Silver Bullet To The Head...

Well it looks like the Mouse's "The Lone Ranger" lives up to that name...

 As in lone. There won't be another. Not with the horse whipping it got over the weekend.  For those of you that didn't notice, Walt Disney Pictures latest film had a disastrous weekend.  For the second year in a row, Disney had a major box office flop.  It appears that when it came time to write the script, no one knew how to get a take on this character.  So the result was an unevenness, tonally incoherent story that pleased no one.

Hollywood in general, and Disney specifically had no idea of what to do with a character that is a goodie-two-shoe.  A hero that does the right thing has to be looked at with suspicion instead of admiration.  Sadly, this is something that Disnet should excel at.  But for some reason they had to attempt a watered down version of "Unforgiven" on a character that was supposed to inspire the better part of people.

And inso doing they got beat by a film that is filled with optimism and laughter.  I don't blame the actors, I blame the film makers who should have known better.  Gore Verbinski's knows how to make a Western as he has done with "Rango", which was a cowboy film by default.  In this one, he and the producers along with willing writers came up with a story they wanted to tell with a hero they were ashamed of.

It is they that should be ashamed...

Iron Man 300,000,000...

So today is the day Phase Two starts...

At least for America.  So begins Shell Head's third outing.  It's already a huge hit overseas with over $300 million so far, and an expected $450 million by the end of the weekend.  That's not included what it's expected to make here.  That's an estimated $177 million more for a total of over $600+ million by Sunday.  I think it's safe to say that this film may make its money back.

Will it make more than "The Avengers" though?

Doubtful, but it'll likely wind up being the second most profitable Marvel film.  It may nip at the heels of the team up film, but there would have to be an extra push to get it over the threshold that Joss Whedon's film set.  Now the question for you is: "Is it worth it?"

Now, I don't do reviews anymore.  I don't consider myself a reviewer, but simply a film fan, a movie lover and Disney obsessor.  My favorite Marvel film is "The Avengers" film, but "Captain America: The First Avenger" is a very close second.  Iron Man 3 is right behind Cap.  It's a very good film.  It's a smart, intelligent detective film, disguised as a popcorn film that succeeds on almost every level.  It's my favorite Iron Man film.  It has the best display of characters of all three films, and it sets a bar for the films to follow.  In other words, it starts off Phase Two with a big, loud bang.

Too bad the Creatives and Suits decided against that Stark Expo for Innoventions...

To Convert Or Not To Convert...

That is the question... Honor here. The Colonel wanted to chime in on something he knows quite a bit about: 3-D. Being a colonel in the Army and all he deals with technology a great deal of the time. So in this battle of wills, this war of words about 3-D and conversion versus filming it, he wanted to set the field of battle for you...

Now that the “Green Hornet” is out in theaters, I thought this would be a perfect time to discuss the 3D conversion at length. While many Internet users and bloggers attack the 3D conversion process for over a year now (I vaguely remember how many people rallied that the upcoming “Priest was SHOT with 3D cameras after they saw the trailer at comic-con only to have an epic FAIL finding out that it was post-converted). The truth is finally beginning to rise to the surface and that is that 3D POST CONVERSION IS BETTER THAN SHOOTING IN NATIVE STEREO.

Yes, I said it, now let the hate mail come. People that have been screaming and writing that the 3D process is just a “gimmick” and it is “dead’ might as well stop reading this right now, and respond to that email from the Nigerian Prince who has a million dollars to give you if only you just send him a couple of thousands. 3D is here to stay, the numbers show it (”50%-70% of Box Office revenue is derived from stereoscopic 3D movies”. Price Waterhouse Cooper) as well as it might be the only thing to save the Blu-Ray format. Because streaming is becoming more and more popular, the DVD is going the way of the dodo bird, but not Blu-Ray and certainly not 3D Blu-Ray. In fact, 3D Blu-Ray will wind up saving the Blu-Ray format. Because you can’t pirate it (yes, the studios love this), and because it requires higher bandwith (much higher than what is available out there right now), and even if they get the bandwidth, they have to send a right eye, left eye file and that would be double the bandwidth, so Blu-Ray 3D will be the format for a long time to come. The content has just started to come out for the home market and it will double by the next year thanks to Disney (they are releasing 15 titles in the next year).

