Back Into The Pool...

What a terrible year for film. If that sentiment sounds familiar, it should, it’s the exact same thing I said at the start of my Oscar post last year. 2008 was a down year overall but still had some major bright spots (Dark Knight, Wall-E, Milk, Rachel Getting Married) and a few noteworthy if not ultimately memorable movies (Gran Torino, The Wrestler, Vicky Christina). What does 2009 have? Avatar has had carnal relations with the box office, but are we going to be talking about it in 5 years? The Hurt Locker was the exception to the “Hollywood simply can’t make a good movie about Iraq” rule, had some incredible moments, but the parts were much better than the whole. District 9 was completely original, the most creative movie of the year, but it really fits the definition of “it’s a thrill just to be nominated.” Inglorious Basterds was brilliant, daring, exciting, everything you want from a suspense movie, it’s the best movie of the year, but is it a best picture?

Well, fuck it. Just because the films were underwhelming doesn’t mean we can’t still fleece our friends for cash at the Oscar party (yes, that's a double negative, but so was 2009). Good luck, hopefully we’ll have a lot more to talk about this time next year.


Best Picture
Will Win: The Hurt Locker
Should Win: Inglorious Basterds


Best Director
Will Win: James Cameron
Should Win: Quentin Tarantino

I can easily see this flipping by the way, with Avatar winning best pic and Kathryn Bigelow taking director. Regardless of how it ends up, I definitely think that the two movies will spilt these; one film won’t win both. The big question: does the Academy want Avatar to win best picture? This isn’t Titanic mind you, which was a very Oscar-friendly theme, this is a movie about nine-feet tall reptilian Smurfs with a language that sounds like Ewoks fucking. It’s Iraq v. Pandora, and I think Iraq wins. Cameron will take director as his consolation prize.


Best Actor
Will Win: Bridges
Should Win: Bridges


Best Actress
Will Win: Streep
Should Win: Streep

Sandra Bullock has been gaining some momentum lately, but I still think Streep takes this home.


Best Supporting Actor
Will Win: Waltz
Should Win: Waltz

Waltz winning this category is a lock. Also a lock: the longest, strangest acceptance speech in Oscar history (which is saying something). During his speech at the Globes, he referred to himself as a planet and Tarantino as the golden sun, and talked about how he’d been orbiting that sun for his whole life but hadn’t dared get close enough until now. What’s possible at the Oscars? I’m thinking something like this:

“52 years ago I was in my mother’s womb. Growing. Bursting with life. Taking nutrients from her fluids. But then a man appeared, a man who had the wisdom of many centuries. He mounted my mother and made love to her. Generous love. Impactful love. He entered her, navigated beyond her many tubes and channels and found me, young, vulnerable, wanting to learn but not yet knowing how. He imparted his knowledge, his passion directly into my placenta. It was this transfer, this sharing of love and creativity that brought me here. Thank you to the Academy. And to Quentin, thanks for traveling back in time and fucking my baby face.”


Best Supporting Actress
Will Win: Mo'Nique
Should Win: Who'Cares?


Best Original Screenplay
Will Win: The Hurt Locker
Should Win: Inglorious Basterds


Best Adapted Screenplay
Will Win: Up In The Air
Should Win: Up In The Air

My heart pulls for District 9 here, but Up In The Air is really an enormous achievement from a writing perspective. Three completely identifiable, three-dimensional characters, don’t underestimate how difficult that is. District 9 is the most creative, but from a pure skill standpoint Up In The Air deserves this trophy.

Good luck in your pools.



JR

And Then There Were Ten...

As I’m sure you can tell by now, Magglio and I have a much different approach to this blog. I like to research a topic, think about it all from all angles, write slowly and edit carefully. Magglio likes to just post, post, post, keep our traffic numbers up and get more and more people reading the blog so everyone will rub his ass and tell him it’s special. What does this have to do with anything? Actually nothing, but he can be a little bitch, huh?

Anyway, one of the predominant questions I’ve been getting over email and in the comments is: “hey, Jericho, why haven’t you reacted to the Oscar nominations yet?” So I’m going to do that today. Why? So you’ll rub my ass and tell me it’s special. I mean, come on, I’m obviously a bitch too, but not like Magglio, that guy’s a fucking bitch. He’s like the Brad Pitt of bitches and I’m more like Channing Tatum. I digress.

One of the craziest things about having a blog is that sometimes I can’t remember if I posted about a certain topic or just ranted about it in private to friends. For example, I fucking hate that the Oscars expanded to 10 best picture nominees (reasons why to come in a second) and have been vehemently protesting against the move since it was announced. When I got the idea for this post, I went to A&M and searched around for the entry where I railed against the new format. To my surprise, it didn’t exist. So maybe this is the first time I’m putting these thoughts to paper, but trust me when I say that nothing is new here, the Academy shit the bed and I've been angrily sleeping in it for months.

Before we get into this, a quick preface: I realize how ridiculous this looks on paper, after all is said and done the Oscars is just a fucking TV show, but it aspires and portends to be so much more and saps like me buy in. If anything, the Oscars succeed because it manages to transcend the “it’s just an award show” mentality, we care about them; we regard Oscar winners with a sense of nobility and accomplishment; in short: the Oscars matter. When they diverge from that course and do something so obviously whore-ish, it affects the validity of the whole thing. They turn it back into a TV show. Maybe that’s at the root of my frustration; we all ignored the elephant in the room and refused to pull back the curtain to see the strings; now the Academy has done that for us. Okay, I’m down from my horse, let’s break this down, here are the 3 big reasons why I hate this decision:

1. It's All About The Benjamins
They are diluting a proven process purely to boost ratings. History has proven that the numbers of viewers increase proportionate to the popularity of that year’s films. When a lot of people see and love a movie they watch the show and pull for their favorites to win. It’s no coincidence that the highest watched telecast was in 1997 (Titanic, Good Will Hunting, As Good As It Gets, cumulative box office of nominees = $1 billion). More films means = higher cumulative box office + more starts attending show = higher ratings. It’s that simple. I don’t like it, but it’s easy to dissect their logic.


2. Yeah, But What About Those Pesky Screener Things
Expanding the number of nominees doesn’t address the fundamental problem with the nomination and voting process: there is no way to verify that every member has seen every film in question. Every year, the Academy will send 25 or so movies out to its body, they watch the films and then fill out a nomination form, the votes are tallied and the nominations announced. How do we know that each member has watched every film? I honestly don’t know how they address this but it’s a major problem and adding more films to the mix seems to make this even more complicated.


3. The Fucking Blind Side? An Education? Precious? Fuck You?
Finally, and this is the biggest problem in my opinion: what if there aren’t 10 movies worth nominating? In the irony of ironies, they are introducing the new rules this year to make amends for last year when two enormously popular and successful movies were passed over (The Dark Knight and Wall-E); except for the fact that this has been a fairly underwhelming year for movies. Look at the list:

- Avatar
- The Blind Side
- District 9
- An Education
- The Hurt Locker
- Inglourious Basterds
- Precious: Based on the Novel Push by Sapphire
- A Serious Man
- Up
- Up in the Air

Other than Avatar, District 9 and Inglourious Basterds, is there anything we’ll be discussing 5 years from now? Isn’t that what a best pic is supposed to do? To illustrate this point, I did a little research and in my opinion, only 4 times in the last 20 years did we have a year good enough to validate having 10 pictures nominated.

Here they are, the films are listed in no particular order:

2005
Brokeback
Good Night and Good Luck
Capote
Munich
Walk The Line
A History of Violence
Constant Gardener
Match Point
The Squid and the Whale
The Upside of Anger


2004
Million Dollar Baby
Finding Neverland
The Aviator
Eternal Sunshine
Closer
Kinsey
The Incredibles
Before Sunset
Collateral
Man on Fire


1997
Good Will Hunting
Titanic
As Good As It Gets
LA Confidential
Boogie Nights
The Apostle
Wag The Dog
Jackie Brown
Donnie Brasco
The Game


1994
Forrest Gump
Shawshank
Pulp Fiction
Legends of the Fall
Nobody’s Fool
The Paper
The Lion King
Quiz Show
Ed Wood
Bullets Over Broadway

A few thoughts before I wind this down:
- 4 out of 20? Looking forward to batting .200 for the next few years, Academy?
- How good were 1994 and 1997? Holy shit those were good years for film.
- Yes, I don’t have the 2005 winner, Crash, on that list. That movie sucks.
- Will I watch the Oscars this year even though I just spent 1,000 words killing their new gimmick? If you don’t know answer then clearly you aren’t rubbing my ass enough. Now come on, tell me it’s special. Please.

