May 5, 2003

$85.9 million.  Why does a number so insanely impressive somehow not make one salivate?

I guessed low by $16.5 million.  That was almost as much as The Lizzie Maguire Movie brought in… a number dressed to impress. 

And yet, $85.9 million for X2: X-men United, a number as large as seems possible for that film, doesn’t send me into shock.  No doubt, the champagne-laden mimosas will be flowing at Fox this morning.  And they should be.  But I expect another record to be set by X2 as well… lowest total domestic gross for a film that opened over $80 million.  The current negative record holder is Harry Potter 2, which did “only” $261 million after its $88 million start last November. 

No movie that has ever opened with over $70 million has missed the $200 million mark.  And I think that will remain true in the case of X2.  Yet, despite the film’s quality, I expect X2 to stay under the $250 million mark.  It is not an indictment of the film, but another indicator of the changing box office universe.

Also impressive was the $69.3 million in 93 additional territories that opened X2 day and date. 

It was 14 summers ago when Batman’s $40 million start brought shock and joy.  How things have changed. 

Next up in the search for stratospheric numbers will be The Matrix Reloaded.  Hannibal is still the high mark in R rated openings with $58 million.  Star Wars: Episode 2 - Attack Of The Clones is the highest launch in the Reloaded slot, with $80 million.  Will The Matrix Reloaded be somewhere in between or will it break through into the $90 million range.  There is no way of knowing.  We are all flying by the seat of our pants now. 

25 of the Top 38 opening weekends of all time took place in the last two years.  66 percent.  Even the Year 2000’s big openings – Mission Impossible 2, with $71 million and The Grinch and X-Men, each with $55 million - seem lightweight in this increasingly front-loaded environment. 

Presumably, we can expect at least ten films to open to over $40 million this summer.  That’s a lot. 

And when you reach this high a plateau, the extraordinary becomes ordinary.  But where can we go from here? 

One more note, as always, opening weekend numbers have NOTHING to do with the quality of a film and everything to do with franchise value and marketing.  So we who judge must slowly adjust our thinking to the new realities and realize that the ability to expand the marketplace for any film with a huge opening is getting more and more challenging… perhaps less and less possible. 

Many lessons will be learned this summer.  And we’ve only just begun. 

MATRIX RESCREWED:  Time Magazine decided to go ahead and do a complete – beyond complete – review of The Matrix Reloaded in this week’s issue of the magazine.  It’s Spoiler Central, so be careful if you decide you want to look.  Since I first saw the review over the weekend, I haven’t had a chance to discuss what the rest of us should be doing with the studio.  I will today.  And who knows, maybe there will be an in-depth review tomorrow. 

Time calls its story “exclusive.”  Seems the only exclusive they have is the exclusive chance to break the embargo date on reviews.  Worse, the story idiotically refers to the exhibitors screening as though it was a room full of first-nighters, instead of a group of cranky old men.  With due respect, Richard Corliss is about two decades outside of the Matrix demo himself.  Yet, he indulges in the tactics of internet gossip like a man a third his age… and half of his intelligence.

“You've been very patient, waiting for four years and wading through 240 lines of this story. You deserve a full description of the new movie.”  Bullshit.  Four years and Time is still willing to mess up a movie in order to appear to be on the edge.  Here’s a newsflash… you’re old media… try to act like grown-ups and offer some intelligent perspective instead of a desperately aggressive story in which the only real story is that you can screw up the movie for others first… cool! 

I don’t have a pressing need to be the first established writer to review this movie.  But something always sticks in my craw when majors like Time and Newsweek sink to the standards of those with no standards at all.  Naïve, I guess.

READER OF THE DAY:  DON’T LET YOUR BABIES GROW UP TO BE THIS GUY writes:  “It's quite good, quite, quite good even.  Pardon the crudeness, I'd say it's an X-Men fan's wet dream, a sci-fi/action/super hero fan's erotic dream that they wake up from just before the event, and a general audience will enjoy it. 

More specifically: For fans who know the comics, the movie does the two things they (speaking for me) want -- it has all the cool heroes and sci-fi/action stuff and treats them with respect and more-or-less faithfulness and, and this to me is more important it utilizes the emotional underpinnings of the classic stories.  I coud see where they got the stories (blending 4 or 5 separate ones together), and certain moments were classic, classic moments coming to life, and I was moved by them as scenes and in the way someone for a love of the source would have.  The end hints at big things to come. 

