RSS
Showing posts with label summer. Show all posts
Showing posts with label summer. Show all posts

ShowBuzzDaily SUMMER MOVIE DRAFT: August 25 Update

Although the race is officially over (with Team Metcalf conceding to Team Salem in the first annual ShowBuzzDaily Summer Movie Draft), here's the latest update.  Team Salem currently leads by $110 million ($1.775 billion to $1.665 billion in domestic summer gross through Thursday).  It was a close race the last several weeks, but Rise of the Planet of the Apes and The Help pushed Salem over the top in the end.  The next movie draft will be the Holiday edition, coming in October.  Click on "read more" to see the almost-final standings and chart.





 

  • Digg
  • Del.icio.us
  • StumbleUpon
  • Reddit
  • RSS

THE SKED REVIEW: BBCA's "The Hour"


THE HOUR:  Wednesday 10PM on BBCAmerica:  Potential DVR Alert

Here's what's wrong with BBCAmerica.

Don't get me wrong:  it's marvelous that BBCA exists to bring us shows like Luther, the original (and superior) Torchwood, the also original (and even more superior) Being Human, and now THE HOUR.  The problem is that a BBC "1-hour" show actually does run for almost a full hour, unlike the 40-45 minutes that US networks (other than pay-cable) call an "hour" once commercials are removed.  If, like BBCA, you're a network that airs commercials and also wants to rebroadcast these series, you have 3 choices, none of them ideal:  you can edit 10-15 minutes from each episode, put them in awkward 75-minute timeslots, or pad 90-minute slots with "extras" to fill out the surplus of time. 


BBCA's solution is an odd compromise.  The initial 2 airings of each episode (east coast and west coast on the same night) run 75 minutes and are uncut, but all repeats after that are brutally edited down to fit a 1-hour slot.  So when I tell you that The Hour is the best new show to hit the air since Game of Thrones, and that you should catch up with the first episode on Saturday and get yourself hooked before next Wednesday's chapter, all you'll be able to watch is the truncated version.  (You may want to check your cable or satellite system to see if the longer cut is available On Demand.)  This is too bad, because The Hour hardly has lulls that would lend themselves to editing.  One of the show's pleasures is its crackling pace of Abi Morgan's script (she has 2 major films upcoming, the Margaret Thatcher biography The Iron Lady with Meryl Streep, and the Michael Fassbinder/Carey Mulligan drama Shame). Still, better to live with a subpar version of the first episode than to miss The Hour entirely.

People seem determined to compare The Hour to Mad Men, but a better way of describing it is Broadcast News as a period murder mystery.  The time is the mid-1950s, and the place is the BBC itself, which is ready to launch itself out of stodgy airings of newsreel footage and start reporting the news seriously.  The vehicle for this new commitment to news is a series called "The Hour," and our protagonists square up nicely with James L. Brooks' main characters.  The Albert Brooks figure is Freddie Lyon, a brilliant, passionately committed newsman who unfortunately lacks camera-ready charisma and tact; he has an unrequited love for Bel Rowley (Romola Garai), the equally brilliant but also beautiful and politic producer of "The Hour," and the show's stand-in for Holly Hunter.  She, of course, finds herself falling for the piece's William Hurt, in this case Hector Madden (Dominic West), the endlessly charming, somewhat superficial and very married anchor ("presenter" in BBC parlance) of the new show.    Freddie and Bel have effortless best-friend banter--even when they're furious with each other, they can't bear to be apart--but Hector has star quality.

Meanwhile, there's been a mysterious murder in a London tube station, and MI:6 is all too interested in the corpse; the death has something to do with Freddie's socialite friend Ruth, who's torn apart by it even as she's announcing her engagement.  Freddie, of course, is determined to get to the bottom of the crime even if no one else cares, and much intrigue is clearly on the way.

The Hour is a thriller, a romantic comedy and a drama about politics and the news business, at a time when most TV series would be happy to succeed at any one of those.  The three leads are terrific:  Whishaw is much more grounded and likable than he's been in indie pictures like I'm Not There, Perfume and Bright Star; Garai (she was the older version of Saoirse Ronan's character in Atonement) has the air of a Hollywood screwball comedy star; and West, well, West was McNulty on The Wire, and consequently will never have to prove anything ever again.  And naturally there's an A-level British ensemble cast behind them, with people like Anton Lesser, Juliet Stevenson, Anna Chancellor and Burn Gorman (late of Torchwood) everywhere you look.  The production design is impeccable, and the first episode's direction by Coky Giedroyc is fleet and tense.

The Hour lasts five more weeks, and it's a perfect way to see out the summer TV season as we await the networks' new arrivals.  It's a burden that if you start watching now, the first hour of The Hour that you'll see will be missing some of its actual hour; after that, though, the show is well worth 75 minutes of your time.


  • Digg
  • Del.icio.us
  • StumbleUpon
  • Reddit
  • RSS

ShowBuzzDaily SUMMER MOVIE DRAFT August 11 Update

Just a quick update to say that going into the weekend Team Metcalf's lead is now down to $45 million in the first annual ShowBuzzDaily Summer Movie Draft.  Next update after the weekend numbers are in.

(A Request From Team Salem to All Readers:  Please ignore my review of 30 Minutes Or Less and go see it this weekend in hordes.  On the other hand, I said The Help is worth a ticket, and meant it.)