JR

A&M's Top 50 Movies of The Decade (part 6)

Earlier today: #10-2
Yesterday: #20-11
Monday: #30-21
Last Friday: #40-31
Last Thursday: Intro and #50-41


Without further ado, the best movie of the decade is:

1. Eternal Sunshine of the Spotless Mind
As I’ve mentioned a few times during these posts, Romadramedies (romance + comedy + drama) are by far and away my favorite type of movie, and Eternal Sunshine is the best representative of the genre. Funny, achingly sad, philosophical, sweet, horrifying, the amount of emotions that this film entails, and the amount of places this screenplay takes you inside your own head are too numerous too name. Now, I fully admit that this movie is weird, maybe it tries a little too hard at times, maybe the director gets a little too clever with some of the visuals, but when you break this down and realize that everything that happens visually is a metaphor for what is happening emotionally, well, it just fucking works. Add in career-defining performances from Winslet and Carrey and no film this decade had a more complete package.

I’ve spent way too much time ruminating on and deconstructing the central metaphor in a somewhat futile attempt to figure out what each of the visual elements mean and how this ties back to the overall theme. There’s way too much going on here to go through, so let’s talk about the big, big takeaways:

1) We need our pain. I can’t remember who it was, but I once heard someone say that we “are the sum of our experiences.” This isn’t just the happy stuff either; it’s the whole package, the mundane, the embarrassing, the hurtful, the proud, the sad, the sexy, the salacious. If we take one thing off that list, we change forever.

2) By far the most painful moment of a breakup is the revelation that the other person has completely moved on even though you still hurt. The fights, the lies, the accusations, all of that fucking sucks. But it’s knowing that you still need them and they don’t need you that hurts more than anything.

3) To quote my favorite director who left his wife for one of his Asian stepchildren, “the heart wants what it wants.” Love is not only emotional and physical, it’s physiological, biological and a shit fucking ton of other words that end in ogical.

4) How we see our past changes based on our current perspective. If you’ve ever kept a journal or a diary inevitably you’ve had that moment where you’ve looked back at something you’ve written and said to yourself, “what the fuck was I thinking? Who the shit is this person?” Memories are the same way. When we look back at a certain event or time, we are doing so as the person we are now, the person we were then has grown, changed, had new experiences. After a certain amount of time passes, you can’t objectively look back at a failed relationship as a singular event frozen in time because too much has happened and the memory has evolved.

And those are just the hors d’oeuvres. There is so much more going on above and below the surface that I could spend months and another 10,000 words breaking this film down. Intelligent, interesting, perfect, every time I throw this in it feels fresh, I notice something new I hadn’t seen before, giving me something else to chew on. And that, along with a host of other reasons, is why Eternal Sunshine is A&M’s top movie of the decade.

Thanks for following along, everyone. Happy Holidays.



JR

A&M's Top Movies of The Decade (part 4)

Today: #20-11
Yesterday: #30-21
Last Friday: #40-31
Last Thursday: Intro and #50-41


20. Wedding Crashers
Blowjobs and French dips aside, is there anything better than watching a great, R-rated comedy in a packed theater? Everyone’s had a few, everyone’s in a good mood, you laugh at things that you normally wouldn’t and miss parts because the collective laughter is so loud. It’s the best, and I had one of my better movie experiences seeing Wedding Crashers. On a scale of one to ten, how good is the opening montage of wedding clips? A 15? 25? Sure, the wheels fall off the last 35 minutes, but the wedding and the dinner scene are so good we forgive this movie for its digressions. Just the tip, just for a second, just to see how it feels.

19. Cast Away
By far the hardest movie to rank, because of the B- opening, A++++ middle and H ending (yes, H); even if the ending was in the C range, this movie catapults to the top 5, maybe top 2 or 3. It’s captivating on all levels, with Tom Hanks giving one of his best performances (which is saying something). However, when making this list I really tried to rate and review movies as a whole, not being swayed by great moments, scenes or performances. So here we are, #19. Could’ve been so much better.

18. Once
I’ve expressed my love for this little movie on more than one occasion and it’s only gotten better with time. Quiet, slow, thoughtful and true, this movie is completely unassuming and unconventional, showing the characters for who and what they are. The music elevates the movie to a whole new level, providing more than the soundtrack but serving as the emotional center of the film. One of the most rewatchable movies on the list.

17. Anchorman
Are there better movies than Anchorman? Sure. Are there better comedies? Probably. Pound for pound, has there been a funnier, more quotable, more enjoyable movie this decade? Nope.

16. Mystic River
Yes, Million Dollar Baby took home the big trophy, but for my money this was Clint’s best movie this decade. Dark, layered, gritty, hypnotic; with Sean Penn reaching new levels as the guilt-stricken father. The great thing about Clint’s movies: they never try too hard; they are exactly what they are. The indie film movement has given rise to the “holy shit I’m directing!” style of filmmaking, but Clint is an old school, true-to-form storyteller. What a fucking artist. The guy directed 9 movies this decade and they’re all good. Mystic River is the best of the bunch.

15. The Royal Tenenbaums
Yes it’s a little pretentious, precocious and up-its-own-ass-ious, but fuck it’s funny. Member how Gene Hackman made this movie and then disappeared off the planet? I’m torn on Wes Anderson; sometimes it feels like he out thinks himself, as if he’s trying to make every scene original rather than true. This makes movies like The Life Aquatic seem too premeditated, as if Wes is a victim of his style rather than a master of it. With that said however, he’s firing on all cylinders here, creating just the right amount of tension and angst where every moment of pain or torment feels real, and every laugh feels genuine and cathartic.

14. Big Fish
All of the great aspects of Tim Burton’s movies collide with Big Fish. Suddenly the visuals exist for a clear purpose, advancing the story rather than merely enhancing it, if that makes sense. When I walked out of the theater, I knew I loved the movie but wasn’t sure what I was supposed to take from it, what the overall message was supposed to be (and if you can’t tell by this obsessive blog series, that drives me fucking crazy). After a few times on DVD I think I’ve got it: we need to love people on their terms, not ours. People are who they are and exist in their own version of the world, and if we want to truly understand them and love them, we have to enter that world, not force them to enter ours. Not sure if I 100% believe in that myself, but this film does with all its heart which is what makes it so fucking great.

13. There Will Be Blood
When film students dissect the films of our generation 50 years from now, the first name they’ll mention is Paul Thomas Anderson, a true cinematic genius who has done more to advance the medium than anyone else over the last 15 years. Part Scorsese, part Demme and part Tarantino; his movies are atmospheric, creating a mood that is completely specific to that film. Boogie Nights and There Will be Blood are very similar and vastly different at the same time and that’s the best compliment I can give.

12. Munich
Another movie that I didn’t love the first time I saw it, but has slowly and quietly climbed back into my head. Dark, violent and extremely depressing, Munich shows the true effect of “revenge” and how those symptoms permeate and reverberate throughout every aspect of our lives. Like most of you, I was totally thrown by the sex scene at the end, it seemed awkward and gross, but it makes complete sense now. There is no escape, even in the most private, intimate moments of our lives. I’m an unabashed Spielberg fan and with this movie and Schindler’s List (the greatest film ever made in my opinion), he has made two films that will be discussed, debated and devoured forever.

11. Before Sunset
I’m not exactly sure what genre you’d lump this movie into, but whatever that category is, it’s my favorite. Part comedy, part drama, part romance (romadramedy?), this movie asks and attempts to answer the big questions that we all face as we enter our 30s: am I ready to have kids? What is happiness? Do I really know the difference between infatuation and love? Is there a difference? Am I grown up enough to handle growing up? The characters are so well defined and so identifiable that they feel like friends, an amalgamation of everyone I know (which includes myself). Even though it’s a Romadramedy, it has as much suspense as anything else I saw this decade, my heart was beating so fast with anticipation during the “will they or won’t they?” scene at the end, that I thought it was going to leap out of my chest. I’ve seen this movie 10 times since, and that scene still gets me every time.

Coming tomorrow: The Top 10


JR

A&M's Top 50 Movies of The Decade (part 2)

Today: #40-31
Yesterday: Intro and #50-41


40. Taken
When this movie ended I sat up in my chair and proclaimed loudly, “greatest movie of all time!” – I was a little excited obviously, but it’s pretty fucking awesome. Literally the most exciting 96 minutes in film history, Liam starts killing people at about the 14-minute mark and doesn’t stop until the movie is over. There’s actually a moment when he pops out of a corner and kills the credits.

39. Old School
Is this the most quotable movie of the decade? How many times have you said “earmuffs” since you saw this? 10? 50? There's some really great comedies on this list with a lot of hysterical scenes, but the part where Frank shoots himself in the neck with the dart is the funniest moment of the decade for my money.

38. Constant Gardener
The last scene, with Ralph sitting triumphantly on the beach waiting for his killers to find him, is one of the most moving, touching and achingly sad things I’ve ever seen (come on, you can’t review 50 movies without a little bit of schmaltz). This movie is like a gigantic puzzle that unfolds like so many gigantic puzzles do: one piece at time. Oh fuck you, just rent this, it’s totally fucking tits.