Many companies have begun to ‘retro-fit’ older properties (please don’t equate this with Ted Turner’s colorization, and in the end you have the original just the way you like it on pristine Blu-Ray, dvd or God forbid VHS), this helps bring in new revenue for the studios, and we know how they love to “double-dip”, well this would be “quadruple dipping”. In a few short years we will have the Star Wars Saga in 3D (and of course Lucas loves this because you will be paying money to see his flawed trilogy at the cinemas and then a year later they will be on Blu-ray 3D, not to mention the gift pack of 3D action figures exclusives at your local wal-mart), Indiana Jones (yes, Indy), Titanic 3D (Really Cameron? You are down on conversion but you are converting Titanic?).  Maybe it’s because you want to sell more Pace cameras, Terminator, LOTR trilogy (3D Gandalf and Balrog just in time for a 3D Hobbit theatrical release), “Spider-Man” trilogy (so Sony can bundle with the TVs in 2012 when the Spidey reboot hits theaters nationwide) just to name a few. Those films mentioned will all be converted because they were shot in 2-D. I haven’t even mentioned “Matrix”, “Harry Potter” trilogies.

This is backed by the 3D TV market exploding this year (3D TVs were the number one item bought on black Friday). Now I get it, if you are older you may not enjoy 3D as much (we lose 1 diopter of eye coordination every 5 years after the age of 30. The older the person gets, the harder it is for them to see in stereo.), but we all know that the studios pander to the young crowd (16-35 males specifically), so you are not their target audience. But now that 3D has infiltrated video games and mobile devices, you can bet on that the generation “NOW” kids will be only used to 3D, just like they are to cell phones, ask them to remember a world without a laptop and iTunes and they will probably stare at you doe-eyed like a deer caught in headlights.

A lot has been said about shooting 3D rather than post converting. Just because some studios wanted to rush a conversion and the conversions came out poorly, people have just assumed that all conversion is poorly done. The way conversion should be used is just like any other art form, it should be viewed like cinematography, editing, sound, it is essential to the picture to be done right. “Conversion is a artistic process, not a technical one” – Jon Landau. I hear people cry over the Internet about how Avatar is so amazing and that everything 3D should be shot like that, but what they don’t know is that “Avatar” was 35% converted (and it was 50% animated but it won the Oscar for best live action cinematography, that will be another argument for another time).

 People love a fight, and they want to make it out like the HD vs. Film war, or the HD vs. Blu-Ray, but what really is happening is that shooting native 3D and post converting 3D will go hand in hand. Some movies will be shot in 3D, but some sequences of the film will be post converted because conversion is like having 1000 cameras on set and being able manipulate every pixel and sub-pixel is far advantageous than just shooting everything on set. In fact, it makes sense especially with the blockbusters that are using mo-cap or heavy fx, why would you want to shoot Optimus Prime or Yogi Bear twice by dual rendering? You have to shoot the left and than the right, instead you can just wait till the fx are done, hand the material over and then post convert it. Shooting a film in 3D is only right for the big boys, the studio tent poles, it costs over 30% more (sometimes up to 50%) to shoot a 3D show, where as converting is a fraction of that cost. And just because “Titans” and other hack job conversions are done, that doesn’t mean they should all be done that way. That is like judging “Batman and Robin” was a bad film, so nobody should see “The Dark Knight” because Batman sucks.

Don’t judge the conversion process by one, two or even five films, when the technology is so new and fresh. And that is the exciting thing about 3D, is we are on the cutting edge of technology. 3D gets us away from the music video Michael Bay like cinematography and makes us focus more on the classic style of film-making. 3D is a check and balances, because it makes the filmmaker focus on the frame and everything in it, makes them think before shooting –

“Every shot is rethinking cinema,” rethinking narrative – how to tell a story with a picture.” – Martin Scorsese.

Shooting has its variety of problems, the rigs are huge, and you are using two cameras at once. Now I understand there is the new EPIC RED camera that Spidey is using but let’s wait and see when they get into post before we judge shall we? According to my sources, Transformers are in trouble, along with the other films that were shot with the pace cameras. The other bummer is you can’t shoot on film, so say goodbye 35mm and hello digital capture. It is also a fact that the way the cameras record the info, it distorts the face if the actor is standing 5ft away, so you can say adios to close-ups, unless you want your main movie star’s face to look like it was rolled like a fruit roll up. If anybody has made a movie, then they can tell you how hard it is to make a great 2D film, let alone a 3D one.