  • Digg
  • Del.icio.us
  • StumbleUpon
  • Reddit
  • RSS

THE BIJOU REVIEW: "30 Minutes Or Less"


30 MINUTES OR LESS - Watch It At Home:  Doesn't Deliver

The frustration of 30 MINUTES OR LESS is that of all the R-rated comedies this summer, it was the one with the most original premise and promising credentials:  direction by Ruben Fleischer, the man behind the surprisingly smart and funny hit Zombieland, and a cast headed by Jesse Eisenberg and Aziz Ansari.  In the hands of the Coen Brothers, its mix of comedy and doublecross-riddled violent action could have been genius; even with the Guy Ritchie of Lock, Stock & Two Smoking Barrels and Snatch calling the shots, it might have been slick, blackly-comic fun.  The result here, though, is half-baked.


The basic situation is based loosely on a real-life incident:  an innocent was strapped to a bomb and forced to rob a bank as proxy for the real thieves.  (Things didn't end well for the patsy.)  In 30 Minutes Or Less, the victim is Eisenberg as Nick, a pizza guy who heads out to make a routine delivery and finds himself in the hands of Dwayne (Danny McBride) and Travis (Nick Swardson).  Dwayne's demented plan is to use the $100,000 Nick will rob from the bank to hire a hit man (Michael Pena) who will kill Dwayne's stern father (Fred Ward) and enable Dwane to collect dad's lottery winnings.  Meanwhile, Nick's first instinct once he's been wired with explosives is to go to his best friend Chet (Ansari), and even though the two of them have just had a falling-out (Chet found out that Nick slept with his sister; Nick discovered that Chet broke up Nick's parents' marriage), Chet is pal enough to help him rob the bank.  To the credit of the script by Michael Dilberti (based on a story by Dilberti and Matthew Sullivan), that's actually when the movie gets more interesting, and the last section of the picture works the best, as the pieces of the storyline start to come together.  By then, though, a lot of the comedy has dissipated.
 
Zombieland also had a loose structure that accumulated suspense as it went on, but it had its horror movie structure going for it, as well as a letter-perfect cast that was all on the same wavelength.  The performers in 30 Minutes are less unified.   Eisenberg and Ansari make a terrific comic pair, with complimentary passive-agggressive styles (the fact that Eisenberg is co-starring with Woody Allen in Allen's next movie suggests one of those time travel movie bits where Character From the Future can't meet Character From the Past or the time/space continuum will explode).  Pena, too, is hilarious in a more high-energy way when he enters the story in the second half.  The main problem is McBride and Swardson who, if they're not actually incapable of entering into an ensemble (McBride showed that he can modulate his style in Up In the Air), certainly have little interest in doing so.  Instead, they repeat the same broad, imbecile schtick that they do in every single project they take on, which is starting to wear more than a little thin.   Here, it unbalances the entire movie.  (Consumer note:  attached to prints of 30 Minutes are trailers for an upcoming Swardson starring vehicle--from Adam Sandler's production company, of course--called Bucky Larson:  Born To Be A Star, which looks to be an early contender for Worst Movie of the Decade.)

The mixtures of laughter and violent thrills that Fleischer seems to favor--30 Minutes includes a nod to Die Hard--are tricky engines (even the Coens screwed up The Ladykillers), and one or two elements out of place can make the whole vehicle feel silly.  Fleischer is a whiz at pacing--30 Minutes, with credits and a post-credits coda scene, runs only 83 minutes--and amping up the narrative as the story moves forward (mention should also be made of editor Alan Baumgarten), but 30 Minutes needed to be a more complicated piece of work than Zombieland, because the bad guys are humans with motivations, ridiculous but also menacing, who require some degree of emotional believability.  While Pena handles that combination beautifully, McBride and Swardson don't provide anything beyond the most superficial gags. (Fleischer's next picture will be his first straight drama, the big-budget period thriller Gangster Squad with Sean Penn, Ryan Gosling and Emma Stone--it'll be interesting to see how he handles a completely different genre rhythm.)   

Despite its flaws, 30 Minutes Or Less is fairly watchable.  It's great fun to see Eisenberg and Ansari bounce dialogue off each other, and the last act of the story has some effective reversals.  It's the most conceptual of the season's comedies, though, and doesn't find a way to make its parts form a satisfying whole. As delivered, it doesn't earn a tip.

  • Digg
  • Del.icio.us
  • StumbleUpon
  • Reddit
  • RSS

ShowBuzzDaily SUMMER MOVIE DRAFT August 10 Update

With over $3 billion of summer box office through Wednesday, only $53 million separates Teams Metcalf and Salem.  Metcalf's slate of movies leads with $1.59 billion versus $1.54 billion for Salem's.  Only one film (30 Minutes or Less) is left to open, and Salem should enjoy a strong second weekend for Rise of the Planet of the Apes.  Conceivably the race could be tied by Sunday or sometime next week.  Stay tuned for updates as the summer -- and the first annual ShowBuzzDaily Summer Movie Draft -- draws to a close.  Click "Read more" for the complete chart.


  • Digg
  • Del.icio.us
  • StumbleUpon
  • Reddit
  • RSS

ShowBuzzDaily SUMMER MOVIE DRAFT August 8 Update

Rise of the Planet of the Apes allowed Team Salem to pick up some ground, but Team Metcalf remains $73 million ahead in the ShowBuzzDaily Summer Movie Draft, thanks to decent second and third week business for his titles.  Salem has two movies to go, although neither is expected to be much a factor in the marketplace.  An excellent hold for Apes is Salem's best bet to close the gap in this extraordinarily close race.  Click on "Read more" to see the updated chart.


  • Digg
  • Del.icio.us
  • StumbleUpon
  • Reddit
  • RSS

ShowBuzzDaily SUMMER MOVIE DRAFT August 5 Update

Through Thursday, Team Metcalf's lead in the ShowBuzzDaily Summer Movie Draft stands at almost $115 million.  This weekend Team Salem opens Rise of the Planet of the Apes, while Team Metcalf has no movies left to open.  Check back Monday for the update with the weekend's numbers, and click "Read more" to see the updated chart.