37. History of Violence
I didn’t like this movie the first time I saw it. The violence felt gratuitous, the sex awkward and dirty, the ending weird and completely unsatisfying. But the movie grew on me after repeat viewings and now I appreciate the sly, subtle brilliance in the screenplay. John Hurt, Ed Harris and the sneaky hot Maria Bello are all incredible; but this is Viggo’s show and he fucking kills it (literally, figuratively and vaginally).

36. Closer
This movie is haunting. I haven’t seen it in four years but it’s still with me, a stink I can’t get off, like a bad cigar or “Antonio” the new scent by Antonio Banderas. Four terrible people doing terrible things to each other, yet for some reason you can’t denigrate either character; somehow you’re rooting for each person to succeed and fail at the same time. Writing this makes me want to watch it yet never watch it again.

35. The Aviator
If this movie were 35 minutes shorter, it’d be in the top 10. You’ll notice something about my top 10 when we get there, no film is longer than 2 hours and 20 minutes. You get any longer, and you don’t have Godfather or Shawshank in your title, then I’m not sticking around for the whole thing. Length is a major factor in rewatchability, and The Aviator is just too fucking long. Movies are like erections, if you have one that lasts longer than 2 hours and 20 minutes then you need to hop out of that creepy tub and go find a deer to fuck.

34. Finding Neverland
Sweet, innocent, touching; take the commas out of the beginning of this sentence and you’ve got a recipe for getting arrested on a playground; leave them in, and you’ve got Finding Neverland, a wonderful little movie with two of the biggest stars in history, Depp and Winslet doing their thing. The last hour is a little too obvious and maybe tries a bit too hard, but the overall product is outstanding.

33. Million Dollar Baby
A complete roller coast ride from start to finish; a boxing movie, a buddy movie, a kid from the wrong sides of the track does well movie, a euthanasia movie, a movie about religion, family and loss. In other words, a movie with alotta shit going on. Despite all of that, it’s a movie that loves it characters and gives them time to develop and grow. Clint has been a major star for 50 years, with movies like this, he’ll be famous for another 200.

32. Finding Nemo
Pixar’s most traditional movie in many ways is also one of its best; funny, exciting, scary at parts, really enjoyable from start to finish. Thank God for Pixar, can you imagine what parenthood would be like without Nemo? On a related note, I saw this movie on mushrooms once and couldn’t eat fish for six months afterward.

31. The Hangover
Is it too early to put this movie this high? After a few years and a few more viewings, will we realize that this was decidedly too low? I’m leaning towards the latter and so is Dr. Faggot.



JR

A&M’s Top 50 Movies of The Decade

Unless you regularly eat soap you’ll see the headline above and know what this post is about, so I won’t spend too much time on the intro, but here are a few things to be cognizant of as you devour this list over the next few days:

- Lists like this, by their very nature, are completely useless, immaterial and stupid. But fuck are they fun to do. I highly recommend it.

- Ranking awesome movies is kind of like ranking Victoria’s Secret models: the top 10 is surprisingly the easiest part; with the bottom being the hardest b/c they are almost entirely based on mood. For me, the top 3 would be some combination of Miranda Kerr, Alessandra Ambrosio and Adriana Lima, and really does it matter who gets the #1 slot? Everyone wins if those three science projects are involved. But who gets the #41 slot? Much harder.

- On a related note, it’s difficult to balance older and newer movies, because the latter is unavoidably top of mind. I really had to go through IMDB to figure this out and have had to start over several times upon realizing a glaring omission.

- Rewatchability is a crucial factor. I really don’t think you can get an idea of how good a movie really is until you are 30 minutes into your 3rd viewing. The first viewing is always deceptive, impacted by hype, preconceived notions, etc; the second is heavily influenced by your lingering feelings from the first; the third, in a weird way, is the only truly unbiased viewing. This weighs heavily into my selection process.

- It’s also important not to let an individual performance affect the way you think about the movie as a whole, which is more difficult than you think. For example, I hate Lost in Translation; fuck that movie. But Bill Murray’s performance is one of the best of the decade, potentially top 5. If I find that movie on cable I always end up watching for a few minutes purely to see him, but quickly flip away when something reminds me how annoying that movie is. Does this make sense? Even if it doesn’t, fuck Lost in Translation.

- No, seriously, FUCK Lost in Translation.

Without further ado, the top 50 in reverse order:

50. The Bourne Ultimatum
The best pure action movie of the decade and possibly one of the most influential, how many movies have we seen since the first Bourne to feature hand-held filmed fight scenes? The Bourne movies were the Pearl Jam of the 90s, everyone wanted to sound like them.

49. Before the Devil Knows Your Dead
This movie came and went without anyone really noticing, but is one of the best suspense movies of the decade with an absolutely killer fucking cast. Hey meatheads, want to see the sneaky hot Marisa Tomei fucked doggy style for 5 minutes? I thought so.

48. Kill Bill
I love these movies, but the excessive dialogue gets a little tedious on repeat viewings. If anything, this movie is a victim of its own success: the action is so good we get impatient waiting for it.

47. The Queen
One of those movies I expected to fully hate and ended up completely riveted (when was the last time you had a good rivet? I highly recommend it.). So much going on in this movie, it has an unexpected depth and density that really carries it forward. The relationship between the monarchy and the government, which is really at the heart of the movie, is absolutely fascinating.

46. 40 Yr Old Virgin
Of the Apatow movies, this one has aged the best and holds up well over repeat viewings. Further proof that Seth Rogen is a fucking force as a supporting player and a C- as a leading man.

45. Little Miss Sunshine
Another highly influential movie with a host of imitators, this hasn’t aged as well as I thought it would but is still a great movie. Not much else to say.

44. Man on Fire
Strong case for the most underrated movie of the decade and definitely one of the most rewatchable; Denzel doing Denzel things and a very satisfying ending. Great movie to watch on TBS on a Tuesday.

43. The Incredibles
One of Pixar’s most relatable films even though it’s about superheroes; this one probably should’ve been higher. Not only does this movie tackle subjects like teen angst and midlife crisis as well, if not better, than any other movie in the decade, but it’s a fucking kick ass action movie to boot.

42. District 9
The most original, creative and mind-blowing movie of the decade, District 9 transcends the sci fi genre and succeeds on a multitude of levels. Remember the name Neill Blomkamp, folks, we’re going to see some major, major things from him over the next few years.

41. Elegy
I think only two people in America saw this movie, but they loved it and thought it was completely mesmerizing from start to finish. Has anyone had a weirder, cooler career than Ben Kingsley? Regardless of how you feel about little indie movies about aging professors and their much younger lovers, this movie does have one central theme that we can all get behind: how absolutely horrifically sad it would be if Penelope Cruz had to have her breasts removed. I think I’d become a Jehovah’s Witness and start selling bibles over the phone or some shit if that happened.

Coming tomorrow: #40-31



JR

I Owe Him a Quarter

Look, Panda, I get paid in Panda babies for this, right?

Box Office Predictions for 5/22/09

(I’m including the Monday tallies as well)

1.
Movie: Night of the Museum 2
Prediction: $83 million

2.
Movie: Terminator 4
Prediction: $71 million

3.
Movie: Star Trek
Prediction: $36 million

4.
Movie: Angels and Demons
Prediction: $27 million

- With Star Trek, Wolverine and Angels & Demons starting the summer season off, there’s been nothing out there for kids and families. Enter Night of The Museum 2, expect this movie to open big.

- Look, I like Stiller as much as the next guy, but I think it’s worth noting that this is his third sequel in five years (joining Meet the Parents 2 and Madagascar 2). With word that Meet the Parents 3 just went into production, it’s safe to say that he’s officially reached “hey, let’s make Indy 4” sell out status. (P.S. Stiller apparently already trademarked that term and I now owe him a quarter).

- Sometimes my judgment gets clouded by my opinion, and here’s my opinion about Terminator 4: who in the fucking fuck wants to this fucking pile of fuck? With that said, I feel in my heart that this movie will under perform, but it does have pretty good buzz heading into the weekend and is a franchise that always seems to open well. So it’s really anyone’s guess here. I’m going with $71 but wouldn’t be surprised to see this in the 80s.

- Terminator 4 is directed by a dude who goes by McG making this film the first in the franchise to a) not star Arnold and b) be directed by a cheeseburger

- Star Trek continues to perform well, actually outselling Angels & Demons throughout this week. A weekend in the mid $30s puts this in the top 100 all time.

- Happy Memorial Day, everybody. Mags and I are both out tomorrow, so we'll get back at ya on Tuesday.

JR

Just a bit outside...

