2010 is the worst year for movies ever, just like every year before it.

Yes, yes, 2010 is the worst year for movies EVER, screams Joe Queenan of The Wall Street Journal. There have been plenty of years where I felt 'this is the worst year/summer ever', especially as, yes, I've gotten older. Part of it is nostalgia, as I remember the years past through rose-colored glasses. I remember the great moviegoing experiences (my dad taking me to a jampacked advance-night screening of Jurassic Park... best moviegoing experience of my life) more than the bad ones (my dad taking me to see an afternoon matinee of Airheads that had me feeling guilty that it turned out to be such a stinker). But looking back at years that I didn't care for, there are still more than a few movies that are so good that they all-but redeem the year. We forget about the bad movies and only remember the good ones. When people discuss 1972, they discuss The Godfather, Deliverance, Sleuth, and Sounder. They do not mention Horror at Snape Island, The Revengers, or The Last of the Red Hot Lovers. When we think of 1996, we remember (depending on our taste) Fargo, Independence Day, Paradise Lost: The Child Murders At Robin Hood Hills, Get on the Bus, Mission: Impossible, Big Night, or Star Trek: First Contact. But I'm betting most of us haven't given a second thought to Sargent Bilko, Eddie, or Striptease in fourteen years.

Sure, I may have complained that summer 2001 was a stinker, but who among us really knew how wonderful The Lord of the Rings: Fellowship of the Ring was going to be just a few months later? I would never think for a moment to trade away the crap of Pearl Harbor or Planet of the Apes if it meant losing the sheer triumph of The Lord of the Rings or the curtain raiser that is Harry Potter and the Sorcerer's Stone. 2010 has been one of the lesser years in my memory, but it has still given us Toy Story 3, Inception, How to Train Your Dragon, Mother, the awesomely awful Mega Piranha, and Winter's Bone. When looking back over a year in film, we don't need every film to be good, we just need an occasional Pulp Fiction or Being John Malkovich to remind us why we're still in this game. If it means we have to sit through Iron Man 2 to appreciate Inception, it's worth it. If experiencing Toy Story 3 means that I'll also have to watch the upcoming Alphas and Omegas, it's a fair trade to me.

Also of note, as Lauren Feder seems to acknowledge after Queenen's screed, many of the alleged classics that Joe Queenen brings up were NOT universally beloved in their time. Robin Hood: Prince of Thieves got mixed reviews at best, with many complaining about its darkness, violence, and the weakness of its lead performance. The Matrix only became a 'classic' after the fact, as frankly do most films considered classics (would you believe that the New York Times panned Goldfinger back in 1964 because Bond didn't get laid enough?). And as for 'no Slumdog Millionaire on the horizon', part of the appeal of Slumdog Millionaire is that it took audiences somewhat by surprise. We (in general) rarely see the classics as classics when they are first released. We overpraise American Beauty and trash Fight Club, not realizing which one will truly stand the test of time. We pan There's Something About Mary only to then complain that Me, Myself, and Irene isn't as great as There's Something About Mary. Today's Marilyn Manson is tomorrow's Beatles.

We complain that things are worse/different than they were in our youth, and then our kids will do the same when they are our age. There are just as many good movies made now as there were at any time. Granted, you may have to seek them out. You may have to go to an arthouse theater, you may have to order IFC On Demand, you might have to watch them on cable, or you may have to troll around Netflix for a minute. But the quality is out there and more accessible than ever before. When 2010 is discussed and remembered, we won't be talking about Jonah Hex, The Bounty Hunter, The Last Airbender, Sex and the City 2, or The Wolfman. We'll be fondly remembering the dozen or so movies we loved from this year, be they Toy Story 3, Inception, The Kids are All Right, something great coming this fall, or some other little gem that only you 'truly appreciated' (I say Shanghai Knights is one of the best films of 2003 and I'll challenge anyone who disagrees). We remember the movies that are worth remembering. Everything else is collateral damage. After all, we need to sit through Percy Jackson and Olympians: the Lightning Thief to truly appreciate how special the Harry Potter series really is. To quote one of the last decade's very best films, if everyone's special, then no one is.

Scott Mendelson

Does Hollywood really think that the world is going to end in 2012?

A friend and I were discussing the glut of major releases over the next two years, and he mentioned something a little disconcerting. There are almost no releases yet slated for 2013. In 2011 we have (among others) The Green Hornet, Thor, Captain America, Kung Fu Panda 2, Cars 2, Pirates of the Caribbean: On Stranger Tides, Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows part II, Transformers 3, Green Lantern, The Hangover 2, Mission: Impossible IV, Sherlock Holmes 2, The Smurfs, Rise of the Apes, X-Men: First Class, Winnie the Pooh, Cowboys Vs. Aliens, the new Muppet movie, and Twilight Saga: Breaking Dawn part I. In 2012, we have The Avengers, Madagascar 3, Battleship, Men in Black 3, Star Trek 2, Spider-Man 2.0, Ice Age: Continental Drift, Batman 3, and Monsters Inc 2. What's already scheduled for 2013? In an era when studios lay claim to prime release dates years and years in advance, there is but a single release slotted for 2013: Disney's Reboot Ralph, slated for March 23rd, 2013. No official word for Jonathan Nolan's Superman, Iron Man 3, or David Goyer's Wonder Woman. No word on Twilight Saga: Breaking Dawn part II. Does Hollywood know something we don't?

Scott Mendelson

Inception humor...

All three of these clips will be after the jump, as the last one basically spoils the end of the picture. The first two are trailer mash-ups, one using Toy Story 3 and the other one, well it's called Bill and Ted's Excellent Inception. As always, trailer mash-ups work best with animation, as you can almost make the lips match up, as this Toy Story 2/Requiem For a Dream is probably the best such mash-up ever created. What's amusing about these new fake trailers is that the music in the Inception trailer, the stuff that kicks in at 1:12, is so powerful that these joke trailers actually work as the real thing. The third is an 'extended ending', which I'll leave you to discover. Enjoy...

See more funny videos and funny pictures at CollegeHumor.

NY Rep Anthony Weiner says what we've all been thinking.

In case you're wondering, here is the specific issue which brought about the above fiery condemnation.

Scott Mendelson

Learning the wrong lesson: Columbia hires Len Wiseman to remake Total Recall.

