph?  The Meshugennah Stuff?

MAKE A CHOICE, KIDS?:  Robert Downey, Jr. attended the premiere of Goldmember the other night.  Back in New York, two versions of the story were unfolding.  Rush & Molloy had Downey in a happy reunion with his 8-year-old son, Indio, enjoying a night out.  Cindy Adams had Downey hitting on a “mini-she.”  (Does that mean that he was trying to get some midget action or that women are just smaller than men???)  No one suggested that there was any coke involved, since product partner Aquafina is a Pepsi brand.

Great battle in Romanesko about the Television Critics Assn. Tour.  The L.A. Times’ Brian Lowry thinks it’s all a bad joke and TCA president Diane Werts just isn’t standing for it (here).  It is to laugh, were it not to cry.

READER OF THE DAY:  SCOTTY attempts to answer one of yesterday’s questions – “Can you guess which upcoming film has the most heinous and offensive product placement – as in, it’s not even trying to be funny or clever or part of the plot – in the history of film????”

He writes:  “Would the answer be Taco Bell in Austin Powers In Goldmember?   Or Pepsi in Austin Powers in Goldmember? Or Pepsi Twist in Austin Powers In Goldmember?  Or Motorola in Austin Powers In Goldmember?  Or Heineken in Austin Powers In Goldmember?  Or Starbucks in Austin Powers In Goldmember?  Or Verifine Juice in Austin Powers in Goldmember?  Or Aquafina in Austin Powers In Goldmember?  Or BMW’s Mini-Cooper in Austin Powers in Goldmember?  Or… I think you get the idea.”

DAVID RESPONDS:  Uh… hmmm… ahhh…. I don’t know what you are talking about.

And HONG KING STEVE writes in one of his unedited classics:  “Dear David:  Am I the only one who thought "MIB" are gay in the closet? Let me explain why.

Well, they are "Men in Black", there's no women. Where's Linda who also joined the team in the end of first one?

No, She's gone. The screenwriters never explain why, they just wanted to bring back Agent K. That's fine. Funny is, Agent K's wife is gone, too. Why did she leave him after they reunited after separation of 20 years? Agent J told Agent K, since he didn't get to know himself inside, his wife could not understand him neither.You see, obviously Agent KJis the one who really knows Agent K inside, much more than his wife.

And there's still no other women in the headquarter of "MIB". No any female agent. When the villain Laura show up as a sexy model in underwear, none agent would pay more attention to her. It's extremely unbelievable.  All female characters are aliens or people who never live with agents, disappear in their lives. Are you not curious about that?

And the automatic dummy guy of the car, show up twice, sitting on the laps of two men separately. If you look the scene from outside of the car, You may wonder what they are doing. Also, when Agent K switch the driver seat with Agent J, what did he say? He yelled, "Hey, it's not gear!" Well, I really wonder what Agent K actually touched.

Of course, we can not forget the ending. Agent J kick off the door, then find out both of them are "inside of the closet". Funny, they are "in the closet", almost "come out"! Yes, "Men In Black" are gay all right.”

E ME:  Funny.  Of course, all female characters ARE aliens.  (Hardy Har Har!!!)  I will be so relieved to have some movies to review tomorrow!!!  New Line’s movie features a gold penis (PG-13 style) and Disney’s movie has characters without any genitalia at all.  Bob Evans?  All balls!  (I crack myself up!)