Box Office Results for 5/15/2009

1.
Angels & Demons
Prediction: $57 million
Actual: $46 million

2.
Star Trek
Prediction: $39 million
Actual: $43 million


- Not my greatest weekend by any stretch of the imagination, missing Angels & Demons by $11m and Star Trek by $4m. I can promise you one thing, a lot of good will come out of this. You will never see any blogger in the entire country study movies as hard as I will study for the rest of the movie season. You will never see someone push Box Office Mojo as hard as I will push it for the rest of the summer. You will never see a blog get as many box office predictions right as this site will for the rest of the season. God Bless.

- I said on Friday that I didn’t really have logic for my Angels & Demons prediction – well, I did, sorta. Da Vinci had sold 81 million copies when it was released into theaters, A&D had sold 60 million as of last Friday – so I guessed that the movie returns would echo the books sales and come in around $20 million less. I was wrong. Why didn’t I mention this on Friday? That’s easy; I wanted to talk shit about how fucking smart I was after the fact. I’ll give you a totally insane and illogical analogy. Let’s say you’re at a bar and you overhear a PYT talking about how bad she feels that her grandma is single and isn’t dating anyone. So you strut over and very coolly ask her to smell your finger. When she does and looks at you quizzically, you very slyly add, “that’s Judi Dench, she rode this all day.” Maybe it works, maybe but it doesn’t, but you are completely revered by your buddies if it does. So yes, my sin is vanity, I wanted to be revered and used Judi Dench’s pussy to do it.

- As I mentioned on Friday however, the real draw for A&D is overseas, the movie opened with almost $105m internationally, a massive haul. It should easily get to $300m and right around #50 all time.

- Star Trek is kicking ass right now – a very miniscule 42% drop on its way to $43 million and almost $150 million through ten days. The international #s are starting to pick up a little too - $70 million through two weeks for almost $220m total.

- Goodbye Gladiator from the top 100 all-time and welcome, Monsters vs. Aliens, with $191m. Other movies in trouble of dropping out this year, Grease, Men in Black II and Toy Story.

- This week brings Terminator 4 and Night at the Museum 2. Two movies that prove one of the oldest theories about how movies get approved / made in Hollywood: a bunch of executives have an enormous circle jerk around a pile of DVDs on the floor – if two of them nut on the same one, they make a sequel. If three of them squirt on the same one, they make a prequel. And if someone inexplicably rips his dick off and eats it they make Terminator 4.



JR

And Hanks Rules All

Yeah, but what's fun about playing with a building?

Box Office Prediction for 5/15/2009

1.
Angels & Demons
Prediction: $57 million

2.
Star Trek
Prediction: $39 million


- My logic for Angels & Demons? Actually I don’t really have any – just playing a hunch here. Da Vinci Code opened to $77 two summers ago (on its way to $760 worldwide), but Angels & Demons doesn’t have nearly the hype or the cache (yes, I just used cache on A&M) of its predecessor. So it won’t repeat that success, but I still think it opens big - not Double D, $77m big - but $57m, a nice handful.

- The real value for this film is overseas – Da Vinci racked up $540 internationally, only 12 movies have made more outside of the US (The Dark Knight made $468m by comparison). So whatever the movie makes here is just more syrup to pour on their enormous pile of money waffles.

- The bigger battle here is not Da Vinci vs. Angels & Demons, it’s Hanks’ mullet (seen here) vs. Hanks’ soccer mom / Diane Lane cut (here). If something crazy happens, and Angels shoots past Da Vinci on the all time list this will be a major blow for mullets worldwide.

- Side note: hasn’t the term “the Pope is not very happy with X” lost all meaning at this point? What movie / star / band / food group is his eminence “pooping his pants thrilled with” at the moment? The Pope is not thrilled with yogurt right now.

- I alluded to some of Hanks’ BO numbers in my overall preview post a few weeks back, but two other amazing things about his career: 1) do you realize this guy has been a star since day 1? His first movie appearance ever was the lead role in Splash in 1984. You look at the IMDB pages of Ford, Will Smith, Tom Cruise; they all have bit parts in small movies before they became stars. Hanks has been a leading man his entire film career – spanning 34 movies over 25 years, incredible.

- 2) Has anyone made more rewatchable movies? Hanks isn’t only the biggest movie star ever, he’s probably the biggest cable star as well. I dare you to flip away when you find Cast Away, Forrest Gump, Turner and Hooch, Big, Saving Private Ryan, Toy Story or The Money Pit on TV. It’s not possible.


JR

Summer Box Office Preview

Here’s a week-by-week preview of the summer box office including US, International and total grosses. I’ve indicated in the total gross section which movies I think will crack the top 100 all time and where I think they’ll rank when all is said and done. I’m not including opening weekend, because I wouldn’t dare rob you of your cherished weekly Box Office predictions. I’ve listed my predicted top 5 at the bottom.

(Also, I’m not including Wolverine in the mix b/c I couldn’t get this done in time; I don’t think it’ll be in the top 5 for the summer anyway, so no harm no foul).

(Also, also, you'll notice that I'm only tracking all time worldwide status - don't worry, I'm not a communist or anything, I just like the big numbers).

May 8
Film: Star Trek
US: $240
International: $285
Total: $525 (#59 All Time)

May 15
Film: Angels and Demons
US: $195
International: $435
Total: $630 (#38 All Time)

May 22
Film: Night at the Museum 2
US: $210
International: $350
Total: $560 (#51 All Time)

May 22
Film: Terminator 4
US: $135
International: $280
Total: $415 (#100 All Time)

May 29
Film: Up
US: $155
International: $220
Total: $375

June 5
Film: Land Of The Lost
US: $115
International: $90
Total: $205

June 12
Film: Taking Of Pelham 123
US: $75
International: $110
Total: $185

June 19
Film: Year One
US: $85
International: $40
Total: $125

June 26
Film: Transformers 2
US: $270
International: $340
Total: $610 (#42 All Time)

July 1
Film: Public Enemies
US: $160
International: $115
Total: $285

July 10
Film: Bruno
US: $115
International: $140
Total: $255

July 15
Film: Harry Potter 6
US: $295
International: $650
Total: $945 (#7 All Time)

July 24
Fuck July 24

July 31
Film: Funny People
US: $130
International: $75
Total: $205

August 7
Film: G.I. Joe
US: $130
International: $85
Total: $215


Jericho’s Top 5 for Summer 2009
1. Harry Potter 6: $945
2. Angels and Demons: $630
3. Transformers 2: $610
4. Night at the Museum 2: $560
5. Star Trek: $525


A few thoughts:
- May has a chance to be the biggest month of all time with 6 major films opening in the same frame. The biggest month in history is July 2007 with more than $1.3 billion (the month saw Transformers, Harry Potter 5 and the Simpsons Movie open, with carry over from Ratatouille, Die Hard 4 and Knocked Up). Considering that 4 of my top 5 open in May, with other films like Terminator and Wolverine also dropping, May has a great shot at being the highest grossing ever.

- If Angels and Demons performs the way it should, then Tom Hanks will pass both Harrison Ford and Eddie Murphy to be the biggest box office star of all time. This movie will be his 15th to make at least $100m, his 10th to make more than $150m and his 6th to make more than $200m. Un fucking believable.

- Do you realize that the top 100 domestic films of all time include 29 films with more than $300m and 89 films with more than $200m? In fact, the lowest grossing movie in the top 100 is Gladiator with $187m – which means that in order to crack the top 100 a film can’t just be a hit, it has to be a massive, massive hit. We’re heading towards a future where every film in the top 100 will be $200m+. To wit, the past three movie years have had an average of 7.5 movies make more than $200m. Which means that mid-way through 2010, the top 100 will be completely full of $200m+ films – isn’t that incredible?


JR

Thursday Thoughts

Apple
Congress is a bit like the NFL in the sense that once something is proven to work, everyone has to try it at least once. For example, congressmen screaming at high paid executives about their bonuses are completely analogous to football teams trying the wildcat formation: It’s worked; the crowds love it; so why not give it a shot? Barney Frank is definitely the “Ronnie Brown scoring 4tds against NE” of congress right now.

Moustache
I am literally waiting with baited breath to see what Jay Z and Kanye do to Chris Brown. Honestly, I haven’t been this excited for a fight since the finals of the All Valley Karate Tournament. You know how there’s that scene in every cop movie where they have the key witness in a hotel room, and everyone is freaked out and checking all his food and shit? Isn’t that exactly how you picture CB right now? The question: which witness is he? Joe Pesci in Lethal Weapon 2? The weird looking bald guy from Traffic? Or Jet Li in the straight to DVD movie co-starring DMX and Marlon Wayans: “Cookie Doh” (Before U get da cookies, U gots 2 make da doh).