With conversion, the artists are left alone to concentrate on creation, rather than throwing another technical monkey wrench into the mix – “Shooting 3D can put you under enormous pressure” – Oliver Stone. With many new 3D conversions coming out – “Thor”, “Captain America”, “Priest” audiences will be able to have more of a variety to compare to instead of just a 6 week conversion of “Clash”. If studios and filmmakers alike treat 3D as a integral part of the story, and give it the time it needs, than post conversion 3D solves many problems and takes all the headaches away from shooting 3D.

Most directors are control freaks, I understand it is their baby, but I think shooting 3D comes from a place of fear, rather than knowledge. As Cameron once said “Technology should come to the filmmaker – not the filmmaker go to the technology”, shooting 3D makes the filmmaker succumb to the burden that he/she does not need. If Filmmakers take their time in post, they find the movie there with the editing, enrich it with sound, make it come alive, then they too should post convert 3D because it is another tool that allows them the time they need to get it right. Yes, you should make your movie with 3D in mind. That is what Michele Gondry did with “The Green Hornet”. His ‘Kato vision” is exactly what 3D was intended for. But that is not what 3D is all about either. 3D is best used when it is submersive, when it allows the audience to partake in the story with the characters, inhabit the world they live in.

Now the audience can live, breathe with the characters and look at the story through a “window” as James Cameron says. I can understand that there is a need for films like “Piranha 3D” , but that is like just shooting a movie all handheld because it looks cool, or if it’s good enough for Bourne it is good enough for me. But in the end I guess this article is moot because what is the underlying factor of this be it 2D, 3D, 4D or smellovision is script. In real estate it is location, location, location but in the film business it is script, script, script (yes, I am quoting Lucas but it was during the golden days of “New Hope and “Empire”, before the dark times) and without a good story with enriched characters, 3D means nothing. But when a story has layers, 3D has layers, it has subtext and meaning and if you use those qualities wisely, than it can be an experience that we will never forget.

After all we see the world in 3D, why shouldn’t we see our films the same way?

Kurtz Out.

One Hundred MillTRON...

Walt Disney Pictures' "Tron Legacy" has passed the 100 million dollar mark...

The picture opened in first place, but slightly less than predicted (43 million versus 50 million), but has maintained a steady daily average. While it's not the blockbuster the Mouse had hoped, it's doing solid business, earning about 170 million worldwide so far. In the case of IMAX it's doing record setting business, with a quarter of the profit coming from those small amount of screens. While the future of this film is a franchise or not isn't known, the box office has been surprisingly steady. The merchandise, DVD/Blu-Ray/rental and animated series will determine if there's a TR3N.

Till then, the grid is still active...

Hair Apparent...

Lots and lots of money, I mean hair...







First off, I want to issue an apology to the Disney Marketing Department...

I was wrong. You did a great job bringing in the butts to see this film. That doesn't mean I like your campaign or wouldn't have preferred to see something different, but it clearly worked and I can't deny that.

Biggest opening in Walt Disney Animation Studios history:

69 million over the five day Thanksgiving Day weekend.

49 million opening weekend.

82,800,000 globally so far.

Looks like the Lamps big brother finally made good on the third try!

Congrats all around, Marketeers...

Billion Dollar Toy...

$$$$$...




$$$$...
The Lamp is burning very, very bright...

On this weekend the little animation start-up in Emeryville that I affectionately/jokingly call Disney Animation North is going to be sitting in a pretty historic position. Their latest film is already Pixar's highest grossing film ever, but by the time Sunday rolls around it will be even more. If that is actually possible.

"Toy Story 3" will have made over one billion dollars by the time the Monday morning sun comes up. That's right:

$1,000,000,000.00 plus spare change. Lots of zeros, but thankfully with a positive number in front of all of them. Congratulations go out to John Lasseter and the crew, but I have to give a special shout out and thank you to Lee Unkrich. Not a bad way to start your directing career, Lee. I mean, as a solo director, of course. He's been riding sidesaddle for a good while and it's nice to see him take the reigns and ride hard. What a success. You must be on cloud 10 right now.

