Agree? Disagree?

latimes.com:

>The Big Picture

Patrick Goldstein on the collision of entertainment, media and pop culture

Why does Hollywood's heat of the summer box office feel so ice cold?
June 7, 2010 | 4:07 pm

When a Lakers game was well into the fourth quarter, with Magic Johnson and Co. trouncing some hapless opponent, the legendary basketball announcer Chick Hearn would say, "This game's in the refrigerator!" If Chick was around today, he'd probably be saying the same thing about this summer's movie box office, which is so cold right now that you half expect to see people wearing fur coats and hoodies into the theaters.

As my colleague Ben Fritz noted in his Monday box-office story, this past weekend had the smallest total grosses of any May, June or July weekend in more than two years. That follows an awful Memorial Day weekend that earned the dubious distinction (once you adjust for ticket price inflation) of having the lowest total number of tickets sold in 17 years. Total movie attendance for the year is only down nearly 3% over last year's banner season, but if you took "Avatar's" 2010 numbers out of the mix, attendance would be off nearly 13% from 2009.

This weekend saw four new movies open, none of which came close to dislodging "Shrek Forever After" from the No. 1 slot. Universal had hoped its raunchy comedy "Get Him to the Greek" would be another "Hangover," but after seeing its humdrum opening weekend numbers, the studio is now hoping it might emulate "Forgetting Sarah Marshall," a far, far more modest comedy hit from 2008. "Killers," which was the most expensive release in Lionsgate's history, opened at No. 3 with $16.1 million, which by Lionsgate's own benchmarks makes it a potential money loser, especially after receiving a giant splatter of bad reviews.

Fox's family film "Marmaduke," which opened to a weak $11.3 million, actually got worse reviews than "Killers," earning an 11 Fresh rating from Rotten Tomatoes, and isn't expected to find any bigger audiences in the coming weeks. Warners' horror film, "Splice," only made $7.5 million, a number that will plunge further downward, since most horror films drop off considerably from their opening weekend performance.

To give you an idea of how bad things were this past weekend, if you put the weekend's numbers up against the same weekend in either 2009 or 2008, "Shrek Forever After" would've finished a distant third. Against similar competition from 2007, it would've finished fourth.

So why the cold shoulder from audiences? This is the time of year when all we hear about are the remakes and sequels and rebooted franchises coming off the studio assembly lines. But the real problem with this summer's box office is that it hasn't spawned a really good original movie, since it's the original movies -- like last year's "The Hangover," "Up" and "The Proposal" -- that bring a broader swath of eager new moviegoers into the theaters. In fact, the movies from the first week of June in 2009 and 2008 that would've finished ahead of "Shrek" were all original films -- "Up" and "The Hangover" from 2009, "Kung Fu Panda" and "You Don't Mess With the Zohan" from 2008.

Ask any box-office expert: If all you had were sequels and remakes, you could pretty easily chart the flow of moviegoers into the theaters. Even though some films would over-perform and some would fail to meet expectations, the end results would be pretty predictable. It's the original films that are the wild cards. Year after year, from "Star Wars" to "The Blair Witch Project," from "The Sixth Sense" to "The Passion of the Christ," from "The Matrix" to "Twilight," they are the surprise hits that really drive the business.

Original movies create a palpable sense of verve and excitement that not only propel themselves to box office glory, but expand the audience for films that follow in their wake. A strikingly original film -- and there is no better example than "Avatar," which almost singlehandedly launched the 3-D revolution earlier this year -- works its magic by injecting good vibes into our moviegoing collective subconscious. Whether its a groundbreaker like "Avatar" or simply a feel-good surprise like "The Blind Side," the buzz generated by an original film can essentially persuade reluctant moviegoers to make an extra trip to the multiplex instead of staying home and watching TV.