My question is, will these things resonate with an audience who really only knows the first movie?  On some level, if they enjoyed the characters, this will be satisfying, and it certainly raises the bar.  Still, will the moments that moved me actually move them?  I don't know.  I think to some degree, yes, but maybe not as much.  Is that a flaw? I don't know.  If I'd spent 120 million on it, I might think so.  I'll be curious to see what the unfamiliar think.  At the very least, the action and effects and pacing will satisfy most people, and so will the bits of humor.  And it does have the qualities the first one had -- good acting (Famke Janssen, Jackman, and McKellan , especially) a nice blend of reality and sci-fi, assured (more so  I think) direction, plus a better score.  Me, I pumped the fist of my heart and said, "Yes, today, I am one of them!"

HAM ON KAWAI writes:  “Lots of debate in my circle (including some that worked on the films) about X2 and Reloaded.  About the R rating versus the PG13.  About the cliffhanger ending versus the self contained story.  About the speculation that Reloaded could be the first R film to do $300 million vs. the "stealth" blockbuster (relative to the "Matrix" hype) potential of X2 to perhaps hit $200-250 million or more.

The buzz hasn't really touched on the fact that these two films, both sequels and both probable blockbusters, are both being described with words that usually aren't heard for these kinds movies:  "smart" and "good".  After several summers of diminishing returns (and IQ levels) from the Hollywood Blockbusters, here we have 2 films at the very beginning of the summer season raising the bars in their own unique ways.

Reloaded (which I haven't yet seen) sounds to be "revolutionary" filmmaking, while X2 (which I have seen but only in industry screenings, not with a "real" audience) is more "evolutionary" . 

As a high profile sequel, X2 is being billed as "bigger, faster, better" than it's predecessor.  That's only partially true.  While certainly better and arguelby bigger, it isn't necessarily "faster".  Unlike the Bays, Senas, and their ilk, director Singer stays truer to "storytelling" rather than relying on sheer velocity and "action beats" every 10 minutes to keep the audience interested.  While the action is eye popping and much better than the awkward wirework of X1, there are also long stretches of actual non expository dialogue and "character" moments that give this movie a heart if not quite a soul. 

Characters are introduced and re-introduced well.  Comic relief is used sparingly and effectively, and the script nimbly (if not always completely successfully) keeps all the character balls in the air (so many mutants, the uninitiated might need a cheat sheet).  The returnees all inhabit their characters like comfortable shoes.  Minor changes have occurred - Rogue has a boyfriend and is much less angsty, Storm has lost the goofy accent (I guess an Oscar win will do that) and has become the almost defacto leader in this outing (ditto), and Jean Gray has had an unexplained power bump to her abilities (which already has the faithful anticipating an uber-sized X3 endgame).  The Macguffin is kind of silly but provided the necessary gravitas to the proceedings and also supplies the "United" (if only temporarily) component to the awkward, studio mandated title.  The new bad guy (the first, best Hannibal Lecktor/Lecter) is good, though not great, as his plan is kinda silly (see Macguffin).  Sir Ian again steals the movie as Magneto, giving a dark, supple performance tinged with sly humor.   Of the newcomers, Alan Cumming as the teleporter Nightcrawler comes off the strongest and most human.  Above it all though, it's still Wolverine's movie and Hugh Jackman is back in the role that should have made him the next Mel Gibson.  Paradoxically, both his ferocity and humanity have deepened and some of his scenes push the edges of what's PG13.

The movie also looks and sounds slicker.  Composer/editor Ottman gives the movie a real momentum that the last one lacked.  The FX (with one or 2 exceptions ) are excellent without being overpowering and the tech credits/production design/locations/sets are all a cut above X1 (the move of the production from chilly, characterless Toronto to the warmer, greener Vancouver helps the look immeasurably; you can definitely believe its upstate New York).

With it's ending (unlike Reloaded, this one does have an actual ending with the promise of more), the movie also surprises somewhat by not stopping with a bang (though there are plenty of those) but an emotional catharsis and tentative look to the future.  As sequels go, many will notice that in its conclusion, there is an (intentional?) homage/complete lift from another much beloved sci fi franchise's finest hour (right down to the semi familiar music cues).  Some will quibble about this but it works and gives the movie an emotional heft lacking in the first.  As genre sequels go, not quite "Empire Strikes Back" or "Two Towers"

but pretty close.  Could be the best damn popcorn flick of the summer (at least until "Reloaded" rips into the market).  Whichever ends up grossing more, the fact is these two movies will likely compare very favorably compared to last summer's juggernauts.  "Attack of the Clones' had all the production values, FX and plot points but none of the dialogue and performances to make if one for the ages and Spiderman was a breezy, pleasant enough event movie that caught the market at the absolute right time and rode it to a ridiculously high gross.  I think X2 (and Reloaded) will earn their successes with both evolutionary and revolutionary technical acumen and good strong character heavy storytelling.”

E ME:  Speak up.  Use clout.  Type In.