I can't wait to see what you have up next, sir...

UPDATE:

Looks like the Mouse has made it official, even earlier than Sunday. Here's the official press release:

DISNEY•PIXAR’S TOY STORY 3 WILL CROSS $1 BILLION TODAY; DISNEY TO BECOME
FIRST STUDIO WITH TWO $1 BILLION FILMS IN ONE YEAR

BURBANK, Calif. – August 27, 2010 – Two weeks after becoming the highest-grossing animated film of all time, Disney•Pixar’s Toy Story 3 will cross the $1 billion mark at the global box office today, joining Alice in Wonderland as the second $1 billion film this year from The Walt Disney Studios – the first studio in history to accomplish this feat. Disney first crossed the $1 billion threshold with Pirates of the Caribbean: Dead Man’s Chest in 2006. Toy Story 3 becomes the only animated film to reach this milestone and the seventh title in industry history.

“It’s been an incredible year as we saw the Pixar team bring Buzz and Woody back to the big screen and watched Tim Burton’s vision for Alice in Wonderland take the world by storm,” said Rich Ross, Chairman, The Walt Disney Studios. “These box office triumphs prove that creative storytelling brought to life by imaginative, inspired and talented professionals is something audiences respond to the world over.”

As of Thursday (8/26/10), Toy Story 3 tallied more than $592.9 million internationally, Disney’s largest international animated release. Latin American audiences have contributed $138 million making Toy Story 3 the highest grossing Disney film ever released in the region. Toy Story 3 is the most successful UK release in Disney history and currently stands as the fourth biggest title in territory history with $102.4 million in box office receipts so far. In Japan, the film has taken in $111.2 million and spent five consecutive weeks as the #1 movie. Toy Story 3 currently ranks as the #7 film in global box office history and domestically ranks #9 with $404.6 million in receipts to date.

Alice in Wonderland began setting records during its opening weekend (March 5-7), becoming the biggest March opening in industry history, the highest 3D opening ever and The Walt Disney Studios’ biggest opening for a non-sequel film. Internationally, the film went on to tally more than $690 million, becoming Disney’s biggest overseas release of all time and the fourth biggest title ever released overseas. Worldwide, the film took in $1.0243 billion, ranking it as the #5 film in global box office history.

I can see why they fired Dick Cook. What a lousy year the film division is having...

No Return To Persia...

Well, with the box office now in it appears that not everything Disney is magical...

At least domestically. Prince of Persia: The Sands of Time came in a disappointing second place on it's opening weekend. If that wasn't bad enough, the number three film that almost beat it was about a group of aging, hormonally imbalanced, frisky New Yorkers and the number one film was an ugly green ogre made by a former cast member. Not quite what the Mouse had hoped.

Looks like Disney with that subtitle, "The Sands of Time" which was meant as an announcement of a possible franchise (read: replacement for POTC) is going to have to just be happy with just a single film. Unless Prince Dastan brings up a lot of Persian gold for the DVD/Blu-Ray release then it looks likely the sands of time have ran out for the dear, noble prince. Now as to what this means for Bruckheimer, not quite sure yet. After all, he survived "Pearl Harbor" didn't he? Let's just be thankful Michael Bay didn't direct this film. The Bruck is still Disney's golden boy and remember, he does have another Pirate tale to tell.

If there's to be another trip to Persia, then it's going to be up to the world (where the film was number 1 this weekend), not America...

Small Change...

When it's all said and done later this year, "Iron Man 2" will put somewhere between 200 - 300 million dollars in the Mouse's vault...

Not bad for something they had zero to do with. But since they now own Marvel, they own the profits in the end run/long run. Even though Paramount Pictures is the distributor, they only get a distribution fee. The bulk of the profits fall back to Mighty Marvel and therefore, Disney. And this is all before DVD/Blu-Ray/Pay-Per-View/Cable/iTunes.

The same is true of next year's "Thor" and "Captain America" and 2012's "Avengers" and the as yet, undecided project. That one will be the last one distributed by Paramount and all other sequels of these franchise and anything else Marvel does will go under Walt Disney Pictures or Touchstone Pictures. That distribution fee won't exist or be needed.