Right now, that sense of excitement and high expectation is missing in action. The best way to gauge moviegoer dissatisfaction is by looking at how the current crop of summer movies have performed with CinemaScore, the firm whose poll of opening-night moviegoers around the country has become a leading industry barometer to assess a film's word of mouth. If a movie gets an A, it will likely have a long and prosperous stay in the theaters. But if it gets a B or worse, its prospects are limited, since a B from opening-night audiences is a lot like a C from regular fans. As CinemaScore founder Ed Mintz told me when I interviewed him last year, he often feels as if he's grading on a curve. If a film gets a B from its most hard-core fans (the people who show up to see a film on opening night), then it probably would only earn lukewarm support from less loyal fans who would take more of a wait-and-see approach about making a trip to the theaters to see it.

So it hardly comes as a surprise to discover that the summer's two major hits, "Iron Man 2" and "Shrek Forever After," were the only films to earn an A from CinemaScore. The films that have been box-office disappointments, including "Robin Hood," "Prince of Persia" and "Killers," all got Bs. "Splice," the horror film that opened this past weekend, earned a lowly D, which tells you all you need to know about what kind of grosses it will have next weekend.

Despite the grim news so far this summer, I'm not predicting a box-office recession. It's way too early for that. But if the box office rebounds, it will be for the same reason that it is now slumping. It won't be the sequels that will save the summer, it will be the original movies. In fact, most of the films that have the best buzz right now are original movies, led by Christopher Nolan's "Inception," which is pretty much everybody's pick for the breakout movie of the summer, followed by the Tom Cruise-starring thriller "Knight & Day," the Adam Sandler comedy "Grown Ups" and the Steve Carell comedy "Dinner For Schmucks."

No one's saying that a sequel like "Toy Story 3" or remakes like "The Karate Kid" and "The A-Team" won't be big hits too. But the difference-makers -- the films that will help decide whether this is a miserable summer or just a modestly disappointing one -- are going to be the original movies. There are still a host of other factors impacting the business these days, not the least of which being the steep rise in ticket prices, especially for 3-D movies, which could be keeping marginal moviegoers away from all but the most obvious most-see releases.

(If I was a betting man, I'd be very worried about a 3-D film like "The Last Airbender," which judging from audience reaction to its trailers looks like exactly the kind of film most likely to be hurt by lack of moviegoer willingness to pay top dollar to see it in 3-D.)

But what really counts here isn't so much sticker shock as the shock of the new. Even in the summer, when we're accustomed to expect a never-ending deluge of reworked ideas and retro-fitted story lines, it turns out that it's the movie that delivers something startlingly new that reminds audiences why they started going to the movies in the first place.

_________________________________________________________________________
http://www.youtube.com/user/punannydiaries

http://thepunannydiaries.com

also on Facebook

Can you tell me one person who was hyped for Prince of Persia? Or Robin Hood? When even girls and gays were hating on Sex and the City 2, you knew that shit sucked. The trailers told us, then the critics confirmed for us, that these movies were trash.

Folks were hyped for Iron Man 2, and you know Shrek 4 was gonna do numbers (although I'm betting it falls off hard the instant Toy Story 3 hits)... but where are the movies people are talking about? They're buried under a sea of remakes and sequels.

Get Him To The Greek- sequel
A-Team- TV adaptation
Jonah Hex- comic adaptation
Karate Kid- remake
Toy Story 3- sequel
Twilight 3- sequel
The Last Airbender- TV adaptation
Predators- remake
The Sorcerer's Apprentice- spinoff

Those will do numbers, sure... but except for Twilight, the numbers I feel will be directly tied to the film's quality. If A-Team is really good, it can carry for a couple of weeks. If it's disposable, it'll do one big weekend and drop hard.

Last year, four of the top 10 films were original. Two were critically-acclaimed relaunchings of known commodities. Three were sequels of children's franchises.

In 2008, four of the top 10 films were original. Three were sequels of franchises held in high critical regard. The other three were kid films.

In 2007, six of the top 15 films were original. Five more were kid films. Three more were sequels of franchises held in high critical regard, and the fifteenth was the movie spinoff of the longest running TV sitcom ever.

I mean... it's not rocket science. Even if your original film feels familiar-- at least it's new characters for an audience to meet and grow to love.

It's literally NO coincidence that the flicks with buzz mentioned there are the originals: Knight and Day, Inception, Grown Ups, Dinner For Schmucks. It's because, as shocking as it is to studios, PEOPLE WANT TO SEE NEW SHIT! If it's new and if it's good, it has a better chance of making money than something old or derivative or shitty.