Apple
Three things I’m dying to say to a client today:

- (Upon hearing that activity X isn’t in the budget): Well, that’s funny; dumb fucking faces aren't in my budget yet here we are.
- Dear, X, rather than edit my content like the dumb cunt fucktard that you are, why don’t you just print it out, bring it to the bathroom with you, wipe your fat ass with it and fax it back?
- Actually, that's a really good idea, thanks. Hahahahahahahaha

Moustache
You’re going to be hearing a lot of Oscar and general movie thoughts from me over the next few weeks – I’m holding off on making any Oscar predictions or ranking the 2008 films for now until I’ve seen a few more movies and can be a bit more objective, but I do have one overarching theory / thought that I wanted to set up the next few weeks of posts with: The movies in 2008 sucked and everyone knows it. You know it, I know it, and you bet both the curly hairs on your left nut that the Academy knows it.

Now, even though the year as a whole was fairly dismal, there were still a number of standout films, the problem though is that they fall outside of the traditional “Best Pic” type. That doesn’t matter to the Academy though, they have a proven formula and they stick to it, come hell or bad films. Think about it, the Academy basically nominates the same five films every year. Almost without fail you’re getting:

1) Epic starring really famous person wearing makeup or period garb: Benjamin Button
2) The little indie movie that could: Slumdog
3) Historical figure / biopic: Milk
4) War / Holocaust / Courtroom: The Reader
5) Seminal event / news story: Frost / Nixon

Look at 2007, you could use the same formula and dissect the nominees.

1) Epic starring really famous person wearing makeup: Atonement
2) The little indie movie that could: Juno
3) War / Holocaust / Courtroom: Michael Clayton
4) Seminal event / news story: There Will Be Blood

No Country For Old Men doesn’t really fit, but I think you get my point. Go back through the archives and that formula will work every year.

One little difference between 2008 and 2007 – ’07 was a fantastic year for films, all five nominees were outstanding. So, in a widely publicized bad year, why didn’t the Academy shake it up a bit, nominate movies like The Dark Knight and Wall-E, two wholly original, creative, excellent movies? Yes, one’s a comic book movie and one’s animated, and neither of those categories fit within the little confines above, but who gives a fuck?

In my opinion, the Academy totally blew this one. They nominate inferior films that ft their criteria, totally blowing an opportunity to expand their horizons and acknowledge two films that will be remembered long after someone gets The Reader on Netflix, lets it sit on the coffee table for three months finally returning it unopened.

We Are All Witnesses

Because it doesn't matter what the theme is,
pics of Lebron dunking are always good

As a box office enthusiast / junkie / dork I’ve been following the Dark Knight with my jaw on the floor. The opening weekend record was a big one, however, the nature of movies, particularly from a marketing standpoint, has changed so much in the last 8-10 years, that the opening weekend record has a lost a little of its panache. Movies are built to open big and then fade quickly – with the theatrical run really only serving as a glorified marketing campaign for the DVD release. Consider this: since 2001, 11 movies have opened with more than $100 million, 30 have opened with $70 or more and the record for largest opening weekend has been broken 4 times.

With that said, take absolutely nothing away from The Dark Knight’s new opening weekend record, any time you can open with $158 it’s pretty fucking incredible. But what’s been truly amazing about Dark Knight is its staying power – the movie has literally broken a record every single day it’s been out. Right now, the best comparison from a box office standpoint is Pirates 2, although there really is no precedent for what we’re seeing with Dark Knight. Pirates 2 opened with $135, made $195 in its first seven days, finishing up with $425 million. The Dark Knight opened with $158 and made $239 in its first seven days – where will it end up? I still don’t think it’ll break Titanic’s record of $600 – but there’s the very real possibility that it crosses $500.

Consider the following records we’ve seen fall in the last 10 days:

- Fastest film to $200 million – took 5 days, Pirates 2 took 8
- Fastest film to $250 million – took 8 days, Pirates 2 took 10
- Fastest film to $300 million – took 10 days, Pirates 2 took 16
- Fastest to $350 and $400 will follow in the next few days (good chance it gets to $350 by Friday and $400 mid-next week, which would obliterate the standing records)
- Highest grossing week - $239 million in its first 7 days – including an abso fucking lutely ridiculous $81 million Mon-Thurs
- Biggest second weekend - $75 million

There are more, but I think you get the point. Doesn’t it seem like only a few weeks ago we were wondering if Indy 4 could pass Iron Man as the biggest hit of the summer? Well, Dark Knight passed Indy after only 10 days, so to quote the effete cop from Lebowksi, “I guess we can close the book on that one.”

A few other box office notes:

- Step Brothers opened with a very solid $30 – anyone seen this? Any good? I’m a little Ferrelled-out at the moment, but all I really need is a little push and I’m in the theater. Anyone?

- Wait, they made another X Files movie? Why the fuck did they do that? Before they named the sequel: “X Files: I want to believe” – do you think they considered: “X Files: Please see this, Gillian Anderson is practically homeless”

- Hancock has now rung up $470 million worldwide and counting – do you ever think that Tiger Woods and Will Smith are the same person? Tiger’s amazing, because he’s absolutely un-hateable – it’s impossible not to root for him when he’s walking down 18 with a one shot lead. Will Smith is the same way, I want every movie he makes to pull down $500 – have we ever seen them in the same room?

- Mummy 3 opens this weekend; can you feel the excitement? “Mummy 3: Tomb of the Dragon Emperor.” Much cooler than the original title, "Mummy 3: Brendan Fraser is fucking laughing at you. Laughing.”

- Has anyone seen the trailer for the animated Star Wars movie coming out this summer? Click here if you haven’t. I know I’ve said this before a million times, but let’s make it one million and one, what the fuck is wrong with George Lucas?. I mean, the animation looks like shit! This is how we’re going out? Star Wars redefined everything and 25 years later Lucas puts out a fucking puppet show? The Star Wars franchise is like one of those 70 yr old actresses that has had so much work done they don’t even look like a human anymore. You get a face-lift, then botox, then a cheek graph or whatever the fuck, flash forward five years and you look like a fat baby’s kneecap. Thanks, George. You're ruining my childhood. Why not frame Ken Griffey Jr for steroids and somehow take the fun out of masturbation so you can go for the clean sweep. Dick face.

A Few Dark Knight Thoughts

A Few Dark Knight Thoughts…

Ladies and gentleman, your new opening weekend champ, The Dark Knight! We won’t have final numbers until later today, but the estimate is $155 million, passing Spider Man 3’s $150. Just mind boggling numbers. The question now is how long can Dark Knight keep this going – Spidey 3 dropped over 60% in its second weekend, topping out at $336, good for #12 all time – where will Dark Knight end up? Top 25 all time is all but guaranteed, can it get into the top 10? Stay tuned…

What a great fucking movie. I’m guessing most of you have seen it already, but for those who haven’t, do me a favor, be patient and wait to see it on IMAX. Just trust me on this. I ask so little, I demanded you see Once and remember how fucking good that was? I told you that Shaun Alexander had a talking vagina and remember how spot fucking on I was? Trust me, friends, wait for the IMAX.

All of the praise so far has been heaped on Bale, Eckhart and Ledger – and it should be, they’re fucking fantastic – but how about Gary Oldman as Jim Gordon? Much less heralded and a much more thankless role but the character is absolutely crucial to the story, he’s the glue that makes the whole thing work. Well done, sir.

This actually brings up a different point, the fact that more and more talented, high-brow and acclaimed actors and filmmakers are gravitating towards comic book movies. This is a fascinating trend with several little sub-trends connected to it – namely that audiences are tired of standard action fare and are demanding more from their action movies – as a lifelong comic book fan (particularly Batman), I couldn’t be happier about this. There’s so much context and subtext to these characters and stories and that’s finally starting to come out in the film versions. For example, and this is dorky but stay with me - I grew up reading Batman books and I remember being in ninth grade and reading Hamlet for the first time and thinking “that’s Batman.” Spoiled, aloof, rich kids who lost their fathers and dedicated their lives to revenge – only to find that they had become so consumed with the “idea” of revenge they had created this insatiable need that actually had nothing to do with their parents – basically they’re angry b/c they’re so angry and keep fighting b/c they realize they can never go back to the person they used to be – does that make sense? See, I knew you guys would like that. You know who didn’t like it? My ninth grade English teacher who gave me a C+ b/c she thought it was sacrilegious to compare one of the greatest characters in literature to a superhero from a “child’s” story. Well, guess what, ninth grade English teacher? Go see the Dark Knight and then take a big healthy bite of my asshole.

One last thought, basically everything that could and should be said about Heath Ledger has been said at this point and by people much more eloquent than myself, but if I may:

- I think I speak for everyone when I say that his death has been 100x more impactful than any other celebrity. His age, his daughter, his overwhelming talent, the unexpectedness of the whole thing – it’s been 7 months and it still feels fucking wrong.