Avatar made nearly $3 billion worldwide because it was a good movie, something that tapped into a worldwide cultural zeitgeist, engaged in true non-denominational spirituality, created a compelling romantic spectacle, and delivered incredible action sequences in breathtaking 3-D, right? No, apparently the only reason that Avatar made any money at all is because it was in 3-D. So, over the last year, studios everywhere have been rushing like mad to convert each and every single tent-pole picture into some form of 3-D. Because obviously Alice in Wonderland and Toy Story 3 would have been complete flops had they been presented in 2-D, right? Well, once again proving that Hollywood can always be counted on to learn the wrong lesson, the first major blowback from the success of Inception is a remake. Yep, Inception didn't become a word of mouth sensation because it was an original, intelligent, and thoughtful action picture in an era of remakes and reboots. No, Inception is a hit because it's about dreams. So the smartest way to cash in on its success is to remake Total Recall?

According to a press release, Columbia is in final talks with Len Wiseman, the man behind the Underworld films and Live Free or Die Hard, to helm a remake/reboot/re-whatever of Total Recall. That 1990 Paul Verhoeven classic is based on the Philip K. Dick short story "We Can Remember It For You Wholesale". It's also arguably the best film that Arnold Schwarzenegger ever made. Sure, we can argue for Terminator, Terminator 2, True Lies, or Kindergarten Cop, but Total Recall is still one of the brainiest action pictures to come out of mainstream Hollywood in the last twenty years. It's also one of the most violent R-rated films ever released, and every bit as ahead of its time regarding the corporate takeover of government (ie - fascism) as Robocop and Starship Troopers.

Sure we'll probably hear arguments about how this new version will 'hew closer to the original story', but considering that the original story is about twenty pages long, I'm guessing that this new version will either be a straight remake of the original film or perhaps something resembling the Showtime TV series that ran for a single 22-episode season in 1999 (if you've seen it, feel free to let me know how it played). Point being, it is beyond depressing that the studios are reacting to a major success of an original film by attempting not to create their own original properties but to simply mine their vaults for slightly similar films that can be remade ('Oooh... this one is about dreams too!'). Once again, Hollywood learns the wrong lesson, even when the most obvious conclusion (Inception was a good and original film that stood out in a sea of strip-mined adaptations) is the correct one.

Scott Mendelson

Like they never left: Road Runner and Wile E. Coyote still got it.

Yes, I laughed out loud, which is the biggest compliment I could pay. I couldn't care less about Cats and Dogs 2: The Revenge of Kitty Galore, but it may be worth checking out purely for "Coyote Falls": the Road Runner/Wile E. Coyote short that proceeds it, the first of three to be released in theaters over the next few months. We may be taking Allison to a 2-D showing of said sequel, so hopefully the short will be available in 2-D as well as 3-D. Point being, if it's there and she doesn't laugh, it may be grounds for adoption.

Scott Mendelson

Thor Comic Con trailer is leaked online. Coming to the CW in Fall 2011...

This movie probably cost $200 million. This thing is five minutes of seemingly finished footage, much of it from major sequences, and with the intent to appease the core audience that will help build the 'buzz' for this very expensive adventure. The cast they've lined up is pretty impressive. And yet, the best thing I can say about the footage above is that Kat Dennings looks even hotter with nerd glasses. The action feels generic (ooh, exploding cars and black-suited men being beaten up!'), the acting is pretty bland (even Hopkins, who usually relishes scenery-chewing pulp fiction, appears asleep at the wheel), and the whole film still feels like a very expensive CW TV pilot. And let's face it, most of the Asgard stuff, with Thor in full suit and/or all the various gods and goddesses playing Shakespeare in space will probably just be in the first and last reels. This movie will likely play out like the 1990 Captain America movie and the 1987 Masters of the Universe picture: 10% Thor in costume kicking ass against the Loki and his goons, 90% Chris Hemsworth in plain clothes running around a city or small town trying to solve his own issues. It's a good thing Thor opens the summer next year, because that's the only reason it will open relatively well, unless of course Marvel is intentionally trying to make the movie look worse than it is. As always, we'll see.

Scott Mendelson

Saw VII 3D debuts a 3-D poster.

Zack Snyder's Sucker Punch gets a Comic Con teaser.

Well this looks like something that will actually be worth the IMAX admission ticket. I have no idea if this will have any value beyond the razzle dazzle visuals, although Zack Snyder generally doesn't set out to make soulless creations. Dawn of the Dead was a character-driven and emotionally engaging horror remake, and Watchmen had at least some of the emotional pull of the original Alan Moore graphic novel (especially in the first act). Sure, 300 was pretty thin stuff, but it certainly tapped into a zeitgeist. Even his upcoming cartoon, Legend of the Guardians, looks to aim for more than visceral thrills. Still, even if Sucker Punch plays like Alice in Wonderland meets 300, the cast alone will be worth it. We've got Emily Browning, Vanessa Hudgsens, Jamie Chung, Abbie Cornhesh, and the vastly underrated Jena Malone. In the grown ups corner, we have Carla Gugino, Jon Hamm, and the equally under appreciated Scott Glenn. Here's hoping that Sucker Punch gives both underloved thespians a chance to shine.

Scott Mendelson

Yogi Bear gets a poster.

This actually screened this week somewhere in LA (don't remember the location), but since my daughter is not between the ages of four and ten, attending wasn't really an option. Not that this one is high on my interest list anyway. I've said this for years, but I still think that Warner Bros is missing a golden opportunity. There's only one Yogi Bear movie I want to see, and it's something more appropriate for Lionsgate or Screen Gems. If you're going to do Yogi Bear, do an R-rated horror picture, involving the seemingly quaint Jellystone Park being terrorized by an apparent father-son team of murderous bears. Ranger Rick is brought in to deal with the bloodshed, as no one wants to close the park during prime tourist season. But Rick soon learns that this murderous duo is in fact smarter than the average bear. "This Christmas... pray he only steals your pic-a-nic basket."

Scott Mendelson

Four new Green Lantern character posters spell out not-so secret message.

Click on either of those two to enlarge them. I'd be lying if I told you that I was excited for this film on any level other than my fandom for director Martin Campbell, but this is an absolutely key project if Warner Bros. wants to truly expand the DC Comics film universe beyond Batman and the occasional Superman picture. I assume that we'll see a trailer pretty darn soon, be it with this weekend's Cats and Dogs 2: the Revenge of Kitty Galore or perhaps attached to Scott Pilgrim Vs. the World in three weeks. The 90 second clip shown at Comic Con did not inspire the levels of press ink afforded to Marvel's Thor trailer and Captain America teaser, so Warner has its work cut out for it at this point. On the other hand, my wife watched Green Lantern: First Flight last year and inexplicably became a Green Lantern fan, so it should be pretty easy to drag her to this one when the time comes.