With a few exceptions (tied usually to Jerry Bruckheimer, who simply knows what people want), many of the highest grossing films of all time are good* films, sequels to good films, or kiddie flicks. All these adaptations of known commodities are cool and all... if they're good.

There's a world in which Jonah Hex is a wildly profitable film. But in that world, the Jonah Hex film is funny and exciting with a great cast and a witty script and it doesn't look like utter shit in the trailer.

*- at bare minimum, entertaining effects-driven diversions

My movies: http://russellhainline.com
My movie reviews: https://letterboxd.com/RussellHFilm/
My beer TikTok: https://www.tiktok.com/@thebeertravelguide

people love sequels; that's a fact. you go online, you talk to movie "heads", they'll all groan and rant away about how there is no originality these days, sequels suck, movies have no substance, blah, blah, blah.

and they'll be half right; there is truth to all of that. but it isn't the complete truth, and maybe not even halfway, the more you think about it. people have migrated to the trilogy platform in droves; LOTR, The Matrix, two Star Wars trilogies, Shrek, POTC, Spiderman, X-Men, and with the (barely) arguable exception of LOTR, all were a VERY mixed bag with at least one entry of each of those. and people ate them up.

the dark knight itself is proof positive that sequels can be done great and attract big business. plenty of arguments could be made for plenty of other movies- gremlins 2 comes to mind, especially since it took the proverbial bull by the horns and winked, nodded, and hijacked it's way into being one of the best, most fun and imaginative sequels ever.

on the other end of the spectrum, yeah, there is a little bit of sequel fatigue at this point because it's sort of being ran into the ground. but at the end of the day, movies almost always follow one golden rule: If you build it, and build it well, they WILL come.

now, this rule sort of fluctuates because you have quality films that are clearly driven with the mass market in mind, and others with a clearly smaller audience in mind, and sometimes these smaller films can explode onto a popcorn level.

clearly, popcorn flicks aren't always mindless drek and artsy flicks aren't always the intellectual superior they are made out to be; there are always exceptions to the rule. at the end of the day though, it matters not whether a movie is an earth-shattering concept that forever alters the way movies are created and perceived, or if it's yet another chapter in an age old story we've seen and heard since the day we could see and hear. you can apply these rules loosely and you'll generally get predictable results, but a great movie is a great movie is a great movie. if you build it, and build it well, they will come- again and again.

-Sig-

“Why didn’t you do this in your own god damn country?"

-All Stah's view on undocumented immigrants wanting to be treated like human beings.

i'm not a critic by a long shot
i'm easy to please
but it's really really bad this year
looking at that post you make hit push whatever
i realized that was it for the summer?!
there isn't anything i really want to see
and usually there is something
*shrug*

it's not us
it's them
~~~~
When you are born, you cry, and the world rejoices. Live so that when you die, you rejoice, and the world cries.
~~~~
You cannot hate people for their own good.

simple as that.

<--- we've got bush!

inception and maybe that Matt Damon Sci-Fi flick. I want to see the Sandler & Get to the Greek comedies but I can wait for them (unless they get really good reviews).


**********

But if the
>box office rebounds, it will be for the same reason that it is
>now slumping. It won't be the sequels that will save the
>summer, it will be the original movies. In fact, the
>film that has the best buzz right now is the original movie
>led by Christopher Nolan "Inception," which is pretty much
>everybody's pick for the breakout movie of the summer

cuz I looked at that as a potential breakout hit / cult type film, good action romp, original characters, good directing, a tinge of cult star power with Nic Cage and McLovin turning in good performances and an already built in fanbase with the comic heads and potential to grow, but it splashed for about 2-3 weekends then disappeared like all the rest.

it's easy to complain about the films, but part of me wonders if the penetration of digital content into American living rooms, coupled with an inreasingly thrifty public, makes it a much better option to stay at home. I can queue up Netflix Watch Instant on anything from an Xbox to a PS3 to a Roku and get access to a pretty robust library, sit on the couch, not get reamed if I want to snack during the film, pay less in an unlimited monthly subscription than the $20+ just for tickets that it would cost for me and a friend for one movie, and watch 2-3 movies in a night, all in HD on a nice TV set, I mean cmon.

yeah, the summer franchises are lame this year, but increased ticket prices and the increased market penetration of new distribution models has to be a factor somehow, too, right?

