Month: January 2013

Box Office Results: January 11-13

The box office results for the weekend are in and while I overestimated the performance of Zero Dark Thirty, it still opened #1 and did quite well.

Kathryn Bigelow’s Bin Laden manhunt epic earned $24 million in its first wide frame, below my generous $29.1M projection. Still, the film looks poised for a healthy run, especially with its strong showing when the Oscar nominations were released (even though director Bigelow was unexpectedly snubbed).

The comedy spoof A Haunted House did way better than I predicted, well exceeding modest expectations. House opened at #2 with an impressive $18.8 million, well above my $10.8M prediction. The film is likely to drop big next weekend, but with a tiny budget, the picture is already a major financial success.

Gangster Squad, with its A-list cast including Ryan Gosling and Sean Penn, had a disappointing third place showing, earning $16.7 million, four million lower than my $20.7M prediction. Pretty much everyone, including me, had it projected opening second. No real way to spin it. This is a weak opening for Squad.

For the four-six slots, Django Unchained took in $11.1 million (lower than my $13.2M projection), Les Miserables made $10.1 million (slightly better than my $9.5M guess), and The Hobbit made $9.1 million (slightly lower than my $9.5M projection). Finally, I predicted last weekend’s #1 Texas Chainsaw 3D would fall big time from #1 to #7. It actually fell even worse, plummeting from the top spot to #9. It earned only $5.2 million in its second frame, lower than my $7.6M projection.

Another note: Silver Linings Playbook saw a 38% boost in its performance, no doubt due to its success with Oscar nominations. It took in $5 million this weekend and will triple its theater count next weekend.

Be sure to check back Wednesday for next weekend’s projections, when the Mark Wahlberg-Russell Crowe thriller Broken City, Arnold Schwarzenegger’s The Last Stand, and the horror flick Mama all debut.

Movies You Might Not Know: Crooked Cops Edition

Continuing with my recommendations of movies that maybe you haven’t seen and should, I offer up three pictures with one thing in common: they’re all about crooked cops. While you’ve probably seen genre titles like Serpico, Cop Land, Training Day and Dark Blue, I would highly recommend this trio as well.

Two come from 1990. First, Internal Affairs featuring crooked cop Richard Gere. He’s joined by co-star Andy Garcia. This is one of Gere’s finest performances. Internal Affairs comes from director Mike Figgis, best known for 1995’s Leaving Las Vegas with Nic Cage.

Next is Q&A featuring crooked cop Nick Nolte. Directed by the great Sidney Lumet (who brought us classics like Serpico, Dog Day Afternoon, 12 Angry Men, and Network), this film fell under the radar screen and shouldn’t have. Nolte is fantastic in it.

Finally, we have Narc featuring crooked cop Ray Liotta. This is better than Liotta’s other crooked cop flick (1992’s Unlawful Entry with Kurt Russell, though that’s worth a look too). Directed by Joe Carnahan (who would later direct The A-Team and The Grey), Narc is a solid genre piece with first-rate performances from Liotta and Jason Patric.

So there you have it! Now have yourself a nice little crooked cop triple feature and thank me later…

Movies You Might Not Know: Trespass

And now for a new feature on my blog where I recommend a film that you may not know. I’ve brilliantly called it “Movies You Might Know”.

I’m often asked by friends and colleagues for recommendations for movies so I’ll use this ongoing series to point out titles that I think many of you perhaps haven’t seen.

We start with a really fun 1992 action flick called Trespass. The plot is very simple: two firemen (Bill Paxton and William Sadler) find a treasure map while battling a blaze. It leads them to East St. Louis, where they search for the gold promised on the map. They get more than they bargained for when they also have to battle a tough street gang, led by Ice Cube and Ice-T.

Trespass comes from a fine action director, Walter Hill, who brought us The Warriors and 48 HRS., among others. The script is written by big-time Robert Zemeckis and his partner, Bob Gale. The picture was released in December 1992 and fell through the cracks, earning just $13 million at the box office.

If you’re looking for a good action flick, Trespass delivers. It’s definitely worth a look.

The 007 Files: Octopussy

I found Octopussy to be the one of the intriguing entries in the Bond franchise for an interesting reason. It features a great number of the problems that I’ve had with certain Roger Moore 007 pictures. It tends to copy and, at least, heavily “borrow from” hot trends of the time. It tends to rely on silliness and overly comedic situations.

However, a strange occurrence took place upon my viewing of it. Despite its flaws, the fact is: Octopussy is just a tremendously fun picture. A lot of it doesn’t necessarily feel like a Bond movie, but I found that not bothering me so much. Why? Mostly because the action sequences, done under the sturdy direction of John Glen, are just terrific. And this Bond entry, probably more than any other, is mostly wall-to-wall action set pieces that are amazingly handled.

The film opens with one of those exciting sequences with Bond flying his jet, literally, out a horse’s ass. A fake horse’s ass, mind you. Like other Moore features, the opening sequence doesn’t have much to do the plot, but it’s good stuff.

For the theme song, we have “All Time High”, performed by Rita Coolidge. It’s a solid enough ballad. The track is probably most well known to you right now as the song Mark Wahlberg sings to Mila Kunis to win back her affection in this past summer’s comedy hit Ted. Strangely enough, the opening title sequence with the song is the only one so far that I couldn’t find on YouTube, but here’s the track:

The plot doesn’t really matter in a Bond movie like this one and granted, it’s a silly one. Bond’s colleague 009 is killed (wearing a clown disguise) while carrying an expensive (or possibly fake) Faberge egg. Told ya. 007 is put on the case and this leads him to a variety of villains. The main one is Kamal Khan, a Middle Eastern prince. A lot of the plot, at least for a while, deals with this Faberge artifact and I was left wondering: really? That’s what this movie is about? Alas, Khan is also in bed with the Soviets, who have a more dastardly plan that involves setting off a nuclear bomb. Much more Bond like!