Scott Mendelson

Michelle Rodriguez says NO to the 'token female role'.

Interviewed by Drew Morton at The Playlist over the weekend while promoting Battle: Los Angeles at Comic Con, Michelle Rodriguez was asked how she felt regarding her being typecast as the 'tough chick'.

"Oh baby, I was typecast the minute I did a film called, Girlfight years ago. That has nothing to do with anything, it just to do with... you allow yourself to be typecast. If I decided I didn't want to be typecast tomorrow I'd just go do an indie film where I play some poor girl who goes through some excruciating experience and win myself an award for crying or being raped [breaks into laughter] or playing someone with mental illness. But at the end of the day I'm not in it for the acting. If I were in it for the acting then I would be worried about people not giving me the opportunity to express my vast array of emotions on the screen.

I could give two shits. I only wanna be someone or I respect or someone that I consider interesting or fun. I'm here to entertain people and make a statement about female empowerment and strength and that's what I've done for the last 10 years, and people can call it typecast, but I pigeonholed myself and I put myself in that box for saying no to everything else that came on my plate. Saying no to the girlfriend, saying no to the girl that gets captured, no to this, no to that. and eventually I just got left with the strong chick that's always being killed and there's nothing wrong with that."

I don't entirely agree with everything she says in the first paragraph (there's nothing demeaning about Jodie Foster's work in The Accused), but it's no secret that actors and actresses often search for roles that allow them to be brutalized onscreen or overcome dramatic circumstances with or without a handicap. But pretty much everything she says in the second paragraph is spot on, and something I've discussed any number of times. It's not every actresses job to make statements about female empowerment, but it's lovely to see someone who has set out to do that while actually walking the walk ('oh, my character is so strong, independent, not just a damsel in distress, even during the extended scene where I'm bound and gagged over a swiftly approaching buzz saw').

It's nice to see that Rodriquez gets it, and it's even nicer to see another actress who has built a stable career without having to play the stereotypical female roles (token love interest, token hostage, etc). The other example I always toss out is Hillary Swank, who has won two Oscars and basically stuck to star vehicles or leading roles in prestigious ensemble casts. What other actresses have made their way in Hollywood without having to pad their resume with 'the love interest' or 'the strong, independent, not-at-all a damsel in distress who still gets kidnapped in the third act'? The only other obvious examples that come to mind are Ellen Page and the gold standard, Jodie Foster.

Scott Mendelson

A sign that Salt was butchered in post production? Andre Braugher is fifth-billed in nearly wordless cameo in a pointless role.

Andre Braugher is doing okay these days. He may not be a multi-millionaire, but he's been working quite steadily since his star-making role in Homicide: Life on the Street ended in May of 1999. He's been a lead in a handful of TV series (Gideon's Crossing, Hack, Thief, Men of a Certain Age, Miami Medical), and he's had supporting roles in several movies (Frequency, Poseidon, Fantastic Four: Rise of the Silver Surfer, The Mist). He may not have an Oscar nomination like Melissa Leo, but he has several Emmys and a consistent flow of featured roles. Point being, he is not so desperate for work that he would intentionally sign on for nearly wordless cameo at the end of a random summer action picture. Yet that's Detective Frank Pembleton himself as the Secretary of Defense in the last reel of Salt.

Not only is he in the film right at the very end, but he gets fifth billing for his role that consists of two full sentences and a brief moment of heroism. There are other signs that Phillip Noyce's Salt was heavily tinkered with in the editing room. It barely runs 90 minutes, its PG-13 yet feels R-rated in content and intent, the seemingly key role of Salt's husband is nearly non-existent, third-billed Chiwetel Ejiofor pretty much disappears for the final third of the picture, and there are several moments (including bits of Jolie having sex with someone, possibly her husband) that are in the trailer but not in the final film. But the biggest sign of distress in the post-production phase is the shocking and shockingly brief appearance of Andre Braugher in a role that any extra could have filled.

Oh well, Andre Braugher still gets paid regardless, so here's hoping some of those missing scenes show up on the DVD. The only example that comes to mind off hand is the 2006 interracial romance Something New, which featured John Ratzenberger, as Simon Baker's father, in a wordless cameo at the very end of the picture. Does anyone else have instances of seemingly notable actors appearing in glorified cameos in meaningless roles?

Scott Mendelson

In the 'what were they thinking?' department: the Salt soundtrack.

Salt is pretty much what it is advertised as, a mid-to-late 90s throwback, a star-driven action thriller that uses its alleged real-world narratives (including an accidentally topical plot involving Russian spies) to obfuscate its patented absurdity. The picture shines in its first half, but plummets in its second when its plot goes from almost plausible to completely nuts. Simply put, the film would have been far more effective if the stakes were not so 'the whole world is at stake' high. When the plot centers around an attempted assassination of a foreign dignitary and the possible revelation of Russian spies in the CIA, there is a certain real-world plausibility that also helps create suspense. Point being, said foreign national might actually get killed during the course of the picture, but we're pretty sure that (being vague to avoid spoilers) the entire world is not going to be thrown into irreversible chaos, especially at the apparent hands of some pretty big movie stars. This isn't Dr. Strangelove or Fail Safe, it's a $75 million popcorn genre thriller starring one of the last remaining bankable action stars on the planet. But, warts and all, the film remains a pleasantly diverting B-movie. I imagine it will play smashingly on TNT for a Sunday afternoon matinee. But that doesn't excuse one of the most boneheaded soundtracks I've heard in a long time.

At least twice in the film that I heard, once in an action sequence at the climax of the second act and once at the very end of the movie, the score literally turns into the Inspector Gadget theme song. First off, we have a scene of Jolie's Salt skulking around and ruthlessly dispatching her enemies in slow-motion, but bloodless carnage. While Jolie shoots and blows up her foes, the soundtrack literally has a choir of some kind start chanting the characters name. Yes, that's right, the soundtrack literally has someone chanting "Salt! Salt! Salt! Salt!" as the alleged double/triple/quadruple agent goes about her killing business. I'm not sure who thought this was a good idea, but I defy anyone viewing this picture not to burst into giggles as they realize that this dead-serious political action picture has actually written a theme song more at home in the Adam West Batman TV show. It happens again right at the end of the picture, and it's every bit as head-slappingly funny there. I'd love to know what composer James Newton Howard was thinking, because even the cheesiest 1980s action picture never had the gall to throw in a theme song right-smack in the middle of the movie. It's an awesomely dumb moment and an otherwise inoffensively dumb picture.

