May 27, 2003

Did you say $85.9 million?

$85.9 million.  Let it roll over your tongue.  Sure it’s an estimate, but it sure is sweet… even if the movie sucks.

I have always said it and I am saying it again… opening weekend has nothing to do with quality.  That said, even over 3 days, Bruce Almighty beat Jim Carrey’s previous best opening, The Grinch, by $15 million.  He beat out Adam Sandler and Jack Nicholson ‘s Anger Management opening by  $29 million.  He beat Eddie Murphy’s Nutty Professor 2: The Klumps by $28 million.  And he beat Ben Affleck’s Daredevil by $30 million. 

The only comedy that he didn’t beat was Austin Powers in Goldmember, which opened with a  $73 million 3-day.  But Carrey beat The Spy Who Shagged Me handily. 

There hasn’t been a lot of happy talk about Carrey since 1997’s Liar, Liar.  The one box office smash was How The Grinch Stole Christmas, but that success was softened by the huge expense of the film and the soft foreign take.

Here’s what we all now must acknowledge… put Jim Carrey in the right high concept project and you will laugh all the way to the bank, even if you only titter in the theater.  He is still the biggest comedy star on the planet.  Period. 

And if you are still hoping to bash Eddie Murphy, Daddy Day Care estimates a 27% drop.  $100 million before the end of the June 13 weekend.  They came out of the woodwork to piss on last weekend’s 32% drop.  I am looking forward the excuses people make for this weekend’s success.  I would bet that they will just shut up and aim at Reloaded’s “horrible” 57% drop... at this rate, the film will only become the seventh highest draw of all time… how can they live with themselves?  I hate to put another film down to built one up, but where were all these boo birds when X2:X-Men United dropped 53 percent in its second weekend? 

The Summer of Frustration for the angry young men (and women) of the chattering class should continue in the next weeks.  People writing off Mark Wahlberg, Charlize Theron and Paramount should find The Italian Job a real distraction.  John Singleton writer-offers will be upset by 2 Fast 2 Furious.  And those questioning whether Harrison Ford and Josh Hartnett are openers anymore may be less upset about 2 Fast 2 Furious.

CANNES NOT:  I’m sure that Elephant will be worth seeing… for a few people.  Dogville will appeal to another four or five… not enough people for Fine Line to exploit its relationship with Von Trier to get distribution rights for less than $2 million.  Then there was Brown Bunny, which will forever be remembered as the movie that either got Chlow Sevigny a lot more dates or a lot fewer as a result of her oral skill set.  (Who am I kidding?  Confirmation that she’s willing is enough for most men!)  No one except critics, who could be spared, care whether Vincent Gallo ever directs again.  Well, no one other than those critics and edgy young actresses who don’t mind a certain lack of bathing. 

There were a couple of sale over the weekend, but the answer to Cannes 2003 is a rousing “yawn.”  But what’s new?  With the exception of last year’s festival, Cannes has been in decline as a key festival for years and years.  They have suffered in image ever since the market free fall of the late 80s/early 90s and suffered financially since the dot-coms that filled the fiscal void also fell off the map. 

What makes Cannes – or any other major – a major?  Most often, it is focus.  Cannes became so big and so glam that focus was not necessary.  They created the focus by being Cannes.  No more.  If I had a vote – which I do not – I would vote that Cannes become exclusively European, so that they could pressure European filmmakers to show their best first at Cannes.  Right now, there are a half a dozen other festivals that will do the job for a European film.  And while Cannes is obsessed with stardom, which leads to Hollywood names, the power to do anything more than to get a TV show on IFC is in the movies themselves.  The movies.  Cannes is no longer “the most” anything… re: movies or not. 

It almost makes you want to read a story about Jeff Wells’ washing machine.  (Sit in that and rotate, Potsie!)

READER OF THE DAY:  DA BALM says:  “the Summer is the season when I do not have to deal with Fall/Adult movies. This is the season when physics are thrown out the window, love conquers all, the bad guys fail to accomplish their dastardly aspirations, CGI appears more than Dame Judy Dench, and things blow up real big!  This is what MOVIES are about to me.  Yeah I enjoy the Fall season, but seldom do those films move me like Summer films do.