___________

HOPE!
https://vine.co/v/i7JjIBL3Qix
https://vine.co/v/i7JtqEFwxDu

1. It got a CinemaScore of a B, with men under 25 giving it an A, but everyone else giving it CONSIDERABLY lower. Seeing as how the majority of folks in attendance were men under 25, that means the other folks didn't just dislike it-- they hated it. It's a love-it-or-hate-it flick-- bad news for something off the beaten path like Kick Ass.

2. In my personal opinion, the film is a mixed bag in every sense of the word. Some sequences I loved, others left me scratching my head, others I found corny, others I found guilty of the very thing they seemed to be satirizing. If a film is going to be a hit, an ambitious mixed bag is VERY rarely gonna fit the ball. Why would I sit through parts of a film I didn't like again? See also: Vaughn's previous film, Stardust.

3. Finally, there's violence. Out of the top 100 grossing films of all time, I count MAYBE four that I would consider "violent:" Passion of the Christ, Matrix Reloaded, Saving Private Ryan, and Terminator 2. Two of them are sequels, the other two are "important" films. Why would the layperson sit through all that bonecrushing gutsplattering violence a second time, or recommend to women or any man over the age of 40 that this is a film they absolutely must see?

This is all a matter of opinion of course. But folks didn't really like it overall according to Cinemascore, and with the film achieving mixed results and carrying an unusually large amount of violence, the real question is: why did people think it would be a hit in the first place?

My movies: http://russellhainline.com
My movie reviews: https://letterboxd.com/RussellHFilm/
My beer TikTok: https://www.tiktok.com/@thebeertravelguide

>This is all a matter of opinion of course. But folks didn't
>really like it overall according to Cinemascore, and with the
>film achieving mixed results and carrying an unusually large
>amount of violence, the real question is: why did people think
>it would be a hit in the first place?

I can definitely see how it appealed to a niche market, but considering how much $$ a (if you ask me) considerably less interesting Wolverine film did, I still thought Kick-Ass performed poorly. I mean, no way did I see it really topping $150M, but last I checked it was petering out around $40M for a film that I figured was a safe $60M with big growth potential (honestly, I thought $100M after a good open and good legs was very reasonably in play).

I guess you could maybe point at marketing, but I saw the ads pretty regular leading up, saw McLovin pumping it at All-Star weekend and everything, so I really don't think it failed to either lack of exposure or mismarketing (campaign matched content well, I though, fit in Hit-Girl (the real star) and everything).

soooo ... I wasn't expecting HUGE numbers, but I would say it disappointed even by cautiously optimistic estimates. given that the thrust of the article posted is that the box office is off because of a lack of original IP, the pretty unequivocal failure of Kick-Ass, a movie seemingly poised to fill exactly the gap the author describes, doesn't really seem to support that.

maybe they coulda made it better, sure, but I don't see that big of a quality gap between something like Kick-Ass, Star Trek, or Wolverine, except for the underlying IPs, which, again, submarines the author's point that the problem is lack of originality.

___________

HOPE!
https://vine.co/v/i7JjIBL3Qix
https://vine.co/v/i7JtqEFwxDu

1. Brand name. Star Trek and Wolverine are both sequels in a way. They're known commodities. So they're gonna get more right out the gate.

2. Rating. PG-13 movies ALWAYS make more than R. Always.

3. Hot guy factor. Hear me out: the hot dudes WILL make girls more willing to see a flick. And there was no hot guy in Kick Ass. Meanwhile, I hear girls on a daily basis pine for Chris Pine and Hugh Jackman. If an action flick can get girls there in any way possible, it doubles the amount of bank it can make, and makes women far more likely to recommend it, or at the very least not despite it. Although my GF at the time loved Star Trek and hated Wolverine, she straight up refused to see Kick Ass. She thought it looked dumb, which I've learned is girl code for bloody action with no hot guys in it.