Of course, then there's the other Marvel films that various studios are producing:

Spider-Man 4 over at Sony (Columbia/TriStar).

Ghost Rider 2 over at Sony (Columbia/TriStar).

Fantastic Four 3 over at Fox.

X-Men 4 over at Fox.

Wolverine 2 over at Fox.

Deadpool over at Fox.

A lot of Marvel aka: Disney projects not handled by Disney, eh? The funny thing to think about is how many other studios have films that are in production based on something owned by another studio? There are two or three other studios that are making films based on Disney characters (yes, Marvel characters are now Disney characters). And Disney will make some cash from each of these productions. Now it won't be as much as if they were making the films in house, but it's still cash. And make no mistake in thinking that Disney isn't watching what the other studios are doing with their properties. They will be making sure they follow those contracts to the letter. The L-E-T-T-E-R. Any deviation that causes them to be in violation would be pounced on before you could even think about it. Disney will make sure that this happens as I'm sure they're salivating at the idea of producing their own Spider-Man film. This is probably why you've seen Columbia Pictures work at getting a "Ghost Rider" film into production by September (because that's when the rights will revert back to Marvel/Disney).

By the end of this year there will be at least one or two films in pre-production on the Burbank Lot that will be Disney's first Marvel productions. Now, they've gone through the library of characters and narrowed down the prospects of what they want to do over the next few years of filming. But as of 2013 you should expect at least two films a year from Disney Studios featuring Marvel characters. It'll be part of their summer/holiday tentpole strategy. Just as Warner Bros. plans on releasing DC characters as their tentpole films as a replacement for the Harry Potter franchise.

So expect a lot of films over the next few years about guys wearing underwear on the outside of their clothes from the Mouse...

World Upside Down...

Number. One.

Need I say more?

I can hear the Suits thinking about a new rodent franchise already...

We're Here To Kick Dat Little Wizard's Butt...

Whoa...

I don't believe it, but "G-Force" beat "Harry Potter and the Half Blood Prince" on Friday night. Now that is something I thought I'd never say or see. I figured the family film would do nicely with the "Beverly Hills Chihuahua" crowd, but I never thought it would beat the Trio of Hogwarts. While it's not my cup of tea, this shows that there is a family audience out there that is hungry to be entertained.

I didn't know they were this hungry...

Second To None, But One...

Up is awesome.
Let's go see it again!



Great news for the Lamp's Tenth Blockbuster...


File this one under all those critics that were talking about what a bad decision it was for Disney to buy Pixar because of the diminishing box office returns.



Pete Docter's latest film has now passed "The Incredibles," which happens to be my favorite film from the Lamp, to become the second highest film from Pixar. The highest would be "Finding Nemo" and "Up" isn't going to make enough to beat it. But this is clearly a case where second best is good enough. Heck, it's great as far as I'm concerned.




The adventures of Carl Fredericksen has now pulled in over $300 million dollars between it's domestic and international releases, with many more countries still to open up. So the final take on this should be somewhere north of $400 million... maybe way north.




If you haven't see this film yet, go see it and sit back watching quality story making with something Michael Bay's never heard of: A plot.



I've seen this film three times now, and it just gets better each time you watch it. It's still my favorite film of the year, and simply a jewel of rich, deep and emotionally involving storytelling. Something most animation and live-action doesn't have.



Here's the rankings of Pixar's ten films according to Box Office Mojo:

1 Finding Nemo $339,714,978
2 Up $264,816,694
3 The Incredibles $261,441,092
4 Monsters, Inc. $255,873,250
5 Toy Story 2 $245,852,179
6 Cars $244,082,982
7 WALL-E $223,808,164
8 Ratatouille $206,445,654
9 Toy Story $191,796,233
10 A Bug's Life $162,798,565

Hat Tip to Upcoming Pixar.

The Experts That Aren't...

All those Wall Street experts that were worrying about the potential of Pixar's latest film have been very quite lately...

As of today, the Lamp's tenth film, "Up" is officially the highest grossing film of 2009. And many of the same naysayers were wondering if kids would go and see this film about an old man, much less buy merchandise related to it.