Scott Mendelson

Inception holds strong, Salt opens well, Kids are All Right excels in wider release. Weekend box office (07/25/10).

It was another 'everybody wins!' weekend at the box office, as holdovers held well and openers opened to reasonable expectation-levels. Inception was again number one, with $42.7 million in its second weekend. That's a borderline-shocking drop of just 32%, which is almost unheard of in this day and age of mega-openers. At $142.8 million at the end of day ten, the film is far exceeding the ten-day totals of other huge-opening original films (Bruce Almighty, The Day After Tomorrow, 2012, and Signs). Only Avatar ($212 million) and Hancock ($167 million) had more at the end of their second weekends, and Hancock had a Wednesday holiday opening (its actual ten day total was just ahead of Inception, with $143.2 million).

Obviously this film is playing to the masses and becoming the sort of film that everyone has to see in order to participate in the discussion. Heck, my brother and his wife saw it last night, and they immediately called me to make sure they 'got it' (they did). The film had the 38th-biggest ten day total. The film's second weekend was 31st on the all-time list, 11th for a non-sequel, 7th for a live-action non-sequel, and the second-biggest second weekend for a live-action original not based on any known property (Avatar pulled in $75 million in its second weekend). Barring a complete collapse for reasons unknown, Chris Nolan's picture is looking at $250 million at this point. No one should be expecting Dark Knight grosses here, but I think this thing could get a lot closer to $300 million that any of us were reasonably expecting.

Opening in second place was the Angelina Jolie vehicle Salt. With $36 million, the film marked the fourth-largest live-action opening weekend in Jolie's career, behind Wanted ($50 million), Mr. and Mrs. Smith ($50 million), and Tomb Raider ($47 million). Some might crow about the disparity between number three and number four on the list, but Salt didn't have much to sell besides Angelina Jolie kicking ass and jumping off trucks. Mr. and Mrs. Smith had the tabloid-frenzy surrounding it, Tomb Raider was based on a popular video game, and Wanted had that whole 'curve the bullet' bit to sell in the ads. Salt was more of a throwback to the mid-90s star vehicles that director Phillip Noyce is known for (Patriot Games, Clear and Present Danger, The Saint, and The Bone Collector). Point being, from a modern marketing perspective, all the picture had was Angelina Jolie, so she gets credit for every dollar earned this weekend. The picture had a 2.88x weekend multiplier, meaning that it played all weekend to a wide audience (the demos were 53% female and 59% over 25). Point being, Angelina Jolie is one of the few truly bankable leading ladies left in this industry, and she's certainly one of the last action stars standing. Although Sony spent $110 million on this old-fashioned thriller, Salt will likely be a solid money maker in the long run (it's the kind of perfectly 'okay' B-movie that will run forever on TNT, USA, and FX).

Not to be outdone by Inception's 32% drop, the two current animated titans, Despicable Me and Toy Story 3, dropped just 27% and 25% in their respective third and sixth weekends. With $161 million in the till, Despicable Me will likely cross $200 million and become Universal's highest-grossing non-sequel since Bruce Almighty back in 2003 ( grossed King Kong$218 million in late 2005, a number this new cartoon should exceed). Currently, it's already the studio's highest-grossing film of any kind since The Bourne Ultimatum ($227 million) back in 2007. Toy Story 3 is just shy of $379 million, meaning that a $400 million+ final domestic gross is all-but inevitable. Both films will have to weather the loss of 3-D screens next weekend, when Warner Bros opens Cats and Dogs 2: The Revenge of Kitty Galore. Of course, since Disney's The Sorcerer's Apprentice is dropping fast (-45%, $42 million in twelve days), maybe Disney would be better off keeping screens for the Pixar toon. It's a shame, as the Nic Cage fantasy is actually funnier and more light-footed than I was expecting, and it probably would have found an audience if the marketing hadn't emphasized the least interesting things about it (the CGI creatures, the various magical fireballs, etc).

The only other wide opener this weekend was Fox's Ramona and Beezus, which is based on a kid-lit series that my wife has apparently read. Anyway, the Selena Gomez vehicle opened with $7.8 million on 2,719 screens. Nothing to write home about, but the film cost just $15 million to produce and will have a decent shelf life. In limited-release news, The Kids Are All Right expanded to 201 screens and racked up a $12,909 per-screen average. So far, the indie sensation of the summer has grossed $4.9 million in just three weeks. Cyrus crossed the $6 million mark this weekend and The Girl Who Played With Fire is at $2.9 million, meaning it will likely equal the $7 million domestic haul for The Girl With the Dragon Tattoo. In other holdover news, Twilight Saga: Eclipse is at $279 million, The Last Airbender is at $123 million, and Predators is at $46 million.

That's all for this weekend. Join us next weekend when Dinner For Schmucks tries to break out in a summer starved for comedies, one weekend before the much-publicized The Other Guys. The above-mentioned Cats and Dogs 2 to be the film that the first film wanted to be, since they know have the money and technology to really do an animal action film. And Zac Efron will hope that Charlie St. Cloud plays more like 17 Again and less like Me and Orson Welles. Until then, take care.

Scott Mendelson

Avengers assemble! Why Mark Ruffalo is a great choice (for any role).