- It’s an amazing thing to watch an actor become a great actor right in front of your eyes. With movies like The Patriot and A Knight’s Tale we knew Heath was ridiculously handsome but really had no idea if he was talented or not. If the age of the trashy magazine and gossip show has proven anything it’s that you don’t really need to be talented to have a long, healthy career. Look at Jessica Alba and Ryan Phillippe (who is quickly proving to be the Keanu Reeves of his generation – one of those guys who keeps making movies and keeps making headlines even though everyone knows he’s awful. In fact, we might go as far to say that the Keanu “puzzled look” is being challenged by the Phillippe “frown” as the predominant bad actor trick). We put Heath in this category prematurely, then he makes Monster’s Ball and we all said, “wait a minute, is there something there?” Then Brokeback and we go “hold on, hold on, is this guy really that good?” And then everything crests with the Joker, when we all collectively realized Heath was on his way to becoming one of the best actors of his generation.

- With that said, thank God he is so unrecognizable in The Dark Knight. Honestly, if the movie started and the credits said “and introducing Bill Mankoewitz as the Joker” we all would’ve walked out saying, “man, that Bill Mankoewitz is a great actor.” It’s such a transformation you really have no idea who it is, and we should all be thankful for that.

- You know how every great performance has that “splash of cold water moment?” You get so engrossed and captivated by the character you kind of forget you’re watching an actor acting – then he does something that is so unbelievable it snaps you back to reality for a moment, kind of like someone throwing cold water on you while you’re sleeping. Think of the church, “give me the blood, Eli” scene in There Will Be Blood, when you think to yourself “holy fucking shit, I’m watching something that will be talked about for years.” With Heath, it was the scene after the hospital blows up – he doesn’t have any dialogue, it’s just the way that he walks from the door to the bus. That weird limp / strut / saunter that he created for the character that snaps you back and makes you think “wow!” as his talent reaches out of the screen and fucking smacks you in the face.

- This whole section is basically just a long, ambling preface for this: what a fucking shame. What an incredibly, incredibly bright and wasted future. Fucking sucks, man, we all got robbed on this one.

Are you ready for...

Are you ready for…

- The Dark Knight to open with $140 million, the second biggest opening ever behind Spiderman 3?

- Greg Norman’s 82 on Sunday? Let me put it this way, predicting Greg Norman’s 82 is as easy as predicting that Paris would start banging that one dude once Nicole Richie was seen with the dude’s brother. You can set your watch by that.

- Sex and the City 2, 3 and 4? Do you realize that SATC has made $370 million worldwide on a budget of $65 million? Yes, you read that correctly, that’s over $300 million in gross profit.

- Spielberg, Ford and Lucas to each make $100 million from Indy 4? Well, you better be, they’ll be there after this weekend.

- To admit that Will Smith is the biggest movie star of all time? Do you realize that Hancock is his sixth movie to make at least $175 million domestically and his seventh to make at least $350 million internationally? (I’ve been making this claim for the last 6-7 years, btw, this really deserves it’s own post)

- To live in a world where “What Happens in Vegas” that poopy diaper with Ashton Diaz and Cameron Kutcher makes over $200 million worldwide?

- For The Dark Knight to be one of your top ten favorite movies ever? Fuck, I’m excited for this. We’ll chat on Monday…

Best Actor Do Over (Part II)

Moving right along...

2000
Nominees:
Javier Bardem -- Before Night Falls
Russell Crowe -- Gladiator
Tom Hanks -- Cast Away
Ed Harris -- Pollock
Geoffrey Rush -- Quills

Did Win: Crowe
Should’ve Won: Harris

Once again, the Academy plays the political game and doesn’t reward the best performance. The voters were split between Crowe and Spacey in 1999, deciding on Spacey at the last minute but kicking themselves the whole time. So Gladiator comes out and it’s fucking awesome and he’s fucking awesome and the Academy thinks “damn it! Crowe is the real deal, we really fucked up last year – let’s just give him this one and call it even.” Obviously this logic is crazy, crazy fucked because it totally overlooks the best performance of the year: Ed Harris in Pollock. Crowe is awesome in Gladiator no doubt, but Harris is a revelation in Pollock, tortured, brilliant, endearing, appalling, a really fantastic performance.

2001
Nominees:
Russell Crowe -- A Beautiful Mind
Sean Penn -- I Am Sam
Will Smith -- Ali
Denzel Washington -- Training Day
Tom Wilkinson -- In the Bedroom

Did Win: Denzel
Should’ve Won: Crowe

Ah, so now the Academy’s lack of foresight has completely come full circle. So they wanted to give Crowe the Oscar for the Insider but didn’t, regretted that decision so threw him a conciliation Oscar for Gladiator, and then are caught with their pants down a year later when he gives the performance of his fucking life in A Beautiful Mind. Holy shit is he good in this movie. Not only that, but this is the absolute definition of an Oscar worthy role – he’s crazy, brilliant, delusional, there’s even a “thirty years later” scene where he wears heavy make up! The Academy fucking loves heavy make up! Man, they really kicked themselves in the ass with this one.

(And I know what you’re thinking, what about Denzel? Is this really the best Denzel performance? No fucking chance. Besides if I was completely redoing this thing, and not just starting from 1993 – I’d go back to 1992, take Pacino’s Oscar for Scent of a Woman and give it to its rightful owner, Denzel for Malcolm X. So there)

2002
Nominees:
Adrien Brody -- The Pianist
Nicolas Cage -- Adaptation
Michael Caine -- The Quiet American
Daniel Day-Lewis -- Gangs of New York
Jack Nicholson -- About Schmidt

Did Win: Brody
Should’ve Won: Day-Lewis

A Polish pianist (Oscar!) uses his music (Oscar!) to raise the spirits (Oscar!) of the oppressed Residents (Oscar!) in the Polish ghetto (Oscar!). In one touching scene, he’s about to be executed by the Nazi guard (Oscar!) but starts playing the piano (Oscar!) and the guard is reduced to tears (Oscar!) and lets him live (Oscar!). Nothing against Brody, who is fantastic in this movie, but don’t you think the Academy was swayed a little by the role and not the performance? What’s more, the year previously they gave the award to Denzel for playing a ruthless, vile bad guy, did they want to do that again by giving the statue to Day-Lewis for his sadistic Bill the Butcher? Well, they should have. It’s been five years, which performance do you remember more? Exactly.

(And no, this doesn’t mean I’m redistributing Day-Lewis’ Oscar this year for There Will Be Blood – the guy is the fucking best, If Neeson wasn’t so good in Schindler’s I would’ve given Day-Lewis the Oscar that year for In The Name of The Father too, which is four, what year did Last of the Mohicans come out? Fuck it, give him that one too.)

2003
Nominees:
Johnny Depp -- Pirates of the Caribbean: The Curse of the Black Pearl
Ben Kingsley -- House of Sand and Fog
Jude Law -- Cold Mountain
Bill Murray -- Lost in Translation
Sean Penn -- Mystic River

Did Win: Penn
Should’ve Won: Penn

Sean Penn won this competition handily in 2003, and he wins again handily here. I do love Murray’s performance and think it might be the pinnacle of his career, Groundhog’s Day notwithstanding, but he can’t touch Penn. He actually can’t come within a mile of Penn, the best performance of the decade by someone not named Day-Lewis.

(Also, can someone please explain to me why people consider Jude Law to be a great actor? He’s average at best. Have you seen Cold Mountain? You know what separates average actors from good actors and good actors from great actors? The ability to think without looking like you’re thinking. With Hanks you can always tell his character is thinking, with Jude you can always tell that Jude is thinking about what the character must be thinking. Does that make sense? In Cold Mountain, Jude’s face basically says “what does sad look like in the mountains?” for a solid two hours. Jude was great in Ripley, but in retrospect, doesn’t that seem like it was mostly Jude just being Jude?)

2004
Nominees:
Don Cheadle -- Hotel Rwanda
Johnny Depp -- Finding Neverland
Leonardo DiCaprio -- The Aviator
Clint Eastwood -- Million Dollar Baby
Jamie Foxx -- Ray

Did Win: Foxx
Should’ve Won: Foxx

Wow. Huge year. 5 legitimate studs, 5 fucking awesome performances. I’m tempted to go DiCaprio or Cheadle here, because I love them both and they both give their best performances so far, but I don’t think anyone can top Jamie Foxx.