4. Effects. The latter two obviously have more CGI and spectacle, which really does put asses in seats.

Other bloody or gross niche flicks like Ninja Assassin and Drag Me To Hell made a little less overall than Kick Ass. Movies with subversive or grossout humor like Bruno and Hot Tub Time Machine only made a little bit more than Kick Ass, with bigger names attached.


>I can definitely see how it appealed to a niche market, but
>considering how much $$ a (if you ask me) considerably less
>interesting Wolverine film did, I still thought Kick-Ass
>performed poorly. I mean, no way did I see it really topping
>$150M, but last I checked it was petering out around $40M for
>a film that I figured was a safe $60M with big growth
>potential (honestly, I thought $100M after a good open and
>good legs was very reasonably in play).

I mean, $100 million is what Watchmen made, with way more hype, way more effects, and a way bigger name. Kick Ass would have had to have received universal critical acclaim to get those kind of legs under it.

My movies: http://russellhainline.com
My movie reviews: https://letterboxd.com/RussellHFilm/
My beer TikTok: https://www.tiktok.com/@thebeertravelguide

>I mean, $100 million is what Watchmen made, with way more
>hype, way more effects, and a way bigger name. Kick Ass would
>have had to have received universal critical acclaim to get
>those kind of legs under it.

whoever greenlit Watchmen had a death wish for their career, because it was guaranteed to piss off fans and completely fail to claim new ones in the theater. I'm glad they made it, so I got to see it (and actually enjoy it), and so we don't have to suffer the speculation of how it would tranfer to film, but I never for a moment thought that film would do much $$ at all.

I guess, having read the comic book, I thought of Kick-Ass' violence as cartoonish, so I didn't dwell much on the R rating, and I completely agree and recognize the differences you pointed out between the franchises named, but that still doesn't totally explain the HUGE disparity between the $$.

well, it does actually -- the author is completely wrong in saying the problem is a lack of original franchises. Hollywood is completely right to continue cranking out proven, yet creatively bankrupt, franchise flicks, because, if managed well, you can dial in the numbers pretty safe, and you have room to grow if it all comes together. going the route of new franchises is nothing but a proven risk (True Lies anyone? lol. or perhaps even better look at the critically beloved Coraline that will probably be roundly trounced both by Shrek Whatever and Toy Story 3).

I'm not trying to say that Kick-Ass was did wrong by the movie going public or something, I'm just trying to say that this critic's conclusion about the drop in box office is just a faulty, self-serving complaint because he's bored of watching mindless, recycled shit for his job. it's common carping by professional critics that has nothing to do with how the public will continue to spend their money.

___________

HOPE!
https://vine.co/v/i7JjIBL3Qix
https://vine.co/v/i7JtqEFwxDu

They have to be accessible, sure. But good films make money. Coraline only cost 60 mil to make, and grossed 75 mil domestic, before international tickets or DVD sales. Not a huge hit but it'll turn profit.

Films from my Top 25 of last year that were original and turned a good profit thanks to mass distribution include Up In The Air, Up, District 9, Avatar, Cloudy With A Chance of Meatballs, and the aforementioned Coraline. All of these have either big stars, special effects, or aim at children, it's true. But all felt to me like a unique experience-- and movies like District 9, Cloudy with a Chance, and yes, even Avatar, could have debuted big and busted if people weren't leaving the theater saying, "That shit was GREAT!" Others like Zombieland and (500) Days of Summer weren't huge hits with big stars, but they turned big profit, largely because the people who saw them loved them.

There is an argument that refusing to patronize can hurt films, ESPECIALLY those aimed at kids-- Where the Wild Things Are was slow and moody, Harry Potter 6 was the darkest yet (and I think the lowest grossing), and Coraline was downright disturbing. People will always prefer a happy ending. People will always prefer the couple getting together at the end. People do want the cliche, it's true.

But a WELL-TOLD film with good distribution will make money. I couldn't believe The Brothers Bloom never made it into more than 200 theaters at a time. Every lame con flick is guaranteed at least 15-20 mil at the box office with even a quasi-wide release... instead, Brothers Bloom only made 3 mil. Pathetic.