I assume anyone reading this will be enough of a nerd to know all or most of the people in that photo, so I'm not going to list them. Well, it looks like Ed Norton is out and Mark Ruffalo is in. Now that it's official, I will simply say that Mark Ruffalo is one of my absolute favorite actors. Not only does he shine in indie material (You Can Count On Me, What Doesn't Kill You, The Kids are All Right), but he brings a believability and gravitas to the romantic comedies (13 Going On 30, Just Like Heaven, Rumor Has It), he occasionally appears in. Like Jason Bateman, he's seemingly incapable of giving a bad performance and incapable of not making his character appear absolutely human and three-dimensional now matter how thin the material might be. So yeah, I think Norton getting sacked was a lousy bit of insider business, but I'm all for Ruffalo getting some true mainstream exposure in a small supporting role (even if Hulk is the villain, I can't imagine that Bruce Banner will get much screentime). As for director Joss Whedon finally confirming his involvement, yay. I'm as much a fan of his Buffy the Vampire Slayer/Angel/Firefly stuff as anyone, and the man has shown that he can juggle ensemble casts and make cheap stuff look expensive. As the guy who made Serenity look like $150 million on a $40 million budget, it's obvious that Marvel wanted someone who could stretch their $300 million (?) budget as far as possible. Will the movie be good? I have no idea, but it's certainly the kind of thing that should be tried, if only once (I have no interest in a Justice League movie).

Scott Mendelson

Inception holds off strong-smelling Salt in Friday box office (07/24/10).

Inception was number one at the Friday box office yesterday, pulling in $13.2 million on its second Friday. That's a moderate drop of 39% from last Friday's $21.6 million opening day. The film has capitalized on strong word of mouth and the mydrid multiple interpretations that merited repeated viewings for those with that kind of time (I've seen just eight films in a theater twice since 2005, none since May 2008 when I took my dad to see Indiana Jones and the Crystal Skull). The Chris Nolan mindbender posted solid weekday numbers that propelled it over $100 million on Thursday (that's just seven days, which is pretty impressive for a movie that opened with $62 million). The second weekend drop should be somewhere around 35%, or a second weekend total of $40 million, which is incredibly impressive in this frontloaded box office age.

Not to be completely outdone, Angelina Jolie proved her worth as an action star once again, as Salt opened with $12.7 million on its first day. The film has scored Ms. Jole's fourth-biggest opening day for a live-action starring vehicle, behind Wanted ($19 million), Tomb Raider ($18 million), and Mr. and Mrs. Smith ($17.4 million). Point being, while Jolie may be iffy in a dramatic vehicle, she is worth whatever you can afford to pay her as an action star, and she may be one of the last true bankable action leads left in this industry. The other opener, Ramona and Beezus, grossed $3 million in its first day. Despicable Me held up remarkable well and grossed $8 million (-21%) in its third Friday, while The Sorcerer's Apprentice grossed $2.9 million (-46%) in its second Friday. More info when the weekend numbers are released tomorrow.

Scott Mendelson

Pirates of the Caribbean: On Stranger Tides gets a Jack Sparrow-centric teaser.

This is a relatively useless teaser, making me afraid yet again that the fourth picture is going to a non-stop Jack Sparrow-mugging show (think a Shrek sequel starring Donkey). Come what may, the original trtilogy made good use of Sparrow as a showy supporting character, with only Dead Man's Chest suffering from a bit too much Sparrow-sillyness. Obviously Disney will sell this film however they please, and their Depp-centric Alice in Wonderland campaign obviously worked wonders. The first three pictures are vastly underrated, shockingly complicated, character-driven, and ammoral for mainstream popcorn munchers (each picture has only two or three major set pieces per film). As I'm not a fan of Rob Marshall in the least, this gets a big fat 'we'll see'.

Scott Mendelson

Machete gets a red-band trailer...

Sorry for all the trailer stuff, it IS Comic Con this weekend after all. Anyway, I still don't get why Fox and/or Rodriguez is insisting on hiding Lindsey Lohan's appearance in this thing. It's not like her tabloid troubles of late are going to besmirch the reputation of this Oscar bait costume drama. We're talking about an exploitation action picture that's being sold as a throwback to the 1970s grindhouse era. I still think Robert De Niro is all wrong for this kind of comedy, and he's too big of a star to genuinely find himself in such a piece of schlock. It's a shame that Don Johnson doesn't get his 'introducing' credit this time around. This is at least more entertaining than the boring trailer that was attached to Predators two weeks ago, if not as amusing as the 'up yours Arizona' teaser that debuted back in May. I'm still on the fence, as the best trailer for this picture is still the original fake trailer that debuted with the Grindhouse double feature three years ago.

Scott Mendelson

Red gets another terrific trailer.

My goodness this looks like an astounding amount of fun. I love that John Malkovich is riffing on his low-key nutcase persona, I love that Helen Mirren has a machine gun or two, I love that Morgan Freeman is physically assaulting Richard Dreyfuss. I love that Ernest Borgnine and Brian Cox are in this thing too. My only complaint is that it appears that Bruce Willis gets most of the pure action setpieces, but that could just be marketing. Either way, this is another great trailer for what is now the film I'm most looking forward to this fall.

Scott Mendelson

Saw VII 3D, the apparent series finale, gets a teaser, and a new release date.

Nothing too unusual about this teaser, save for the fact that Jill Scott (John Kramer's wife) is in apparent peril this time around and there appears to be a trap rigged in public. Lionsgate has officially stated that this will be the final film in the Saw series, and here's hoping it's anywhere near as good as the stunningly good sixth installment. In bigger news, Lionsgate has apparently cried 'uncle', moving the film from its October 22nd release date to October 29th. The Saw franchise has operated out of the pre-Halloween weekend date since the second film, but it was apparently scared away by Paramount's Paranormal Activity 2. Those hoping for a rematch between the two properties are in for a disappointment. We can expect Universal to quickly announce the release date change of Wes Craven's My Soul to Take, which is currently occupying the Halloween weekend spot (where, ironically, the first Saw film opened back in 2004). Otherwise, moviegoers will have to choose between witnessing the finale of the most successful horror franchise in history, or discovering firsthand why Wes Craven was so willing to get screwed over by the Weinsteins yet again with Scream 4 (I'll give you a hint - 'blind item').

Scott Mendelson

Tron Legacy gets a theatrical trailer.

This looks pretty dazzling, but I can't help but wish that Disney would have just quit while they were ahead, with the gloriously moody and enticing teaser they released back in March. That looked like a teaser for a real movie, this looks more like a trailer for a film that eventually degenerates into a pointless light-and-magic show in the later acts. Still, if eye candy is all you want, I'm pretty sure this will be worth the IMAX 3-D admission price.

Scott Mendelson

That's Outrageous! Batman: The Brave and the Bold video game gets a trailer.