I wonder how long Pixar will wait for an apology? I don't think Lasseter and crew are really even caring about what's being said. Other than by the film goers themselves. The critics liking the film was icing on the cake and the critics that were worried about the appeal of this film, well? They're toast, after having their lunch handed to them. Enough of the food metaphors, but you get the point.

Now, let's hope the critics did too...

UPDATE: The only downside of this is that as of next week, the incomprehensible mass of action minus a story known as "Tranformers: Revenge of the Fallen" will overtake it. Another feather in Michael Bay's "whoneedsaplot" cap.

No Dog At The Box Office...

Pixar's "Up" made $21,400,000, on its Friday opening according to Box Office Mojo...

Wonder how those critics that felt the film would have limited appeal because the hero was a senior citizen and therefore, not very likable to the young kids that normally go see these films? Crickets, I hear crickets.

Nuff said...

Choices...

Candid, I love candid...

You know I hate when someone in charge tries to place blame on others or states things were beyond their control. So it's refreshing to hear Bob Iger respond to an analyst who asked why Disney is at the bottom of the barrel of a year in which the studios are almost literally raking in money:

It's about choice of films and the execution of the films that have been chosen for production," Iger said. "We've had a rough year in terms of the performance of the slate. So, in that case, it's not the marketplace. It's our slate.

I may not like the results, but I like that I can trust the CEO of Disney won't sugarcoat it for me so as to look as though he had nothing to do with it. Perhaps next year it'll be another story.

I know Dick Cook is feeling the heat...

Blue Sky Summer...

Summer is about to be upon us and time to focus on the films that Blue Sky Disney is looking forward to. In no particular order...

Public Enemies (July 1, 2009) - I'm probably looking forward to no other movie than this Michael Mann directed bio-pic of the crime wave of John Dillinger(Johnny Depp) and his G-Man Nemesis Melvin Purvis(Christian Bale). This is the tops for me this summer, the bee's knees.

Up (May 29, 2009) - Any film made by Pixar is a film worthy of seeing. John Lasseter and his crew focus on story, story and oh, I forgot... story. It looks like Pete Docter has made sure it's going to be a rousing adventure and I like adventure as much as the next lad out there. Plus I can't wait to see more of my favorite character, Dug!

Star Trek (May 8, 2009) - Let me state for the record that I'm not a Trekkie or Trekker, if you want to be specific. I'm a Star Wars type of guy. But this film looks really, really cool. It's got the intensity and drive of a space action film that I've never seen in a Trek film(the only exception could possibly be "Khan")).

500 Days of Summer (July 17, 2009) - Marc Webb's love story that's not a love story starring Joseph Gordon-Levitt(Brick, G.I. Joe) and Zooey Deschanel(Bridge to Terabithia, Yes Man). This is one of those indie films that happens to appeal to my personal taste. Plus I think Gordon-Levitt is a star waiting to break out... could G.I. Joe be his chance? Or will it be at a later date since he missed out on being Spider-Man once Tobey decided to come back for a gigantic paycheck? Either way, this is one of those films I'll search out and catch with a few friends.

Terminator Salvation (May 21, 2009) - I never thought I'd willingly go see a film by McG, but the Michael Bay on steroids style slick shots I'm used to seeing from him are missing in these trailers for the next Terminator film. Add Christian Bale to the mix and I'm curious to see if he can pull off a film that I'll not only like, but love. And I can't help mentioning it one more time: No Will Smith, McG!

The Hurt Locker (June 26th, 2009) - Katherine Bigelow's(Near Dark, Point Break) take on the current Iraq War without any political slant, just a good old fashioned action-adventure film. Something she's darn good at doing. I've wanted to see this one since I heard the early buzz about it coming from the screenings it's had. It's supposed to be a heart stopper from start to finish. I'll be there.

Transformers: Revenge of the Fallen (June 26, 2009) -
The Brothers Bloom (May 15, 2009) - And while we mentioned Michael Bay, let's focus on what the real one is doing. I'll be the first to admit I thought "Transformers" would suck. I was wrong. At least for me, I enjoyed watching the tale of giant robots destroying the earth. Hopefully the sequel will have more of that and less of Shia trying to score with Megan Fox. But this is definitely one of the big tent pole films of the summer I'll be buying a ticket for.