 

  • Digg
  • Del.icio.us
  • StumbleUpon
  • Reddit
  • RSS

THE BIJOU REVIEW: "Rise of the Planet of the Apes"



RISE OF THE PLANET OF THE APES - Worth A Ticket:  Simian Power

Although it's positioned as the last big adventure epic of the summer, for most of its length Rupert Wyatt's RISE OF THE PLANET OF THE APES isn't really an action movie.  Somewhat surprisingly, while it establishes an alternative mythology to explain (spoiler alert?) apes taking over the world, the script by Rick Jaffa and Amanda Silver honors the ethos of the original 1968-73 film series and concentrates on (simian) character and story.  Despite some flaws that ultimately catch up with it, the result is one of the more satisfying pictures of the season.


In the new timeline of Rise, it isn't the aftermath of nuclear war that causes the mutation leading to intelligent apes and the downfall of humanity.  Rather, the culprit is that ever-popular bugaboo, genetic tinkering.  Will Rodman (James Franco) works at the multinational pharmaceutical company Gen-Sys, where like many a movie scientist who shouldn't have tampered with nature, he only wants to do good.  Specifically, he's trying to find a cure for Alzheimer's, a malady that hits close to home because it afflicts his music teacher dad (John Lithgow).  Will has come up with a drug that builds healthy cells in the brain, counteracting the effects of the disease, and he's ready to start testing it on chimps (the name of the first test subject is the first of several nods to the original Apes).  Disaster ensues, and the tests are abandoned, but not before Will manages to rescue a chimp baby from the lab and bring it home with him.  That baby, ominously for those who remember Roddy McDowell's second incarnation in the Apes series, is named Caesar, and he's been exposed to the miracle drug.

Since Caesar's brain cells were healthy to begin with, the drug creates even more brain power for the chimp, giving him super-intelligence.  In sequences that won't be the last to echo the recent documentary Project Nim, we follow Caesar over a period of years with Will and his father, living somewhere between a pet and a younger brother.  (Along the way, Will acquires a vet girlfriend, played by Frieda Pinto.)  But of course, Caesar is still an ape, and when Will's father is attacked, and Caesar tries to rescue him, he does so in a way more fit for the jungle than the suburbs.

This leads to the most interesting section of the movie, which is essentially a jailbreak caper:  Caesar is imprisoned in a "shelter" where owner Brian Cox (who starred in Wyatt's indie The Escapist, another prison break picture) and his reliably evil son Tom Felton mistreat the captives, and where Caesar plots his escape.   Caesar, for the first time in his life, is among other apes, and there's very little dialogue; the almost purely visual sequences of Caesar figuring out how to form alliances and strategize the simian power structure are beautifully done.

Here's the place to note that, thanks to the new wonders of CG and performance-capture technology, "Caesar" isn't a guy in an ape suit, as in the original Apes films (and in Tim Burton's misbegotten 2001 remake), but a wholly computer-generated creature who interacts with complete believability alongside the human actors.  His performance is created by Andy Serkis, who's previously done this with Gollum in the Lord of the Rings pictures and as Peter Jackson's King Kong.  As in Avatar, the line between "special effect" and "acting" are all but erased here; the eyes and expressions of Caesar look utterly real.

The special effects are a little less effective in the last section of the movie, where crowds of apes are required, and where the conventions of big-budget Hollywood action lead to the apes performing super-simian stunts that look as fake as when CG'd humans perform them in other movies.  This is also where Wyatt's inexperience with big action sequences shows, and where the script starts to falter by becoming more generic popcorn entertainment.  (It doesn't help that there are suddenly advances in Caesar's abilities that seem too abrupt, or that this section is kicked off by one too many salutes to the original Apes, a blunt gag that comes at what should be a critically important point in the story.)

The bigger underlying problem with Apes is that the humans are never remotely as interesting as the simians.  While Caesar is a fully-fledged, complex character, and even the supporting apes have their moments of characterization, Will is completely bland, and Franco does nothing to make him more engaging (I'm not sure Franco is ever going to be a movie star, if that's even what he wants to be); Pinto, Cox, Lithgow, Felton and David Oyelowo as Will's boss have even less to do.  People were never at the center of the Apes series (Charlton Heston aside), but this story is set in the contemporary human world, so it's a more serious shortcoming here.

Glitches aside, Rise is mostly a smart and even soulful entertainment that retains the spirit of its 1960s-70s roots.  It's the rare tentpole movie that makes the idea of sequels seem like a prospect, rather than a chore.  (Thinking of which, don't jump from your seat as soon as the end credits start.)  Franchise of the Planet of the Apes, anyone?

  • Digg
  • Del.icio.us
  • StumbleUpon
  • Reddit
  • RSS

THE BIJOU REVIEW: "The Change-Up"


THE CHANGE UP - Watch It At Home:  Cliches with Dirty Words Are Still Cliches


There have been plenty of R-rated comedies this summer--a bumper crop, really--but none more fully committed to raunch than THE CHANGE-UP.  The script by Jon Lucas and Scott Moore (they wrote The Hangover, but also Ghosts of Girlfriends Past) doesn't use one piece of profanity where 3 would do; there's enough off-color material to make it "on."

And as the saying goes:  not that there's anything wrong with that.  Mel Brooks made Blazing Saddles in 1974 and proved that flat-out grossness could be hysterically funny; David Mamet, among others, can make scabrous dialogue sound like music.  The Change-Up, however--not quite in their league.