There's a great book which is called (I believe) The Gross that covers an entire summer, the stress behind the making of the films and the promotion of them, and how literally the culture has turned so that studios want one big weekend and then don't give much of a shit after that... any legs a film has are a bonus. Because it's all about getting people to see your film all in one weekend, there is a degree of conformity-- a film must be good in a trailer, must have something catchy that creates interest in society, etc. Something like The Brothers Bloom won't ever really have that, so of course it's easy to dump (in May! The same weekend as Angels and Demons, in between Star Trek and Terminator 4! Of COURSE no one saw that shit, lol).

Sorry I've been rambling in this post... the art of how movies make money and why certain movies catch on fascinates me.

My movies: http://russellhainline.com
My movie reviews: https://letterboxd.com/RussellHFilm/
My beer TikTok: https://www.tiktok.com/@thebeertravelguide

>3. Hot guy factor. Hear me out: the hot dudes WILL make girls
>more willing to see a flick. And there was no hot guy in Kick
>Ass. Meanwhile, I hear girls on a daily basis pine for Chris
>Pine and Hugh Jackman. If an action flick can get girls there
>in any way possible, it doubles the amount of bank it can
>make, and makes women far more likely to recommend it, or at
>the very least not despite it. Although my GF at the time
>loved Star Trek and hated Wolverine, she straight up refused
>to see Kick Ass. She thought it looked dumb, which I've
>learned is girl code for bloody action with no hot guys in
>it.

mind you i dont mind blood action
at all
but i'm just really really REALLY tired of the average to downright unattractive dude in flicks
enough already
with that a friend(female) dragged me and a cousin (also female) to see kick ass
we loved it

but still hot guys were lacking sorely
~~~~
When you are born, you cry, and the world rejoices. Live so that when you die, you rejoice, and the world cries.
~~~~
You cannot hate people for their own good.

yeah no


at first i was like brad who?
pitt is in it!?


but bradley cooper
i mean he's not hard on the eyes at all
but he isn't someone i need to go run to see on the big screen
because hes just that fine
and i just don't think he's fine enough to run go see that movie

maybe i need to see a shirtless shot or something
but i can't agree here
~~~~
When you are born, you cry, and the world rejoices. Live so that when you die, you rejoice, and the world cries.
~~~~
You cannot hate people for their own good.

I guarantee he's shirtless in at least one scene. Undoubtedly.

My movies: http://russellhainline.com
My movie reviews: https://letterboxd.com/RussellHFilm/
My beer TikTok: https://www.tiktok.com/@thebeertravelguide

~~~~
When you are born, you cry, and the world rejoices. Live so that when you die, you rejoice, and the world cries.
~~~~
You cannot hate people for their own good.

it's called kick-ass and I saw the trailers, but I don't recall mclovin or nick cage popping out at me as attached to it, nor would I have really cared if I had.

no one who saw it seemed to say OH YOU HAVE TO GO SEE IT

the only discussion that ever stuck to my thoughts about that movie were that there's some little girl who's an assassin.

it was that movie right?

http://card.mygamercard.net/lastgame/rjcc.png

www.engadgethd.com - the other stuff i'm looking at

it's just light hearted action with some good style and a somewhat fresh / unique take on the whole cape and tights thing. it's bloody and light hearted, feels something like a teenage Tarantino flick (without all the self-concious stylization and referencing).

if you enjoy action pictures or superhero pictures at all, I'd highly recommend trying to catch it on DVD.

and as far as my point about the marketing, it's not as if it was AMAZING, but I thought it was marketed just as well as any other big picture, so it would be baseless to say that was the reason it didn't do great at the box office.

