The box office is always a riddle to me, but I rarely get it this wrong. Despite finishing on top in a weak week, "Snakes on a Plane" managed to only scare up a fairly measly $15.3 million at the box office.
Did these people see the same movie I did (well, duh, the short answer to that one is they didn't see at all!)
I've already reviewed "SoaP," so I'll just sum it up by saying I found it to be a thoroughly fun, albeit extremly crude at times, summer popcorn flick. So, what happened?
Two things are possible, I think. The first is that there just isn't the wide audience out there for campy, very funny horror flicks. I was equally surprised early this year by how poorly "Slither," the ultra-funny horror flick starring the great Nathan Fillion, fared at the box office. Maybe these movies are purely for geeks.
The second, and more likely, possibility is that a lot of people were simply put off by all the hype. Personally, I ate it all up and laughed all the way. The idea that something as simple as "SoaP" could become such a fan phenomenon was just fun to watch. But it's very possible many people were put off by this, and therefore decided to just stay home.
There are two silver linings here. No. 1: We still got to see the movie we wanted, and it was a blast. No. 2: Any impulse Hollywood would have had to cookie-cutter mass produce "B" fare will be halted, at least for now.
I still think "SoaP" will have a long run in theaters as positive word of mouth spreads to the sceptics, but I guess we'll have to wait and see.
A rare honor for Tim Allen
I've seen this posted at other blogs, but I just wanted to add my hearty congratulations to Tim Allen for the landmark achievement with his new film "Zoom."
It seems that only seven movies before yours have managed to compile the 0% rating from critics over at Rotten Tomatoes. Congrats, indeed.
I was trying to find out what movies proceeded you in this hall of shame, but I could only find a partial list. You'll find fine company in Roberto Benigni's live-action "Pinocchio," "Ballistic: Ecks vs. Sever," "Son of the Mask" and "Superbabies; Baby Geniuses 2." (Apparently one critic out there gave a good review to the original "Superbabies." You know who you are, so just step forward and confess.)
If anyone knows the other two movies to earn this dubious distinction, please let me know.
As for Mr. Allen, get your Razzie speech ready now. I have a feeling you're gonna be a multiple winner this year.
I, for one, am fairly excited about the OutKast flick opening this weekend, "Idlewild" (though not as nearly as I am about "Beerfest"! This is gonna be a good weekend for flicks.)
John Anderson, a very honest and reliable critic, has a review of "Idlewild" up at Variety's site. Here are some excerpts from his very positive review:
"Idlewild," aka "The OutKast Project," achieves magic - something sorely missing from so many movies these days - and does so via a philosophy of respect, but not reverence, for what's come before it; it never recycles, it just reimagines. With its two platinum-selling pop stars, propulsive musicality and a something-for-everyone approach leading to a huge payoff, pic should not only lure its target fan base but achieve crossover success as well.
Fashioning his musical fable like a Warner Bros. Prohibition drama in which production numbers erupt at the local nightclub, writer-director Bryan Barber has absorbed all the gangster tropes, along with a healthy dose of Coen brothers' irrationality, "Cotton Comes to Harlem" comedy and Terry Gilliam-style animation.
"Idlewild" may not succeed entirely in terms of story structure, dramatic motivation or acting (both Andre Benjamin and Antwan Patton are good, although Patton is the one the camera loves). But it has such ineffable charm and pure entertainment value, it's hard to imagine auds going only once.
Sounds great to me. OutKast gets better with each album, so this should just be a wild ride.
Monday, August 21, 2006
Posted by Reel Fanatic at 7:23 AM