The Change-Up's plot wins no points for originality.   Dave (Jason Bateman) is a respectable attorney gunning for partner, with a lovely wife (Leslie Mann) and kids; his best friend Mitch (Ryan Reynolds) is a swinging bachelor whose aimless life (he's currently trying to be an actor) mostly rotates around getting laid.  Mitch kinda envies Dave's stability; Dave sorta longs for Mitch's freedom; one late, drunken night they cross streams while urinating in a fountain, and voila!  Body switch!  Now Dave must endure Mitch's demeaning jobs and discover how kinky his best friend's sex life really is, and Mitch has to pick the kids up from ballet class (and change diapers!  Ha!) and find out what married life is really like.

This stuff is Comedy 101, and the only idea Lucas and Moore have for spicing it up is making it hugely broad.  Some of this, as directed by David Dobkin (of Wedding Crashers) rises to a level of cartoonishness that can be quite funny:  there's a sequence where Mitch narrowly manages not to kill Dave's baby in the kitchen that's like a live-action Looney Tunes bit, and Leslie Mann is uttery fearless in her willingness to show the good and the bad of longtime mariage.  At other times, though, the jokes are almost desperate in their attempt to be edgy:  I won't spoil the secret of Mitch's hot Russian girlfriend, or the details of his acting gig, but the gags makes no sense, given what we know about Mitch, other than as gags.

The Change-Up is most tiresome in its second half, when it gets down to the grinding, predictable work of having the body switch turn Mitch and Dave into Better Human Beings.  From the time we see how busy Dave is and how little attention he pays to his wife, and Mitch's irresponsibility (he's not nice to his dad, played by Alan Arkin), we know what lessons they're going to learn, and pretty much how it's going to happen.  There's nothing remotely subversive about The Change-Up's message:  for all its "edgy" humor, the picture is finally as conservative as a Doris Day movie.

That's not to say the movie doesn't have its charm or some laughs.  The two stars are as personable as anyone could wish, and they each do a great job at conveying the other's personality after the body switch.  Reynolds rebounds from his Green Lantern debacle to demonstrate again what an expert light comic he is, and it's a pleasure to see Bateman, once he's "Mitch," cut loose against the suburban lifestyle.  Mann doesn't just get her laughs--she has the bulk of the more dramatic moments, and pulls them off too.  Olivia Wilde, as Dave's junior lawyer, who has to deal with a mess of permitted and forbidden romantic interests (guess where that plotline ends up), is able to be far more likable here than Cowboys and Aliens permitted.

The Change-Up, powered by its cast, is fitfully entertaining, but it'll fare better on the small screen.  Besides its sitcom look and feel, there'll be the priceless ability to fast-forward through the dull Life Lessons sections and watch the bits that work.  Meanwhile, the Summer of Raunch continues:  we're just a week away from 30 Minutes or Less.  

  • Digg
  • Del.icio.us
  • StumbleUpon
  • Reddit
  • RSS

ShowBuzzDaily SUMMER MOVIE DRAFT August 1 Update

Through Sunday, Team Metcalf's lead in the ShowBuzzDaily Summer Movie Draft is now $101 million.  That lead will expand somewhat over the weekday period because of the number of Metcalf's films in more recent release, but Team Salem has the final advantage of having three more movies to open, most notably Rise of the Planet of the Apes. 

Coming in the late Fall, we plan to follow this game up with the Holiday Movie Draft, with the full intention of involving ShowBuzz readers in the contest.  Details to come later.

Click "read more" to see the updated Draft chart.


  • Digg
  • Del.icio.us
  • StumbleUpon
  • Reddit
  • RSS

ShowBuzzDaily SUMMER MOVIE DRAFT July 29 Update

Through Thursday, Team Metcalf's lead in the ShowBuzzDaily Summer Movie Draft is now almost $67 million.  This weekend Metcalf's final two films open (Cowboys & Aliens and Crazy, Stupid, Love), while Salem opens The Smurfs.  Metcalf's lead will expand somewhat this weekend, and the race will be decided by Rise of the Planet of the Apes and how it delivers for Salem.  Next update coming Monday.

  • Digg
  • Del.icio.us
  • StumbleUpon
  • Reddit
  • RSS

THE BIJOU REVIEW: "Cowboys & Aliens" - Circle the Spaceships!


COWBOYS & ALIENS - Watch It At Home:  Genre Mash-Up Zaps Itself In the Foot

It's admirable, in a way, that for much of its length, COWBOYS AND ALIENS is willing to be more of a western than a scifi extravaganza, even though scifi is a safer commercial bet.  The problem is that as westerns go, it's not all that impressive--and that goes for its otherworldly dimensions too.

The extended development process for Cowboys and Aliens has been much reported.  It was first acquired for the screen 14 years ago, based on a title and pitch for a graphic novel that hadn't even been written yet.  Through the years, the project went through prospective studios, directors, stars and many, many writers.  The final film credits include half a dozen of the latter (Damon Lindelof, Roberto Orci, Alex Kurtzman, Mark Fergus and Hawk Ostley for the script, and the last 2 of those plus original scribe Steve Oederkerk for the story), which in Hollywood means at least twice that many had their hands in it.  Over the years its tone no doubt changed many times, as did the balance between its twin genres.  The ultimate choice for director was Jon Favreau, and the film has a cast of producers to give any studio accountant pause:  Steven Spielberg, Brian Grazer, Ron Howard, Favreau and several of the writers are among those with fingers in the profit pie.  