This wonderful looking side-scroller is coming out for the Nintendo DS and the Nintendo Wii on September 24th. Imagine, a Batman game that is actually fun to play, that doesn't require me to have an online strategy guide at my disposal at all times. Even cooler, imagine a Batman video game that my daughter (whose quickly becoming a fan of the new Super Friends storybooks) can actually play alongside me. To all those who complain that I'm impossible to buy gifts for (Endy-wa, Arcus-ma), take heed. Batman: The Brave and the Bold on Wii. Coming September 24th. That's a Friday.

Scott Mendelson

Dora the Explorer in Inception

It's been awhile since I laughed out loud at a viral video. I wish this were longer, as you could easily do even more with this concept (for example, Mal = Swiper the Fox), but this is a short and sweat little gem anyway. Enjoy.

Scott Mendelson

Ben Affleck's The Town gets a trailer.

I know, I'm a little tardy on this one, but life has been a bit hectic of late. I've defended Ben Affleck the actor for years, pointing out his good-to-great work in films like Changing Lanes (his best performance), State of Play, Boiler Room, and the director's cut of Daredevil. But his directorial debut, Gone Baby Gone, needs no defense, as it is one of the very best directorial debuts by a name actor in my lifetime. So, ironically, despite years being mocked as an actor, director Ben Affleck is being treated like royalty, with his next project considered one of the must-see events of the fall movie season. The Town certainly looks like a rock-solid genre picture. The cast (Affleck, Rebecca Hall, Jon Hamm, Blake Lively, Jeremy Renner, Chris Cooper), is sparkling, while the action scenes look engaging and intense. So why don't I feel more excited about it? Well, frankly, the story (about a bank robber who romances a traumatized hostage from a prior heist) feels a bit contrived. The second half of the trailer seems to degenerate into yet another 'but he cries at opera' type fantasy, where a murderous bank robber is really an okay guy because he tries to protect his new girlfriend from his criminal cohorts. I'll be the first to admit error if the film is less cliche than Warner's sell is indicating, but for now this gets a big, fat 'we'll see...'.

Scott Mendelson

Inception grosses $62 million opening weekend, while Sorcerer's Apprentice really shouldn't have opened on Wednesday. Weekend box office (07/18/10).

Playing like an old-fashioned general-audiences blockbuster, Chris Nolan's Inception opened at the higher end of realistic expectations with $62.8 million over the weekend. That's a 2.89x weekend multiplier, which means that front-loading was moderate but not severe (the film actually rose a token amount from Friday to Saturday). Word of mouth is relatively positive, as the film earned a B+ from Cinema Score but an A from the under-25 crowd (73% of the audience was under 34 years old and 54% was male). In a world filled with remakes, reboots, and franchise-intended adaptations (many retrofitted for 3-D), Inception stood out as an original 2-D would-be tent-pole not based on any existing property. It was, to paraphrase Nolan's last film, attempting to be an original film in an unoriginal time. As such, it scored the fifth-largest opening weekend ever for a completely original live-action picture, behind Avatar ($77 million), The Day After Tomorrow ($68.7 million), Bruce Almighty ($67.9 million), and 2012 ($65.2 million). If you take away holiday weekend-infused openings, then Inception is the third-such opening behind Avatar and 2012.

A big kudos to Warner's marketing department, as they spent a solid year selling this one and preparing audiences to dive into what could have been a very questionable blockbuster. By teasing the visuals and action beats, and then gradually explaining the plot in broad strokes, they made the film feel comprehensible and only slightly challenging while withholding the basic narrative and any plot twists. They sold the visual spectacle and alleged epic nature of the film. Ironically, like Star Trek, the full trailer was more 'epic' and emotionally-compelling than the actual film, using sweeping and powerful music that was not from the film itself. Most importantly, they bet that audiences would care about seeing a movie from 'that guy who directed The Dark Knight'. More than the visuals or even lead actor Leonardo DiCaprio (this far exceeds his $41 million debut of Shutter Island), the real star of the marketing campaign was director Chris Nolan. It was a risky bet, as Nolan's non-Batman pictures have not gotten anywhere near blockbuster territory. But Warner hoped that Nolan was enough of a known entity, with audiences having seen the Batman pictures and theoretically sampled at least one of his other mind-benders (Memento, Insomnia, The Prestige) over the last decade. With this opening, Chris Nolan becomes a member of a very rare club: the star director. Nolan joins James Cameron, Steven Spielberg, Tim Burton, M. Night Shyamalan, Michael Bay, Quintin Tarantino, Roland Emmerich, and Tyler Perry as a director who is famous and/or respected enough by general audiences to be a valuable marketing tool.

Where Inception goes from here is anybody's guess. Unless it completely collapses or turns into a true audience sensation, $190-230 million seems a reasonable finishing point. Such a finish would put it on the high-end of such original properties. Of the 105 movies that have crossed $200 million, twenty-five are live-action originals and ten are original animated films. While the film cost around $160 million, Warner is also betting on strong global business. It pulled in about $15 million in a small number of markets this weekend, but it expands overseas over the next three weeks). While the film feels fashioned as the kind of picture that demands repeat viewing, the exposition-heavy movie is pretty easy to comprehend the first time around, leaving repeats only for the hardcore fans who want to catch small tidbits and/or deeper meanings that they missed. But the movie has a real IMAX advantage, as it will keep those 150+ IMAX screens (ideal for second viewings) for nearly two months before Resident Evil: Afterlife 3-D snatches them away on September 10th, 2010. Regardless of the final gross, this proves that audiences will flock to original properties if the studio behind them has faith enough to spend the time and money to market the picture. Kudos to Warner Bros. for breaking through the reboot/remake glut with something new.

The only other major opener was Disney's The Sorcerer's Apprentice, which shot itself in the foot by opening on a Wednesday. I've said this time and time again, unless fans are camped around the block for the first midnight showing, your film does not have enough of a must-see factor to open on Wednesday. If audiences can wait to see the film at their convenience, they will certainly wait to see the film over the traditional Fri-Sun weekend. As such, all a Wednesday opening does is kneecap the three-day opening weekend, giving you a soft five-day total instead of a solid three-day total with the same number. So while The Sorcerer's Apprentice opened with about $24.8 million over five days, it pulled in only $17.6 million of that over the weekend. Yes, money is money, but perception is everything. Instead of saving some face with a soft-but-manageable $24 million three-day take, the film looks like an absolute disaster with a $17 million three-day take and a footnote discussing the full five-day numbers.