___________

HOPE!
https://vine.co/v/i7JjIBL3Qix
https://vine.co/v/i7JtqEFwxDu

everyone wants to be quirky nowadays, there was no hook.

http://card.mygamercard.net/lastgame/rjcc.png

www.engadgethd.com - the other stuff i'm looking at

>it's easy to complain about the films, but part of me wonders
>if the penetration of digital content into American living
>rooms, coupled with an inreasingly thrifty public, makes it a
>much better option to stay at home. I can queue up Netflix
>Watch Instant on anything from an Xbox to a PS3 to a Roku and
>get access to a pretty robust library, sit on the couch, not
>get reamed if I want to snack during the film, pay less in an
>unlimited monthly subscription than the $20+ just for tickets
>that it would cost for me and a friend for one movie, and
>watch 2-3 movies in a night, all in HD on a nice TV set, I
>mean cmon.

This is probably the real reason. It's not that movies are particularly shitty. Maybe they are, maybe they aren't. The fact is this is probably the norm, and frankly I'm surprised this didn't happen tot he movie industry sooner.

If I go to a movie in theaters I pay $10.

If I stay at home, for $1 I can rent the movie and:
- watch it without people talking
- pause it, rewind, etc. to make sure I don't miss anything
- watch it on a better screen
- eat whatever I want without paying
etc.

Basically the only advantages of seeing a movie in theaters are the sound system (which is USUALLY better) and the fact that I don't have to wait a couple months to see it. The waiting is what gets people to come out for movies that look sick as fuck...but if a movie doesn't look sick as fuck, there is just too compelling an argument to stay at home and put that money towards other things.

>It's not that movies are
>particularly shitty.

Compared to last summer, the line up of movies this year is just WEAK. Last summer, my friends and I were in the theater several Friday nights from the beginning of May to end of June catching the new blockbuster that came out (Wolverine, Star Trek, Up, Hangover, Transformers 2; they saw Terminator w/o me, and Angels & Demons was a blockbuster we didn't care to see). And even later in the summer, we were excited to catch GI Joe and District 9, knowing they probably wouldn't be spectacular, but would definitely be entertaining.

This summer? There's been virtually NOTHING of interest. Whereas last summer delivered at least 1 good event pic a week, this summer has so far been pretty barren. One of my boys snookered us into seeing "Robin Hood," and I've seen a pair of romantic comedies (Killers, Just Wright) on dates. They have a REALLY weak slate this year. The studios and studio watchers are ABSOLUTELY correct to trace weak box office this year to weak offerings. People are willing to pay big prices to see GOOD MOVIES (see: "Avatar," "How to Train Your Dragon"). We're not willing to pay for some bullshit like what's come out so far this season.

Go Smack yourself and then apologize to your hand for looking stupid - Case_One

http://i54.tinypic.com/nxros2.jpg

Wolverine
Transformers 2
Terminator Salvation
GI Joe

Go Smack yourself and then apologize to your hand for looking stupid - Case_One

http://i54.tinypic.com/nxros2.jpg

I suppose, if you prefer HDTV to 35mm projection, which I don't.

I guess a lot of people don't anymore, but I value the movie going experience for the atmosphere and the escapism. I don't want ot pause and rewind the movie, and I want to see it with a larger audience (though not one that talks throughout the movie; I don't go to theaters with yakkers).

a lot of us DO enjoy that. and we'll pay for it for, at the least, good popcorn movies. which the studios haven't delivered so far this summer AT ALL. it sounds to me like folks wanna cop pleas for weak movie product.

Go Smack yourself and then apologize to your hand for looking stupid - Case_One

http://i54.tinypic.com/nxros2.jpg

Or better put: "If all you serve is bland chicken, can you really get mad that they don't like it?"


"Your current frequencies of understanding outweigh that which has been given for you to understand." Saul Williams

i'm happy burn notice is back
i can't wait for true blood, eureka and mad men

i need to catch up on us of tara
i hear breaking bad is something i need to catch up on
i'm steadily watching dr who


the movies really aren't bringing it
and i'm finding myself more hyped about my shows
~~~~
When you are born, you cry, and the world rejoices. Live so that when you die, you rejoice, and the world cries.
~~~~
You cannot hate people for their own good.

>i hear breaking bad is something i need to catch up on

------

12 play and 12 planets are enlighten for all the Aliens to Party and free those on the Sex Planet-maxxx

XBL: trkc21
Twitter: @tyrcasey

and USA's White Collar (Marsha Thomason is back AND she a series regular! FIYAH!!! FIYAH I SAY! FIYAAAAAHHHHHHHHHH!!!!! ) and the new show COVERT AFFAIRS...