Despite all those cooks in the kitchen, the film manages to feel all of a piece, but it's a curious piece.  The main creative decision seems to have been to play against the jokey title that was the reason the project was bought in the first place--the movie has precious little humor, and never plays western conventions against the aliens-from-outer-space genre in any kind of entertaining, let alone provocative or ingenious, way.  Instead, it trots out as many western cliches as a TCM theme night:  we have a Man With No Name (Daniel Craig, eventually revealed to be Jake Lonergan) who rides into a town dominated by all-powerful cattle baron Dolarhyde (Harrison Ford) and his sadistic drunken son Percy (Paul Dano).  Dolarhyde's chief aide is a Native American (Adam Beach) who's a much better man than Percy, but Dolarhyde won't recognize that.  In town, Percy makes trouble for the sheriff (Keith Carradine) and the tenderfoot saloon owner called Doc because he wears glasses (Sam Rockwell); Doc also has a Latina wife (Ana de la Reguera).  There's also a tough but kind preacher (Clancy Brown) and a boy determined to fight with the men (Noah Ringer)Finally, the town has a gorgeous woman of mystery named Ella (Olivia Wilde).  

The story doesn't do anything with those cliches other than plopping spaceships down beside them.  It begins when Jake finds himself jerked awake in an empty expanse of wilderness; he has almost complete amnesia, and a curious metal bracelet around one arm.  As soon as he reaches town, of course, he antagonizes Percy, which brings Dolarhyde into his life--which is when the alien spaceships attack, taking much of the cast captive for nefarious purposes, and Jake discovers that the bracelet is actually a weapon that can shoot down the ships.  He, Dolarhyde, and most of the surviving town (and eventually some Apaches and outlaws) have to join forces to track down the prisoners and stop the aliens.

This form of Cowboys and Aliens must have satisfied the battalions of studio executives and producers who had to sign off on it, and why not--it's entirely predictable, made up of pieces of better movies.  Memorable westerns, though, stay in our minds not so much because of their shootouts as the characters and tone, and that's the case whether the films are John Ford classics, dark, latter-day Clint Eastwood dramas or last year's Coen Brothers' snappy remake of True Grit.  Even a Sergio Leone epic like The Good, the Bad and the Ugly, with all its striking imagery, is built in great part around the iconic performances of Eastwood, Eli Wallach and Lee Van Cleef.

There's nothing comparable in Cowboys and Aliens.  Craig is a perfectly functional hero, but the fact that he's amnesic forces him to be fairly blank for most of the story.  Ford, of course, has an iconic screen presence of his own, and he manages a few pungent scenes, but there's little to his character, in large part because Favreau and the writers don't have the nerve to keep Dolarhyde a bad guy for very long.  Olivia Wilde's performance makes sense once her Ella is fully explained, but that doesn't make the character more satisfying.  The rest of the strong supporting cast mostly fades into the background--even Sam Rockwell, for whom the word "irrepressible" is usually apt.  

This was a film that badly needed a visual stylist as director, and although Favreau has genuine strengths as a filmmaker, that's not one of them.  The Iron Man movies have splashy special effects, but they work because of the sharp, witty dialogue and the comic license Favreau gives Robert Downey Jr and the rest of the cast.  None of that comes into play here, and Favreau's western landscapes and alien action sequences all look pretty dull, even with the great Matthew Libatique (Black Swan and Inside Man, among others) behind the camera.  Harry Gregson-Williams' score is routine, and the CG aliens and spaceships break no new ground.

Cowboys and Aliens earns some goodwill, because it does mark a change from the superheroes and genetically gifted teens who inhabit our fantasy films these days.  Unfortunately, while it puts on a moderately entertaining show, its only clear accomplishment is wasting a very cool title.

  • Digg
  • Del.icio.us
  • StumbleUpon
  • Reddit
  • RSS

THE SKED: Summer Broadcast Ratings Update

The broadcast week just concluded (July 18-24) had virtual parity between the four major broadcast network.  A mere two-tenths of a rating point separated first from fourth place, continuing a trend we have seen all summer as high-rated sports programming and NBC's The Voice left the air. 


Weekly Network Averages -- Adults 18-49 rating


Week of     ABC   CBS   NBC   FOX   CW
June 13     1.2   1.1   2.0   1.6   0.3
June 20     1.3   1.1   1.8   1.4   0.3
June 27     1.3   1.0   1.6   1.2   0.3
July 4      1.4   1.2   1.6   1.3   0.3
July 11     1.3   1.3   1.4   1.7   0.3
July 18     1.3   1.4   1.3   1.5   0.3


The chart below lists the hit network shows by night (those programs at a 2.0 Adult 18-49 rating or higher).  ABC's Extreme Makeover: Weight Loss has joined the list.  Just missing the list are It's Worth What (1.8 rating on NBC Tuesday),  Wipeout (1.9 rating on ABC Thursday), and The Simpsons & Family Guy (1.8 rating each on FOX Sunday).   A new show joined the CBS schedule Sunday night, Same Name, and it disappointed with a 1.5 rating (dropping 38% from its Big Brother lead-in).  Same Name was extremely heavily promoted the last several night, squeezing out promotion for new fall series -- a bet that did not pay off. 

Top Network Shows (Adult 18-49 rating 2.0+)
Week of July 18-24

Mon: FOX Hell's Kitchen 2.5, MasterChef 2.4
     ABC Bachelorette 2.25, Extreme Makeover Weight Loss 2.0
Tue: NBC America's Got Talent 3.2
     FOX Hell's Kitchen 2.5, MasterChef 2.2
Wed: NBC America's Got Talent 2.7
     CBS Big Brother 2.6
     FOX So You Think You Can Dance 2.0
Thu: CBS Big Brother 2.6
Sun: CBS Big Brother 2.4

 

  • Digg
  • Del.icio.us
  • StumbleUpon
  • Reddit
  • RSS

THE BIJOU: Captain America: The First Boxoffice

The Hollywood Reporter has some rough early numbers for Friday's boxoffice, and the news looks good for CAPTAIN AMERICA:  THE FIRST AVENGER.  Including Thursday midnight grosses of $4M, it seems to be around $25M for the day.  This would be right in the neighborhood of its Marvel-mate Thor, which had a $25.5M opening day and a $65.8M weekend, and ahead of X Men:  First Class and Green Lantern, which both opened with $21.4M.  