Yeah it is a matter of choice and just one man's opinion.  However Fall would not mean as much if Summer changed from it's current form.  Summer is fun.  Fall is introspective, deep, and has really nice scoring.  I would recommend this reader of the day give X2 and the Matrix Reloaded a chance because of the messages of each film.  X2 is about trying to find a place in the world, when you really do not have one, but you try to make a place for yourself nonetheless.  Sure there is violence, but this message of trying to find a place for one's self is a Fall movie season staple.  Imagine Antwoine Fisher but with mutants instead.

The Matrix Reloaded, well, is a movie about choice, causality, happenstance, the why, and love changing the fate of the One's destiny.  It really is, underneath it all, a love story.  Imagine Love Story, but set in a future when humanity lives underground and machines rule everything.

Whatever the case, this season is what movies are to me.  It is all fine and good to want adult movies during this season, but I bet the studios surely need this cash to make or buy those Fall and Winter movies a lot of people cant wait to get back to.  I am going to enjoy this movie season, and dread going back to the Fall and Winter months when physics returns.  Situations, seldom get resolved.  The bad guys sometimes win.  And Dame Judy Dench is all over the place.  At least TV returns in the Fall.”

THE HAM-STER writes: “In the spirit of her "gentle, humanistic" tirade, may I offer an equally "gentle and humanistic" retort to "Mother Mary's" self serving, short sighted letter.

"What are we who love film to do?"  Ignoring the obvious tone of "holier than thou" snobbery for a minute, "film" to my definition encompasses everything she both rails against and praises.  "Film" includes thrill rides like X2 and Reloaded (which to my mind are both good and not particularly "ultra violent"), "film" includes gems like "Bend it like Beckham", "Spirited Away" and "Mighty Wind", and yes, "film" includes cynical "made by commitee" corporate crap like "The Core" and "Dreamcatcher" (two worse "Hollywood" films you're not likely to see this year unless they re-release "Pluto Nash").

"My problem, I'm female.  I love good films."  With all due respect, being female to my mind is not a "problem" and loving "good films" is not the sole province of "sistahood".  As I see it, your "problem" (if you really want to call it that, though I call is personal taste) is your "comfort level" with films seems to only encompass the rather small world of "arthouse" and what the industry semi derisively calls "chick flicks" (yes, with the subgenre of cute talking animal pictures thrown in for good measure).

While I don't have an issue with your taste in movies, I do find tiring your "snobbish" (yes, there's the variation on that word again) attitude that these are the only "adult" and "good" films and that this "other" audience you speak of (I guess that would be the "all female audience who only like Arthouse, Chick Flicks and cute talking animals" subculture)  is 'unwelcome" at the cineplex.    I don't know where you live, but unless it's in a one-theater town (population 117), you can always find pics from the arthouse circuit playing (though the cute animated animal pictures are little harder to find). 

You say you won't see these blockbusters out of "principle".  What principle is that?  The principle of not wanting to give money to Hollywood studios during the period of the year that the grosses get the most attention in the media?  Seems like a silly principle but the only one I can fathom since you alluded that you may see these films on cable (when they're "free", so maybe it's the "cheap" principle you speak of?).  Curious, since I gather from your letter that you've already assumed they're not "good".

To me, to "love film" means embracing it in all it's forms.  I see the Hollywood blockbusters (and hate about 75% of them, but the 25% I do like are very good), the art house flicks, the chick flicks, the obscure foreign films, the documentaries, the shorts and the cartoons.  I watch new releases and old classics; film, DVD and (shudder) even VHS, but rarely cable (unless they're uncut and commercial free).  Film can show you worlds you've never seen and have never existed, can educate and entertain, can make you laugh, gasp or cry, and is limited only by the filmmakers imagination and the willingness of the audience to try something they may not have seen before, if they're willing to venture outside their comfort zone. 

I offer to you a final piece of advice from the ‘60's folksy era’ you seem to love so much (and quoted in the original, ‘ultra violent’, and `I assume in your mind, not very "good" Matrix):  ‘Free your Mind’.”

E ME:  Did you kick in for Bruce?

 

"There Are No Matrix Pieces"
What Would Neo Do ..||||...Character Arcs (spoilers)
Review.. |||..Spoilers .

PHYSICIAN HEAL THYSELF
The New Yorker & The Matrix Reloaded ......