As for the opening itself, it was a matter of Disney never really making the film look anything other than a relatively amusing curiosity. Fair enough, but relatively amusing curiosities should not cost $150 million. The film was sold on Nicholas Cage's extremely unreliable star power, and random special effects shots. Sure Alfred Molina is cool, Theresa Palmer is cute, and Cage is doing his 'low-key crazy' shtick, but that's not enough to sell when you've bet the farm. Nevermind Disney's confusion about how faithful it was to the Fantasia short for which it is named, that property is irrelevant to today's kids. While we may think of Pinocchio and Fantasia as classics, the classics for today's kids are Finding Nemo, Toy Story, and The Lion King. I'm sorry if I just made you all feel really old, but it's true (recall a Spring episode of Glee, where the U2 song 'One' was treated as classic rock). Anyway, Disney is hoping that overseas numbers save this one in the manner than they saved the earlier Bruckheimer production, Prince of Persia: The Sands of Time ($90 million domestic, $236 million overseas).

In holdover land, Despicable Me had a decent second weekend, dropping 42% for a second-weekend gross of $32.8 million. 41% is a larger than normal drop for an animated film, but the Universal picture had a pretty large opening weekend, so there was more room to drop. Point being, the $70 million-budgeted film crossed the $100 million mark on Saturday and ended day 10 with $118 million. Twilight Saga: Eclipse dropped 57% for a third-weekend take of $13.4 million. For such an infamously front-loaded franchise, this is a pretty okay hold. It has grossed $264.7 million domestic thus far and has already grossed $552 million worldwide. Toy Story 3 grossed $11.9 million (-42%) in its fifth weekend, and it has a new total of $362.9 million, or the fifteenth-highest grossing film in US history. Grown Ups had the best hold in the top ten (-37%), again showing strength as the casual choice of general moviegoers. It has now grossed $129.1 million and is already Adam Sandler's sixth-highest grosser ever.

The Last Airbender dropped 53% and grossed $7.7 million in weekend three. On the plus side, it ended the weekend with $115.1 million, surpassing the $114.1 million gross of The Village. The Last Airbender is now, for better or worse, M. Night Shyamalan's third-highest grossing film, trailing the $227 million take of Signs and the $293 million gross of The Sixth Sense. Predators took a massive tumble from last weekend's solid debut, plunging 71.7% in weekend two (the 32nd largest second weekend drop ever and the 7th-largest such drop for a film on over 2,000 screens). Still, the $38 million-budgeted horror sequel has grossed $40.3 million, and with a global total already at $77.9 million and a decent sized bounty on DVD/Blu Ray still to come. Fox will make a profit on this one in the long run. Knight and Day is at $69.1 million (it may surpass the $81 million gross of Valkyrie), The Karate Kid is at $169.2 million, The A-Team is at $75.2 million, and Iron Man 2 is at $310 million. In limited release news, The Kids Are Alright expanded to 38 screens and grossed $1 million in its second weekend, for a $28,009 per-screen average. Cyrus crossed the $5 million mark and The Girl Who Played With Fire is at $2 million. And the year's best live-action film, Winter's Bone, crossed $3 million this weekend (if you see one arthouse film this year...).

That's all for this weekend. Join us next weekend when Angelina Jolie tries to launch her own spy franchise with the well-reviewed Salt and Disney Channel star Selena Gomez launches the rare G-rated live-action film Ramona and Beezus. For a look at this weekend in 2008 and 2009, click accordingly. Otherwise take care and keep reading.

Scott Mendelson

Inception opens with $21 million, Sorcerer's Apprentice grosses $5 million (that's what you get for opening on Wed!). Friday box office for 07/16/10.

Right in line with the highest expectations, Chris Nolan's Inception pulled in $21.6 million on its first full day, including $3 million in midnight sneaks. Depending on whether it plays like a general-audiences hit or a frontloaded genre picture, it could do anywhere from $55 million to $65 million over the weekend. In the realm of live-action films that are completely original and not based on any other prior property, Inception's opening day ranks fourth , behind Avatar ($26.7 million), The Day After Tomorrow ($23.5 million) and 2012 ($23.4 million), while ranking just above M. Night Shyamalan's Signs ($20.8 million) and The Village ($20.3 million). It's a doozy of a start, and it will be absolutely fascinating to see just what drew audiences to this epic puzzler (the concept, Leonardo DiCaprio, or Chris Nolan). It looks like Chris Nolan has joined the exclusive club of marquee directors (James Cameron, M. Night Shyamalan, Tim Burton, Steven Spielberg) who can open a high-concept picture partially on their name in the ad campaign.

Also opening was The Sorcerer's Apprentice. Disney erred in the same way that Fox did with Knight and Day, opening this not-anticipated picture on a Wednesday and thus cutting off its own knees. The film pulled in a mediocre $5.2 million for Friday, a number which would have been much higher had the film not pulled in $7 million during the first two days of release. Now what could have been a manageable $25 million three-day opening will be a weak $17 million three-day and $25 million five-day number. Once again, I repeat, unless your film is heavily anticipated, unless audiences are lining up around the block for the midnight showings, DO NOT open your film on a Wednesday! I don't care that its summer and I don't care if you're worried about competition from another movie opening that same Friday, unless moviegoers absolutely have to see your movie as soon as possible, they can wait until the weekend. Just say no to Wednesday openings.

Scott Mendelson

Review: Inception: An IMAX Experience (2010)

Inception
2010
148 minutes
rated PG-13

by Scott Mendelson

I have never understood the idea that Chris Nolan is a cold man who makes cold films. While he is a brilliant craftsman and a technical genius, his films have always had a vibrant heartbeat at the center. Whether it's amnesiac Leonard struggling to retain his humanity, rival magicians Robert and Alfred slowly wrecking their lives in a pointless game of one-upmanship, or James Gordon trying to fight corruption in a city that runs on graft, Nolan's films generally remember to put the human element above the spectacle or gimmickry. But, for the first time, Christopher Nolan has made a film that embodies the Chris Nolan stereotype. Inception is a visually dazzling, exceedingly intelligent, and possibly ingenious puzzle box. But the human element takes a backseat to the visual wonderland and the plot mechanics. For the first time in a Chris Nolan film, I didn't have any real emotional investment in the characters.