Second place belongs to HARRY POTTER AND THE DEATHLY HALLOWS (PART 2), headed for around $16M on Friday.  This would be well below the $20.8M of Deathly Hallows (Part 1)'s second Friday, and further demonstrates how frontloaded Hallows 2 is:  despite an insane 80% or more drop from its record-breaking opening day, it would nevertheless be $50M higher in total than Hallows 1 at this point in its run.  Hallows 2 should still easily be the highest grossing Harry Potter domestically, but a $400M total is starting to look like a stretch. 

FRIENDS WITH BENEFITS is in third place with around $7M on opening day.  This would put it almost even with January's No Strings Attached and its $7.3M Friday (and $19,7M weekend), and below Bridesmaids ($7.8M/26.2M), Bad Teacher ($12.2M/31.6M) and Horrible Bosses ($9.9M/28.3M).  Friends also has instant competition coming with next weekend's Crazy Stupid Love.  

Read Mitch Metcalf's weekend predictions here, and watch for his detailed analysis of Friday's full numbers and the weekend grosses later this morning.

  • Digg
  • Del.icio.us
  • StumbleUpon
  • Reddit
  • RSS

ShowBuzzDaily SUMMER MOVIE DRAFT July 22 Update

Through Thursday, the ShowBuzzDaily Summer Movie Draft remains extremely close.  Team Metcalf is holding on to a $16 million lead (with over $1.2 billion in box office to $1.19 billion for Team Salem's slate of films).  This weekend the second weekend of Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows Part 2 (belonging to the Salem Studio) should edge Captain America: The First Avenger (Metcalf's) opening weekend, but it could be close.  Check back Monday to see the next update of this race.  Click "read more" to see the updated chart.



  • Digg
  • Del.icio.us
  • StumbleUpon
  • Reddit
  • RSS

THE BIJOU REVIEW: "Friends With Benefits" - Strings Attached



FRIENDS WITH BENEFITS - Worth A Ticket:  Almost Great

For about an hour, as you watch his new FRIENDS WITH BENEFITS, you could be forgiven for thinking that writer-director Will Gluck is the future of Hollywood romantic comedy.  Gluck came out of TV with the very underrated Fired Up, about a pair of college guys who dress up as female cheerleaders to get girls (I'm serious--watch it on video), and then he had his break-out with last year's terrific Easy AFriends With Benefits seems to be well on its way to building on this with an unusually smart, funny romance--until it isn't.


As everyone knows by now, Friends shares its premise with No Strings Attached, the very lame comedy that rode Natalie Portman's concurrent Black Swan stardom to a $71M gross ($148M worldwide) earlier this year.  In both, a couple that isn't romantically involved decides for the sake of convenience to get together for sex, with the idea that they'll be able to keep it separate from any emotional entanglement.  Of course, in both cases that's not the way it plays out.

The dreary thing--OK, one of the dreary things--about Strings was that it never really honored its own premise:  from the start, it was clear that Ashton Kutcher's character had a puppydog crush on Portman's, so the story became a matter of waiting for Portman to be willing to accept emotional commitment and open herself to Kutcher's love.  The script had to come up with psychological issues for Portman to triumph over, and there was hardly any fun to be had in the movie at all.  (Not to mention that it was almost stubbornly devoid of laughs.)

Friends With Benefits, in contrast, delivers on its initial idea.  Dylan (Justin Timberlake) is a magazine designer from LA headhunted for a NY job by Jamie (Mila Kunis).  He's new in town, they're both busy people who've recently been dumped, and they strike up a friendship--then decide that the sensible thing to do is add purely physical sex to the equation, since neither wants to be in a real relationship.  Of course, even while they're denouncing the cliches of romantic comedy (Kunis has a great bit attacking Katherine Heigl movies, and there's even a film-within-the-film that features Jason Segal and Rashida Jones), the two of them are falling for each other, and it doesn't take a prophet to figure out where it's going to end up.  What makes Friends work for quite a while is the very quirky, genial, appealing script by Gluck, Keith Merryman and David A. Newman, which has the kind of old-fashioned snappy banter that nowadays is rare outside of an Aaron Sorkin project. 

It also helps that Timberlake and Kunis actually seem to like each other, and they have real screen chemistry together; it's a relief to watch a big-screen romance where neither of the characters is an idiot, a doofus or a selfish creep with a heart of gold.  Timberlake's been kicking around with his film career for several years now, and he was excellent in The Social Network, but Friends is his first genuine leading man role, and he handles it like a veteran, smoothly hitting all the laughs and carrying off the more dramatic moments.  Kunis, too, has been on the brink of breaking out since she moved over from TV, and she makes a hugely appealing, sexy and often hilarious lead.  Gluck is a casting whiz, and like Easy A, Friends is also loaded with fabulous supporting actors:  Woody Harrelson, Andy Samberg, Richard Jenkins, Jenna Elfman, and Easy A's own Emma Stone and Patricia Clarkson all make appearances.  

So how does it all go wrong?  Gluck and his co-writers can't manage to stick the landing.  After being intelligent and witty and charming for more than an hour, easily convincing us that these two smart people would ultimately figure out that they're made for each other and fall into each other's arms, the script invents melodramatic and unnecessary plot turns to push them together, then break them up, and of course reunite them.  The last reel is cluttered with "call-backs" that repeat scenes and motifs from earlier in the movie in a grindingly obvious way.  Jenkins is forced to more or less replay his role from Dear John, as the movie recycles one of the lousiest recent movie cliches:  the Alzheimer's patient who manages to reach lucidity just long enough to impart some parental wisdom.  Timberlake and Kunis suddenly act in ways inconsistent with their behavior earlier in the movie, just to keep the plot's wheels turning.  By pandering to exactly the same rom-com conventions they ridiculed earlier, Gluck and his team drive their project straight into a wall.