Harry Potter and the Half Blood Prince (July 15, 2009) - I'm not one of those fans of the books(although I have read and enjoyed the first one), but I am a fan of the film series. I've enjoyed as each one has gotten darker and darker, calling on Harry to reach further inside himself to confront the evil that destroyed his family. I think they've done quite well by the direction Warner Bros. has chosen with the series and this is one Muggle planning on being there opening night.

Drag Me To Hell (May 29, 2009) - Finally, Sam Raimi returns to his roots. I AM THERE. The story of a woman who's the recipient of a nasty curse will give shivers of delight to "Evil Dead" fans all across geekdom. My only worry, or any one's worry, is that the rating will be PG-13. I think it'll still be scary enough to please the traditional Evil Dead crowd as that rating is closer to an "R" than it was a decade ago. I just think it'll have less blood and more scares... which is fine with me. I just wonder if Bruce makes a cameo?

Ponyo on the Cliff by the Sea (August 14, 2009) - Hayao Miyazaki next classic animated piece about an old man who goes on an adventure in his house by attaching balloons to it... er, scratch that. No, it's actually the story of a small mermaid in the sea named Ponyo who becomes a human girl. Along the way, she strikes up a friendship with a young boy named Sōsuke. Long considered a pivotal influence on the development of Pixar, Miyazaki is an animation legend... and one that still works in beautiful, hand-drawn animation. looking forward to it.

Inglourious Basterds (August 21, 2009) - I've read every script by Quentin Tarantino(Kill Bill, Jackie Brown) since he made "Pulp Fiction," but after reading the first ten pages of the ginormous script that makes up this film, I put it away. I wanted to experience one of his films for the first time in a long time without knowing what was coming next. And although Brad Pitt's accent is atrocious, I still plan on being in line on opening weekend to watch some Nazi's get scalped.

The Hangover (June 5, 2009) - Todd Phillips(Old School, Starsky & Hutch) latest film looks like another hysterically funny adventure with a macabre twist. Set in Las Vegas, this comedy tells the story of three groomsmen who lose groom during a night of drunken misadventures. They find themselves with a lost baby and have to retrace their steps from the night before to find him and the answers to this unknown baby.

District 9 (August 14, 2009) - Neill Blomkamp's(who was supposed to direct "Halo" before the studio got buyer's remorse upon seeing the budget) makes a film based on his short, "Alive in Joburg" about aliens having landed on earth and a secretive camp at which they are held. A thinly veiled account of social conditions in some parts of Africa disguised as a Sci-Fi film. It's been getting kudos from all who've seen it in very selected screenings. I'm looking forward to seeing what I could've expected from Halo and the Suits will be as well.

Honorable mention(or not):

G.I. Joe: Rise of Cobra (August 7, 2009) - Stephen Sommers is pretty much hit and miss with me. While I know he can deliver a fun, action filled yarn(The Mummy), I know he can also deliver a massive, high-concept travesty(Van Helsing). Let's hope this is more on the fun side, because Joe is a story that could be very good in the right hands... the question is are those hands Sommers?

X-Men Origins: Wolverine (May 1, 2009) - Having read the original screenplay for this, I had high hopes. After seeing the preview I've wondered what to think. The trailer looks to be more of a sequel to "X-Men" than a spin off of it. I hope the film is good and am cautiously optimistic. I've had a friend see it and love it. Here's hoping that finding out about Wolvie's past doesn't make me hate his future.

Funny People (July 31, 2009) - Anything directed by Judd Apatow(The 40-Year-Old Virgin), I'm willing to watch. This is the story of George Simmons(Adam Sandler), a successful stand-up comedian that finds he has an inoperable blood disorder and given less than a year to live. Hilarity ensues... under anyone else I'd be doubtful, but Apatow is capable of turning the bizarre and benign into brilliance. I'll be there to see if this one is as funny as I expect.

When In Rome (August 7, 2009) - If Kristen Bell were in a film about a girl that stands there watching paint dry I'd watch it. Ok, maybe that's a bit exaggerated, but you get the point. I'm a big fan of "Veronica Mars" which starred my future wife, errr future ex-wife, errr future ex-girlfriend, maybe? This sappy sweet love story starring her and Josh Duhamel(lucky bastard) is about single art curator in Rome to attend her younger sister's wedding. While there, she finds a coins from a “fountain of love,” and leaves for New York. All the while, she's pursued by a band of wacky suitors whose coins she took. Go figure... it's Kristen Bell. I'm there.