2005
Nominees:
Philip Seymour Hoffman -- Capote
Terrence Howard -- Hustle & Flow
Heath Ledger -- Brokeback Mountain
Joaquin Phoenix -- Walk the Line
David Strathairn -- Good Night, and Good Luck

Did Win: Hoffman
Should Win: Phoenix

WOW! Now this is a massive, massive year with five fantastic performances, including three for the records books with Heath, Hoffman and Joaquin. Considering that this year also had Viggo in History of Violence, Ralph Fiennes in The Constant Gardener and Eric Bana in Munich, the argument could be made that this was the strongest year for male lead performances in the last 50 years and maybe ever. With that said, I’m going against the grain here a little by taking the Oscar away from Hoffman (who is lights fucking out fantastic) and giving the award to Phoenix, b/c I think his role has aged a bit better and ultimately was just more of a physical achievement. (BTW, if I write this column tomorrow I may give it to Heath, and a few days later change my mind again and give it to Viggo or Bana – 2005 is just that good).

2006
Nominees:
Leonardo DiCaprio -- Blood Diamond
Ryan Gosling -- Half Nelson
Peter O'Toole -- Venus
Will Smith -- The Pursuit of Happyness
Forest Whitaker -- The Last King of Scotland

Did Win: Whitaker
Should’ve Won: McAvoy

The strongest year for male leads is followed by one of the weakest. Honestly, there isn’t a really memorable performance on this list. Whitaker gives the best here, but to be honest, doesn’t even give the best performance in his own movie, so I’m really going against the grain here and giving the award to Forest’s co-star in the Last King of Scotland, James McAvoy. I like Forest, everyone likes Forest, and he finally found a role where his lazy eye could be used as a plot device, but I can’t get past the fact that this feels more like a lifetime achievement award than a recognition of excellence. Besides, McAvoy absolutely carries that movie from the first shot to the last, conveying more hope, intelligence and terror on his face than most actors (I’m speaking to you Mr. Law) do in a lifetime. Fantastic performance.

2007
Nominees:
George Clooney -- Michael Clayton
Daniel Day-Lewis -- There Will Be Blood
Johnny Depp -- Sweeney Todd The Demon Barber of Fleet Street
Tommy Lee Jones -- In the Valley of Elah
Viggo Mortensen -- Eastern Promises

Did Win: Day-Fucking-Lewis
Should Win: Day-Fucking-Lewis

Fun year, four of the best actors up against one of the best ever. Sorry gang, but there’s a reason people don’t like playing Michael Jordan, tackling Barry Sanders or trying to out-cunt Catherine Zeta Jones.

Best Actor Do Over (Part I)

Best Acting Oscar Do Over Part I

I caught a few minutes of Saving Private Ryan the other day and was thinking to myself, “this is by far and away Tom Hanks’ best performance.” Yes, he was fantastic in Forrest Gump, Apollo 13, Big, Cast Away and Philadelphia (look at the fucking list! What a career this guy has had – incredible), but nothing can compare to SPR. In fact, I’d go as far as to say that the scene after Giovanni Ribisi is killed and Hanks sneaks off to cry in that ravine is the best acted moment of all time (see, this is why it’s fun to have a blog – you can make bold, somewhat unfounded statements that are given some sense of validity b/c it’s in print and you idiots read it. Anyway…). Hanks didn’t win an Oscar for that role, the weird Italian dude that basically raped 16 people on the way to the podium won for Life Is Beautiful (do you ever notice how being European provides you a total get out of jail free card in the US? “He’s not an asshole, he’s just French.” “Well, my landlord probably shouldn’t take a dump in my mailbox, but what can you do? He’s Polish.” If we tried to pull that shit over there we get our asses kicked, but over here it’s a “cultural difference.” Crazy.)

Now, let’s take nothing away from the groping Italian, great performance in a great movie, but better than Tom in SPR? No fucking chance. I don’t think many people would argue that point, so why didn’t Tom take it home? Three reasons:

1) The Oscars aren’t scientific – people are asked to measure something that can’t really be measured – the wisdom of crowds plays in here and momentum and buzz can definitely swing the vote in someone’s favor
2) Great artists inevitably end up competing mostly with themselves – Hanks had already won twice, so regardless of how good he was in SPR, are they really ready to make him a three-time winner?
3) Extension of point 2, the Oscars are highly political and the best person doesn’t always win. Case in point, Hanks won the Oscar in 1993 for Philadelphia when Liam Neeson was far, far, far superior in Schindler’s List. However, Hanks was an industry favorite who’d been around forever and stretched his range considerably with Philadelphia; that equals an Oscar nine times out of ten, regardless of merit. This gets the Oscars into trouble sometimes though, flash forward to 1998, Hanks should’ve won for SPR, but they can’t give it to him b/c they already gave him one five years ago for a lesser role. And round and round and round it goes…

With that said, let’s take a look back at every best acting Oscar from the last 15 years (starting in 1993 and moving forward), take the politics out of it and redistribute the Oscars accordingly.


1993
Nominees:
Daniel Day-Lewis -- In the Name of the Father
Laurence Fishburne -- What's Love Got to Do with It
Tom Hanks -- Philadelphia
Anthony Hopkins -- The Remains of the Day
Liam Neeson -- Schindler's List

Did Win: Hanks
Should’ve Won: Neeson

Liam in a landslide. When was the last time you watched Schindler’s List? I own this movie and try to throw it in once a year or so, an incredible experience from start to finish that is absolutely carried by Liam. Lots of good performances on this list including the aforementioned Hanks who is absolutely fantastic, but no one can top Liam this year.

(Also, side note, let’s take Hopkins off the list (when he was in his prime Lecter, “nominate me or I’ll fucking eat your face bones” phase and give Bill Murray in Groundhog’s Day the final nomination. Thanks)

1994
Nominees:
Morgan Freeman -- The Shawshank Redemption
Tom Hanks -- Forrest Gump
Nigel Hawthorne -- The Madness of King George
Paul Newman -- Nobody's Fool
John Travolta -- Pulp Fiction

Did Win: Hanks
Should’ve Won: Hanks

Crazy, crazy year, with three of the most rewatchable movie of all time - Pulp, Shawshank and Forrest - all up for best pic (little did TBS know how much cash they’d one day make from the 1994 movie year). My heart pulls a little to Freeman, whose performance gets better and better as the years go on, but Hanks rightfully wins this one. A perfect movie for Hanks to win his first Oscar – has an actor in history ever been able to move back and forth between comedy and drama as well as him? This performance is the absolute apex of that.

1995
Nominees:
Nicolas Cage -- Leaving Las Vegas
Richard Dreyfuss -- Mr. Holland's Opus
Anthony Hopkins -- Nixon
Sean Penn -- Dead Man Walking
Massimo Troisi -- Il Postino

Did Win: Cage
Should’ve Won: Cage

I can’t stand Cage’s head and am tempted to give this to Penn, but I know how much better he was in Mystic River so am fine waiting a few years and besides, Cage really does knock this role out of the park. I’m always wary of roles that scream “Oscar!” – b/c I think the Academy has a tendency to reward the role over the performance sometimes (this peaked in 1999 when Hilary Swank won for Boys Don’t Cry over the far superior Annette Bening in American Beauty) – however, Cage is worthy here, eliciting empathy and disdain in equal measure.

(Also, side tangent, Mr. Holland’s Opus is one of the dumbest movies of all time – I hate, hate, HATE this movie. I can’t believe Dreyfuss got nominated for this cheesy pile of drool. Really? He’s better than Hanks in Apollo 13? Better than Morgan Freeman in Seven? Better than Denzel in Crimson Tide? Better than Pacino or De Niro in Heat? Or De Niro again in Casino? What a fucking stupid nomination.)

1996
Nominees:
Tom Cruise -- Jerry Maguire
Ralph Fiennes -- The English Patient
Woody Harrelson -- The People vs. Larry Flynt
Geoffrey Rush -- Shine
Billy Bob Thornton -- Sling Blade

Did Win: Rush
Should’ve Won: Rush

Strange year, strange films, none of them particularly memorable, good performances on this list but nothing earth shattering. I still think Rush should win even though his performance is more of a supporting role.

1997
Nominees:
Matt Damon -- Good Will Hunting
Robert Duvall -- The Apostle
Peter Fonda -- Ulee's Gold
Dustin Hoffman -- Wag the Dog
Jack Nicholson -- As Good as It Gets

Did Win: Jack
Should’ve Won: Duvall

Now this is a powerhouse year; 4 legends and 1 upstart who has since proven to be one of the best in his generation. As great as Jack was in this movie and in every movie for that matter, this performance hasn’t aged as well as it should have. Parts of the movie seem a bit contrived and the chemistry between him and Hunt falls flat at times. On the other side, you have Duvall, who gives one of the most electric, intense, complicated performances in the last 15 years. Dark, driven, manic, he’s off his fucking ass in this movie.