It's sad to watch, because once you're on a movie's side, the last thing you want is to have the filmmakers wrench it away.  And even with its missteps, Friends With Benefits is still worth seeing, the first two-thirds are the most likable comedy of the summer.  It's jsut that when things get bogged down, you might want to consider checking out the next auditorium at the multiplex and watching the giant robots destroy Chicago; it's less painful than watching Friends With Benefits destroy itself.

  • Digg
  • Del.icio.us
  • StumbleUpon
  • Reddit
  • RSS

ShowBuzzDaily SUMMER MOVIE DRAFT July 18 Update

Through Sunday, Team Metcalf is holding on to a $39 million lead over Team Salem in the ShowBuzzDaily Summer Movie Draft.  The terrific opening of Harry Potter was balanced somewhat by decent holds for Transformers 3, Horrible Bosses and to some extent Zookeeper.  We expected Salem to pull ahead by Sunday, but that should happen sometime early this week.

  • Digg
  • Del.icio.us
  • StumbleUpon
  • Reddit
  • RSS

ShowBuzzDaily SUMMER MOVIE DRAFT July 15 Update

Through Thursday (and including the midnight showings of Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows Part 2), Team Metcalf is clinging to a $109 million lead over Team Salem.  Of course, that lead will turn into a tie sometime Saturday night, and Salem will regain the lead Sunday.  Go Captain America and Cowboys and Aliens in the next few weeks!

Click below for the updated chart.


  • Digg
  • Del.icio.us
  • StumbleUpon
  • Reddit
  • RSS

THE BIJOU REVIEW: "Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows (Part 2)"



HARRY POTTER AND THE DEATHLY HALLOWS (PART 2) - Worth A Ticket - The Event of the Summer

The boxoffice totals for tonight's midnight screenings of HARRY POTTER AND THE DEATHLY HALLOWS PART 2 aren't available quite yet, but it was a remarkable experience to go to a shopping center multiplex and find its 6-story garage filled up to the roof even though every store and restaurant in the place was long closed.  (And then, leaving after 2AM, to walk through the throngs just arriving for 3AM overflow shows.)  J.K. Rowling's 7 novels, and the 8 films based on them, are arguably the most powerful narrative engines of their generation, a combination of plotting, character and a completely imagined, inhabited magical world that's left its contemporaries in the dust. 


If Deathly Hallows Part 1 was the healthy meal audiences needed to consume in order to gather their energy and maintain good health for the struggles ahead, Part 2 is practically all dessert. Where the earlier Potter movies were set over the course of an entire school year, the bulk of Deathly Hallows Part 2 takes place within a single 24-hour period, and it's a collection of mammoth action sequences that keep following one after another.  Unlike, say, some Michael Bay movies one could name, these sequences aren't spectacle simply for the sake of showing off the filmmakers' technical prowess, but carefully crafted steps that proceed toward the confrontation that's been a decade in the making (more than that if you start with the first book's publication):  Harry vs. Voldemort.  

Despite all the budget in the world and a combined 4 1/2 hours of screen time to play with, Deathly Hallows wasn't an easy work for screenwriter Steve Kloves (veteran of all the films except Order of the Phoenix) to adapt.  Rowling's plotting is so dense that thick slices of the novel's pie (Dumbledore's history is mostly gone) still had to be omitted, and short shrift is given to others.  Even the deaths of well-loved characters are sometimes observed only in a couple of shots, and while some iconic characters (Maggie Smith, front and center as Professor McGonagall) are showcased, others (Hagrid) are reduced to a few on-screen moments; when one budding romance is revealed, the characters haven't even shared a scene together in this movie.  

Compared to a typical Hollywood action epic, some of the narrative choices can seem eccentric.  Twice the action is interrupted for long stretches, first (vague Spoiler Alert)  for what is essentially The Severus Snape Story, and then for what readers will recognize as The Dumbledore Railway Scene.  Enormously important twists in the action are determined by obscure rules of wand ownership, which have to be expositioned after the fact.  The latter part of the story becomes somewhat spiritual, in the fairly familiar quasi-religious form that was always latent in a saga that calls its protagonist "The Chosen One," but which the previous stories avoided.  

With all these quirks, the film is a mostly triumphant entertainment.   David Yates, finishing out the series with his fourth consecutive film, moves smoothly from beautifully observed character moments to epic scale, from humorous action sequences that evoke the earliest films in the series (the Gringotts heist) to heartrending revelations about characters we thought we knew.  He's working here with the same technical group as in Deathly Hallows Part 1, including cinematographer Eduardo Serra, editor Mark Day and composer Alexandre Desplat, all of whom do beautiful work; special note should be taken in this installment of Stuart Craig's massive production design (no doubt aided seamlessly by CG) for the war-torn Hogwarts, and the combination of make-up technicians and CG wizards who pulled off the how-are-they-gonna-do-this? epilogue.  (The 3D is a conversion, and while it's not necessary by any means, it's quite good as conversions go.)

The Potter series, though, has most distinguished itself from all other franchises by the phenomenal skill of its cast.  Even the Lord of the Rings series didn't have the depth of characterization and quality of performance that these films have drawn; for this final installment, Ciaran Hinds and Kelly McDonald join the astonishing ensemble.  With all the plotting and action, and the return of many old characters (dead and alive), inevitably while Rupert Grint and Emma Watson are impeccable, they have less to do here than they did in Deathly Hallows Part 1, where they were responsible for carrying whole chunks of the story.  Part 2, though, is very much Daniel Radcliffe's movie, as Harry pieces together the story of his own life, learning truths about himself that Rowling had been nursing through 6 previous books; his stunned disillusion and then his resolute decisions to go on anyway are as inspiring as those of any screen hero one can name.  There's nothing glib about the character or the performance; Harry's ultimate heroism is his insistence on being ordinary.