A $300,000,000 Bolt Coming Soon...

So the domestic take of "Bolt" has been a disappointing release based on going head to head with a horrible episode of Dawson's Creek that stared vampires...

But it opened up Numero Uno at the British box office on it's first week grossing an amazing £2.8m from people spared the fight with "Twilight" that was had here in America.

Elsewhere in the world the film continues to make bucks and the international take of this Disney film will be more than double the amount it made on home turf.

Looks like John Lasseter's first outing may not be a giant blockbuster, but ain't going to be a disappointment when the final numbers are tallied either...

A 200,000,000 Dog...

It's taken longer to get there and is still a disappointment more than Lasseter and the Suits at the Mouse would like to admit, but "Bolt" passed the two hundred million dollar mark yesterday(that's 200,000,000 for you UCLA graduates!).

The film has had a steady growth rate overseas and will wind up a modest hit, but a hit none the less. The little white dog is a step in the right direction for Disney animation and those that didn't go and see it in theaters will have a chance to realize they made a mistake in March. This was the beginning of Disney rebuilding its reputation and that takes time... part two will be the DVD release and the next step will be that little animated film coming out on Christmas day...

Artwork by Brooks Campbell.

Top Ten Films Domestic/International 2008.

If money talks then these films spoke volumes...

2008 U.S. Domestic Box-Office Top Ten

1. The Dark Knight - $530.9 million
2. Iron Man - $318.3 million
3. Indiana Jones and the Kingdom of the Crystal Skull - $317.0 million
4. Hancock - $227.9 million
5. WALL-E - $223.8 million
6. Kung Fu Panda - $215.4 million
7. Madagascar: Escape 2 Africa - $174.9 million
8. Twilight - $167.3 million
9. Quantum of Solace - $164.3 million
10. Dr. Seuss' Horton Hears a Who! - $154.5 million


2008 Worldwide Box-Office Top Ten

1. The Dark Knight - $996.9 million
2. Indiana Jones and the Kingdom of the Crystal Skull - $786.6 million
3. Kung Fu Panda - $631.9 million
4. Hancock - $624.4 million
5. Iron Man - $581.9 million
6. Mamma Mia! - $572.2 million
7. Quantum of Solace - $537.1 million
8. WALL-E - $507.3 million
9. Madagascar: Escape 2 Africa - $457.2 million
10. The Chronicles of Narnia: Prince Caspian - $419.6 million

Notice a little problem with that list? Only one Disney film on it... "Wall-E". And even that was from Pixar which the Mouse bought a couple years ago. This is quite a change from the last couple years where Disney had been at the top or near it...

Narnia isn't counted because it's mainly a co-production with Walden Media and they, not Disney, own the copyright. Here's to a bigger and better 2009.

Bolt's Jolt...

Apparently getting bit by a vampire isn't permanent or fatal...

The Disney animated film's box office take was up around 2 percent more this week than the opening weekend based on strong word of mouth. It came in neck and neck with "Twilight" over the three day weekend, but according to initial estimates just beat it with $26,596,000 versus $26,370,000. Twilight's box office take plunged 62 percent which means those tweens and young girls aren't enough to keep it going into the new year.

Bolt ended the weekend with just shy of $67 million dollars, reversing a disappointing opening weekend that was expected to take in between 40 and 50 million, not the 27 million it actually made. Still, this weekend shows that audiences have warmed to the film and it should continue to make a fair amount of green for the Mouse. The international market hasn't opened up for WDAS latest film and the foreign territories tends to be where studios make the majority of their coin these days.

It appears the Suits in Burbank have a lot to be thankful after this Thanksgiving weekend...

Attack Of The Tweens...

Well, it looks like High $chool Musical 3 was the big winner at the box office this weekend...

Duh.


The second sequel to the original “High School Musical pulled in $42 million over the weekend. Can anyone doubt there's going to be a part 4? The tween blockbuster also raked in over $40 million overseas, where it opened up in 22 markets with more yet to come.

That's over 80 million in three days. I guess Iger and company are all smiles right now.

Now, they look toward November and a little movie they hope does just as well, or better...

Preferably better.