1998
Nominees:
Roberto Benigni -- Life Is Beautiful
Tom Hanks -- Saving Private Ryan
Ian McKellen -- Gods and Monsters
Nick Nolte -- Affliction
Edward Norton -- American History X

Did Win: Benigni
Should’ve Won: Hanks

Now, with everything I’ve said about Hanks you’d think this would’ve been an easy call, but its actually one of the more difficult due to the absolute brilliance of Norton in American History X. An absolute transformation, it’s one of those performances that are so good it forever changes the way you look at the actor, once someone has scared you that much, like Hopkins in Lambs, a piece of that role always stays with you – do you know what I mean? Anyway, Norton is fucking fantastic and Benigni, even though he proved to be an annoying little homunculus after he won, is devastating in Life, but Hanks is just too good in Ryan. He deservingly gets his second Oscar.

1999
Nominees:
Russell Crowe -- The Insider
Richard Farnsworth -- The Straight Story
Sean Penn -- Sweet and Lowdown
Kevin Spacey -- American Beauty
Denzel Washington -- The Hurricane

Did Win: Spacey
Should’ve Won: Spacey

This is another tough one, I didn’t like the Insider when I saw it for the first time, but caught it again recently and was totally blown away by how brilliant Crowe is in this movie. He’s such a fucking dickwad that we forget how ridiculously talented he is, and he’s lights out here. Penn is also incredible in Lowdown, a criminally underrated performance in a criminally underrated movie. However, we’ve got career-defining performances for these two gentlemen coming up in a few years, so I’m comfortable skipping them here. Spacey is brilliant in American Beauty, another movie that has aged fantastically well. I tend to undervalue his performance in this movie sometimes b/c I really feel that Annette Bening is the heart and soul of the film and the fact that she didn’t win (losing to Swank as I mentioned above) somehow rubbed off on my appraisal of Spacey’s performance (does this make sense or do I need help?) Anyway, Spacey is picture perfect in this movie – honestly he doesn’t even need to appear on screen, his narration is so good and tells you so much about the character that he’d win the Oscar just for that.

Coming Tomorrow: Part II

Box Office Recap: 6/30/08

1.
Wall-E
Actual: $63 million

2.
Wanted
Actual: $51 million

Was a little too busy to post predictions last week, but still wanted to do a quick recap and make a few observations on the box office as we wrap up June and head into July.

- Another Pixar movie, another metacritic score in the 90s, another $60+ opening. Just incredible. Pixar is kind of like Radiohead, they’ve been so good for so long that every time they put out an album you think, “Ok, maybe this is the one that will suck.” But it never happens; they hit everything out of the park. What's more, Pixar has officially entered the “Spielberg zone” – when you see a trailer for a movie, if it starts with something to the effect of, “from the mind of Steven Spielberg," you immediately know it’ll be good and want to see it. Think about the way Wall-E was marketed, no dialogue, no story really, just a cute little robot chirping around picking up garbage – and it still opens with $60+. What an amazing brand.

- Wanted opened with a massive, massive $51 – making back 2/3 of its $75 million budget on the first weekend and also registering: the 2nd biggest non #1 opening weekend of all time and the 7th highest opening for an R rated movie. Major numbers from a movie that no one really knew what to make of a few weeks back. Also, all the talk so far this summer has been about Iron Man and Indiana – but how about Morgan Freeman and Angelina Jolie? With Wanted as well as Dark Knight (Freeman, looking like a sure bet for $250+) and Fuck You Panda (Jolie, currently at $180 and holding strong) – they look like they’ll have the biggest summers for an actor and an actress, crazy, huh? Morgan Freeman has really had an amazing career; do you realize that Wanted and Dark Knight will be his 11th and 12th $100 million films? To put that in perspective, Murphy, Ford and Hanks, the three biggest stars in terms of overall domestic box office, have 13, 11 and 15 $100 million films respectively. In any list of top box office stars of all time, Freeman is right there – crazy.

A couple of things I’m wondering:
- Will Indy eventually top Iron Man for biggest movie of the summer? It looked definite a few weeks ago but Indy is slowing down
- Will Hancock be a bigger hit than Batman?
- Will Batman be the last movie of the summer to cross $150 million? Look at the release schedule post Dark Knight – pretty weak.
- Is Angelina a bigger overall star than Brad? I think the difference between them is pretty negligible, but the Oscar might push the debate in Angelina’s favor…

Indy update:

Indy 4
Production: $185
Marketing / distribution: $115
Total Budget: $300
Worldwide Gross to Date: $713
Net Profit: $413

The Players:
Paramount: $139
Ford: $91
Spielberg: $91
Lucas: $91

Box Office Recap

1.
Hulk
Prediction: $48 million
Actual: $55 million

2.
The Happening
Prediction: $29 million
Actual: $30 million

Hulk exceeded my expectations, opening with a very solid $55 domestically and about $85 million worldwide – with a budget of $150 though it’s got a little work to do to make a profit. Ang Lee’s Hulk (Otherwise known as the Hulk movie that the current Hulk movie is pretending never happened) opened with $63 but cooled significantly, finishing with a very pedestrian $132. Will be interesting to see how this movie holds with some big fish coming up in next few weeks…

The Happening opened with a very solid $30 million, earning back half of its production budget in the first frame. The reviews for this movie are HORRIBLE so am dubious of its long-term strength, but with about $50 million worldwide in week 1 should continue M. Night’s track record of profitability.

Will be another fun Friday with Get Smart opening up against the Love Guru, until then…

As Indy inches closer to being in the top 30 all time, let’s recap where everyone stands:

Indy 4
Production: $185
Marketing / distribution: $115
Total Budget: $300
Worldwide Gross to Date: $634
Net Profit: $334

The Players:
Paramount: $129
Ford: $68
Spielberg: $68
Lucas: $68

Hulk v. The Happening

1.
Hulk
$48 million

2.
The Happening
$29 million

Interesting slate of movies this week: Hulk v. The Happening.

Hulk comes five years after the widely panned Ang Lee / Eric Bana version, do people want to give this franchise another shot? Are there still Hulk fans out there? Is this movie just a weird stopgap between Iron Man and The Dark Knight? How much is Edward Norton being paid for this? I’m dying to hear about his deal, does anyone know of a site where you can track this kind of stuff? Also, is it just me, or is Hulk the most phallic thing of all time? He gets aroused and he gets bigger, isn’t that what a penis does?

The Happening. I have tons and tons of thoughts on this one, so much so that I’m going to bullets for this:

- Three weeks ago, the studio announced it was opening this as an R-rated movie, the first time an M. Night movie hasn’t been PG-13. This could mean a number of things obviously, but my take is that they saw the movie and thought it was absolutely awful, knew they’d never make their money back and decided to pump up the shock value and position the movie as a gory, gruesome Saw-like movie.

- There's this strange conception that all of M Night's movies are colossal failures. However, when you look at the numbers this is totally false. First off, his movies always make money; Lady In the Water was his first movie not have a worldwide net higher than $100 million (yes you read that correctly) Due to a combination of factors, mostly b/c a) his movies are fairly cheap and b) he’s still riding the Sixth Sense wave – M. Night is actually one of the most successful directors of the last ten years. Take a look at this list plotting the worldwide gross of his films vs. production budgets:

Lady In the Water
Budget: $70 million
Worldwide Gross: $72 million
Net: $2 million

The Village
Budget: $60 million
Worldwide Gross: $256 million
Net: $196 million

Signs
Budget: $72 million
Worldwide Gross: $408 million
Net: $336 million

Unbreakable
Budget: $75 million
Worldwide Gross: $248 million
Net: $173 million

The Sixth Sense
Budget: $40 million
Worldwide Gross: $673 million
Net: $633 million

Totals (for 5 movies)
Budget: $317 million
Worldwide Gross: $1.66 billion
Net: $1.3 billion

- $1.3 billion! The fucking guy has made the studios more than a billion dollars since 1999! I remember reading the story about M. Night throwing a tantrum when Disney didn’t like his script for Lady in The Water and demanding out of his deal so he could bring the movie to Warner Bros, and thinking, what a fucking prick this guy is. But look at the numbers, the guy made a billion dollars for Disney and they still don’t trust his value, no wonder he stormed off.

- The thing with M. Night is that more than anything else he’s a victim of his own success. Not only was Sixth Sense a massive, massive hit – over $600 million net! – but it was nominated for a bunch of Oscars and everyone crowned M. Night the new Spielberg. So everything he does is judged by those accolades and that kind of success is nearly impossible to replicate (unless of course you are actually Spielberg who could direct a Cheetos commercial and make $100 million)

- Now, with all that said, I think the Happening looks absolutely awful. Lady in the Water looked horrible and the Village is in my top ten worst movies off all time. However, his name is still good, the R factor will help, and horror movies always seem to open well – The Strangers opened with 20+ a few weeks ago – something that M. Night should easily be able to top. I’m giving him $29 but wouldn't be surprised with high 30s, low 40s

- I know I say this every time he’s in a movie, but are we just supposed to just forget about the Funky Bunch? I mean, are we really supposed to take this guy seriously? I’ll never get this…