It's unlikely that we'll see the like of the Potter series again, at least for quite a while, although we'll certainly get  many attempts to duplicate its appeal.  (Coming next year:  The Hunger Games, to name just one.)  Its original author, the filmmakers, cast and crews have done an exemplary job in a genre that's often a cynical display of trailer moments with no particular interest in context.  And credit is due, too, to Warner Bros:  it can't be a coincidence that two of the three best franchises of the past decade, Potter and Christopher Nolan's Batman films, come from the same studio (and the third, Lord of the Rings, was from New Line, a Warners division).  One can't begrudge them any of their billions.

There are people already begging J.K. Rowling to come back to Hogwarts and keep the stories going (and no doubt Warners would be happiest of all if she did).  But think about the last Indiana Jones movie, the last Godfather, Wall Street 2.  Rowling and the thousands responsible for making the films have managed to bring an epic tale to a satisfying conclusion.  Harry Potter deserves to enjoy his life.

HARRY POTTER RETROSPECTIVE REVIEWS
Harry Potter and the Sorcerer's Stone
Harry Potter and the Chamber of Secrets
Harry Potter and the Prisoner of Azkaban
Harry Potter and the Goblet of Fire
Harry Potter and the Order of the Phoenix
Harry Potter and the Half-Blood Prince
Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows (Part 1)
 

  • Digg
  • Del.icio.us
  • StumbleUpon
  • Reddit
  • RSS

THE BIJOU RETROSPECTIVE: "Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows (Part 1)"




When the announcement was made that Warner Bros would split HARRY POTTER AND THE DEATHLY HALLOWS into 2 full-length movies, there was a certain amount of cynicism about studio greed--and, indeed, why not pick up an extra billion or so if the opportunity arises?  But really, J.K. Rowling's novels have all been stuffed so full of plot that any of the adaptations could have been 2 movies long--as it is, readers had been complaining all along about the scenes and storylines that had to be cut for time.  (For that matter, this season HBO spent 10 hours on a single volume of Game of Thrones--just nominated for a slew of Emmys--and nobody seemed to have a problem with that.)  


Dividing Deathly Hallows in particular, though, guaranteed that the first film would be what is almost certainly the bleakest, most unsettling movie in the history of giant Hollywood franchises--a picture so awash in futility and death that if it were a standalone project, it probably couldn't get financed, much less muster a deluxe $150M+ budget.  The first half of the Deathly Hallows novel and film presents the Harry Potter saga at low ebb, with its central characters spending much of its length wandering through an unforgiving countryside at a complete loss, falling apart emotionally and failing at all of their goals; they're like Beckett protagonists with wands. 

All of which makes Deathly Hallows (Part 1) perhaps the trickiest production of the whole series, and despite its inherent difficulties, in some ways a special triumph for the filmmakers and stars.  David Yates, directing his third consecutive chapter, has to craft the film out of the bare essentials of the saga; most of the huge supporting cast is reduced to brief appearances, there's no Hogwarts at all, and only a few action sequences.  (Although this film isn't about its guest stars, added to the cast this time--in case the series didn't already have enough great British actors--are Bill Nighy, Rhys Ifans and Peter Mullen.)

Behind the camera this time is Eduardo Serra, the French cinematographer whose works include Girl With a Pearl Earring and many of the later films of Claude Chabrol; once the film has left the city and its black-walled Ministry of Magic, Serra's images becomes warmer than those in Order of the Phoenix and Half-Blood Prince, with gorgeous landscapes that emphasize the smallness of these teenagers as they try to defeat a mad and murderous army.  The composer is Alexandre Desplat, whose superb recent scores include The King's Speech and The Tree of Life; his music here is more delicate than any other Potter score (John Williams' original theme is barely to be heard).  Mark Day again serves as Yates' editor, keeping the pace moving forward even as the characters are in stasis.  Stuart Craig is the production designer, as he's been all along; note the subtle way the sequences in the Muggle world, although set in ordinary places like cafes and public restrooms, are slightly off-kilter, odd in a way that suggests a world alien to witches and wizards.  The special effects, often cartoonish and obvious in 2001 (although state-of-the-art at the time), have become so realistic that they seem as real as the sets, and special note should be made of a lovely, distinctive animated sequence that explains the story of the Deathly Hallows themselves.

Ultimately, though, while Deathly Hallows is part of an epic adventure, it's a very intimate story, and the fact that the film is so compelling has to be credited to screenwriter Steve Kloves and the stars Daniel Radcliffe, Rupert Grint and Emma Watson.  Those three (and for a chunk of the time, just Radcliffe and Watson)  carry almost an hour of screen time virtually alone, an accomplishment they seem to bring off with ease.  (Kloves, Radcliffe and Watson have justly been praised for adding the brief, exhausted dance between Harry and Hermione that isn't in the book.)  Although there were some complaints about the story's relentlessly grim focus on Harry, Ron and Hermione, it was yet another very smart decision by Rowling and then Yates and Kloves:  staying closer to those three, without the distraction of huge sets and starry supporting characters, and watching them suffer and struggle, only brings the audience more into their story, heightening the emotions for the grand finale.

And so:  the cliff is hanging, the advance ticket sales are record-breaking, the clocks are ticking to 12:01AM.  All that remains is for film projectors around the world to be switched to "On."  

  • Digg
  • Del.icio.us
  • StumbleUpon
  • Reddit
  • RSS