TNT's pulling out their new shows and their second season ones...

and then with ALL the possibilities for the coming 2010-2011 network season...

right now i'm not very HYPE about movies...

INCEPTION
KNIGHT AND DAY

are really the ONLY two films i'm checking for SPLICE after reading it and seeing the lame assed, fucked up twist...im passing....

Get Out the Room
https://itunes.apple.com/us/podcast/get-out-the-room/id525657893

Some of y'all need this in your life: http://www.psychology.com

>Marsha Thomason


i didn't know!!!!
this is gonna be great


oh and i'm eyeing knght and day
cruise looks hilariously nutty


inception...that bad first trailer threw me

the subsequent ones have been better
but i'm still tepid
~~~~
When you are born, you cry, and the world rejoices. Live so that when you die, you rejoice, and the world cries.
~~~~
You cannot hate people for their own good.

yes...i saw an article about her being a series regular this season...BUT, I hope they keep her character a lesbian and not de-gay her and make her a one episode love interest for Neil Caffrey (though, since the dude who's playing Caffrey is apparently, a friend of dorothy , I would be curious to see his chemistry with her as he tried to get his "mack" on....

INCEPTION did look a hot mess but the subsequent trailers have me sold...plus, TOM HARDY (ROCKNROLLA) is in this and um, he oddly just DOES IT for me...i have no idea why

and yes Tom Cruise looks nuttier than ever and Cameron Diaz is giving us BAD ASS SKINNY GIRL WORKING CLASS LONG BEACH EFFECT circa 2000 Charlie's Angels..i'm IN.

Get Out the Room
https://itunes.apple.com/us/podcast/get-out-the-room/id525657893

Some of y'all need this in your life: http://www.psychology.com

>and USA's White Collar (Marsha Thomason is back AND she a
>series regular! FIYAH!!! FIYAH I SAY! FIYAAAAAHHHHHHHHHH!!!!!
> ) and the new show COVERT AFFAIRS...
>
i stopped watching cause she was gone....now i'll be back...


>TNT's pulling out their new shows and their second season
>ones...
>
LEVERAGE!!!

>

"yes, sometimes my rhymes are sexist, but you lovely bitches and hos should know i'm tryin to correct it"- hiphopopotamus

Gina Bellman (from the BEST and original COUPLING) is a hoot, and I love Beth Riegstaff (sp?)

but, the writing is just kinda meh to me...and Aldis Hodge is the ashiest nigga on tv right now...

and Christian Kane...he tries way to hard to be tough...

but ill give it another shot..maybe.

Get Out the Room
https://itunes.apple.com/us/podcast/get-out-the-room/id525657893

Some of y'all need this in your life: http://www.psychology.com

Time for some new shit, Hollywood!

We're not interested in half-baked 80's rehashes or Spiderman 12.

Some of us want originality and art with our greasy-ass popcorn.

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

*Effasig*

nm

Forgiveness is the fragrance that the violet sheds on the heel that has crushed it.

Everything else is extra.

Seems like the studios aren't investing in anything that isn't going to profit. The movies seem very safe this year...

Shrek
Toy Story
Alice in Wonderland
Twilight
Remakes of classic shit (A-Team, Robin Hood, Karate Kid)

All seem like "sure things." Hell, I'm sure Nolan only got to make Inception because his last movie was the motherfucking Dark Knight, which made uber-money.

-------------------------------
If life is stupendous one cannot also demand that it should be easy. - Robert Musil

and start BACKING original material...

people want to see ORIGINAL shit...not the rehated tv to movie bullshit craze going on now...

or comic book movies of either obscure characters or ones you don't *REALLY* want to see...

most of the memorable films from the summer of recent note were all ORIGINAL films...

plus, studios need to BACK TO backing INDIES...really, you want better quality of film, start distributing indie films again....REAL TALK.

Get Out the Room
https://itunes.apple.com/us/podcast/get-out-the-room/id525657893

Some of y'all need this in your life: http://www.psychology.com