A token amount of plot - Cobb (Leonardo DiCaprio) is a leading specialist in a form of industrial sabotage called 'extraction'. Basically, he and his team enter the dreams of their target, in order to steal information that the victim keeps in his or her own mind. After a job goes bad, the team ends up on the run, but the former mark (Ken Watanabe) offers Cobb a counter-offer. He wants the dream team to try something called 'inception', whereby a person has their dreams invaded for the purpose of planting, rather than extracting, information or an idea. It's an incredibly difficult thing to accomplish, but the rich and powerful Saito has offered Cobb a bonus upon completion: Saito will have Cobb's criminal record cleared so that he can return to America and see his two children again.

Plotwise, that's really all you need. As far as the complicated narrative and the various twists and turns, the film works like a puzzle game such as Tetris: easy to learn, easy to play, challenging to master. The broad strokes of the story and the major rules of the dream worlds are clearly spelled out for anyone simply awake and paying attention. Ellen Page plays Ariadne, who is hired to build the dream world for the 'big job'. While Page does what she can, her character is around purely for exposition. She is our surrogate into this new world, learning how to play in the dream world and what the guidelines are. Later, she becomes a source of emotional exposition, as she is the one who gets to engage Cobb in various bits of character back-story (DiCaprio's Cobb is the only person who gets any kind of character development to speak of). While the first hour of the film is basically set-up and exposition, it's actually quite engaging, as we get to learn the nitty-gritty details of just how one goes about creating a dream for a mark and then invading that dream for illicit purposes.

Alas, once the actual caper goes forth in the second hour, the film becomes a visually scrumptious but emotionally hollow thrill-ride. Almost immediately upon entry into the mind of Robert Fishcer Jr., son of a dying energy industrialist (played by Cillian Murphy), the film devolves into a series of action sequences. Chases, shoot-outs, fights, and explosions abound. But since we know that all of the opponents in the dream world are just projections and not flesh and blood people, there is no weight to the violence. Yes, the action set-pieces are proficiently staged (and more smoothly edited than the action beats in Nolan's Batman pictures), but a huge chunk of the second hour of the film is basically Cobb and his team shooting at unreal targets whose 'deaths' have no moral consequence and thus no impact on the audience. It often resembles watching someone else play a video game, complete with characters jumping from one level to another, each with a different locale and difficulty level. Yes, the IMAX screen obviously increases the scope and scale of these set pieces, but since I didn't find the thrill-ride elements all that thrilling, I can't say that the film will lose much on a traditional screen.

The characters on Cobb's team have no development or backstory, and whatever impact they have derives strictly from the actors who play them. Joseph Gordon Levitt and Tom Hardy have fun as the researcher and the muscle respectively, as both have big action moments in the second half (a zero-gravity hallway fight and a snowbound invasion of an impenetrable fortress). It is Leonardo DiCaprio's Cobb who gets every ounce of character and the only one who gets anything approaching an arc, that involving his coming to terms with the death of his wife (Marion Cotillard) and how it affects his work in the dream world. While the back-story is interesting and the ideas it brings up are engaging, the film fails to make us care on an emotional level. Aside from those bits of emotional back story, the film basically plays out like a sci-fi variation on John Frankenheimer's Ronin. Both pictures are ice-cold action pictures involving a ruthless team of mercenaries who accept a dangerous, but somewhat ill-defined job. Both films are entirely concerned with the minutia of planning and then carrying out said job, with little thought given to the moral implications of success or failure. Both films feature a token back story for the leader of the team (Robert De Niro in Ronin), and a minor character played by a notable actor (Sean Bean in Ronin, Lucas Haas here) who gets kicked off the team early on in the film. Both are exceptional genre pictures and contain solid action sequences, and both seem unconcerned about whether or not you care about what's transpiring onscreen beyond a visceral level.

Here's where it gets tricky to critique a movie like Inception. As expected from the man who made The Prestige and Memento, Inception operates on several levels. There can be several interpretations in regards to what the film is 'all about', and any of those interpretations could be right or wrong (Penrose's never-ending staircase is featured prominently). Like a video game that is so clearly resembles, Inception is a film that can be viewed two ways. One can watch the film on the surface level, making it from one scene to the next, going along with the plot and making it to the end for a mostly satisfying movie-going experience. On the surface, it is about what most of Nolan's films are about: how flawed men lie to themselves to cover up the moral failings they can't live with. Or, one can see the film multiple times and navigate around the edges, straying off path to find bonus items, hidden secrets, and buried treasures. Ironically, many of the 'deeper meanings' are similar to those found in the infamously derided climax to Steven Spielberg's AI.

So do I praise the film for having multiple levels of complexity and having enough sub-textual material for several viewings, or do I simply judge how the film works for a general moviegoer seeing the film once in a theater? On the surface, Inception is a sci-fi heist picture, a dreamworld variation on Ronin or The Italian Job. But both films, while less intelligent and ambitious, had a greater viewer investment in the onscreen action (when innocent bystanders got shot to ribbons in the streets of Paris, or when Donald Sutherland was gunned down in the opening reel, it mattered). In its objective coldness and attention to procedural detail, it resembles the first Mission: Impossible (another film that wasn't nearly as surface-level complicated as many claimed). But, at the end of the day, however much credence I give to the possible deeper meanings of Nolan's brainy blockbuster, I must concede that I was less engaged by Inception than I was with any of Nolan's prior works since he broke out with Memento ten years ago. The film may in fact reward multiple viewings and those repeat viewings may reap added rewards. But the cold truth is that I will have to force myself to buy another ticket to Inception, rather than just wait until DVD/Blu Ray to experience it again. Chris Nolan has made a fine, intelligent, and viscerally engaging cinematic experience that is one of the more entertaining pictures of the year. That's enough for me.

Grade: B+

M. Night Shyamalan-produced Devil gets a trailer.

Devil is the first film from 'the Night Chronicles', which will hopefully be an ongoing series of M. Night Shyamalan-produced horror pictures. This is frankly just the sort of thing M. Night Shyamalan should be doing with his free time. Say what you will about his output in the latter half of the decade, but he has worthwhile ideas and tells stories worth telling. So, if he's not going to go full-Hitchcock and do a weekly TV series, why not use his name to give other filmmakers a boost and the chance to make an M. Night Shyamalan movie better than M. Night himself? It's not exactly Stephen King selling the movie rights to his short stories for $1, but it's worth celebrating. As for the preview itself, it looks like a sharp and satisfying little horror tale. And since my wife is terribly frightened of elevators, I'll be sure to drag her to this one.

Scott Mendelson