Our main Bond girl is the title character, Octopussy, played Maud Adams. Interestingly, Adams also appeared in The Man With the Golden Gun as a completely different character. Her part here is of a jewel smuggler who happens to live at a palace only populated with beautiful women who are trained to be in a circus she runs as a side business.

I know. I know. While you’re reading this, you’re probably thinking this sounds like the stupidest James Bond film ever. And if you concentrate only on the plot – well, there’s a lot left to be desired.

However, the story line in many a 007 flick is not all that important. This is a prime example. Here’s what I found important:

1) There is a totally awesome sequence where Khan and his army of henchmen hunt 007 down in the jungle. In this sequence, Bond not only has to deal with these ruthless human baddies, but also tigers, snakes, elephants, leeches, spiders, and alligators.

2) There is the best train action sequence since From Russia with Love.

3) The main female character is both a fairly interesting character and has great chemistry with Roger Moore. She’s not portrayed as an airhead and seems smarter than most of the other characters. These are compliments I cannot pay to many other Bond women, especially those in the Moore films. And Maud Adams’ performance is solid.

4) While not one of the great 007 villains, Louis Jourdan’s performance as Khan is a good one. Here’s a good scene between him and Bond playing backgammon and wagering on that all-important Faberge egg.

5) The way the action sequences are shot and choreographed represent some of the best work of the series.

Is this film overly silly? Oh yes. We get treated to the sight of 007 in a gorilla suit and made up as a clown. We get more over-the-top villains than we can count, including Steven Berkoff (who played the main baddie in Beverly Hills Cop) hamming it up as Soviet general.

Yes it’s ridiculous, but did it bother me as much as it did in other 007 films like Diamonds Are Forever, The Man with the Golden Gun, or Moonraker? No. Octopussy may not always feel like a Bond film. In fact, the first half especially is closer in tone to a film that came out two years prior in 1981: Steven Spielberg’s Raiders of the Lost Ark. 

The fact that Octopussy is set in India that helps contribute to this. It’s not just that, however. The tone of the picture feels more like a Saturday afternoon serial. I suspect the producers were going for that Indiana Jones vibe here after seeing its massive success, just as they did with Moonraker, which was released two years after Star Wars. Call this Indiana James or Raiders of the Lost Faberge Egg. 

Call it whatever you want, but I was surprised by how much I liked it, especially considering its mediocre reputation. Like most of the other 007 flicks, it had been years and years since I’d seen Octopussy. I remember loving it as a kid. There are many who disagree in principle with a Bond movie being this over-the-top and I understand. I prefer a darker Bond, too. To me, this is the one “silly” Bond movie though that seems to get it right, at least on its own terms. The reason is simple: the action is so well-handled and exciting that you don’t really give a damn how silly it is.

Octopussy would post solid box office numbers, earning slightly under $200 million worldwide, close to the numbers of its predecessor For Your Eyes Only. Domestically, it would outshine that movie with a U.S. gross of $67 million, compared to $54 million for Eyes Only.

If you choose to accept Octopussy for what it is and just go along for the ride, it is a worthwhile entry in the 007 franchise.

As a side note, the year 1983 is a significant one in 007’s history in that there were two competing Bond films. Octopussy would be the official picture that came from the Bond camp, but Sean Connery would reprise his portrayal of 007 in Never Say Never Again. That film was produced by a different company after a protracted legal battle over rights to the story allowed it. The Connery adventure would do well at the box office, but would not match the numbers of Octopussy, much to the delight of the Bond team. Never Say Never Again is not considered part of the official 007 cannon and therefore will not be included in “The 007 Files”. In fact, it’s even hard to get a copy of the DVD at anything approaching a worthwhile price. If and when I do purchase it, expect a separate blog entry in the future.

Here are the facts:

Film: Octopussy

U.S. Release Date: June 10, 1983

Director: John Glen

Screenplay: George MacDonald Fraser, Michael G. Wilson, and Richard Maibaum

Bond: Roger Moore

Main Bond Villain: Kamal Khan (Louis Jourdan)

Main Bond Girl: Octopussy (Maud Adams)

Theme Song: “All Time High” – performed by Rita Coolidge

Budget: $27.5 million

Worldwide Box Office: $187.5 million

My James Bond blog series will return in “The 007 Files: A View to a Kill”

Oscar Nominations Reaction

As you may have seen, the Oscar nominations were out bright and early this morning. Now it’s time to do the postmortem on my predictions and find out what it all means and what and whom may walk away with the gold.

Best Picture

How I Did: 8/9

Pretty happy with my Best Picture predictions! Most of all, I’m glad I hit the number nine pick on the head, as this category can be anywhere from 5-10 nominations. The eight films I correctly guessed: Amour, Argo, Django Unchained, Les Miserbles, Life of Pi, Lincoln, Silver Linings Playbook and Zero Dark Thirty. My only misstep was including Paul Thomas Anderson’s The Master back in my predictions. It ended up being the indie film Beasts of the Southern Wild that received the ninth slot instead.

Overall, no real surprises here. Beasts of the Southern Wild had been on my earlier prediction lists but eventually fell off and I always listed it as a contender. Skyfall and Moonrise Kingdom were two pics that seemed to be picking up steam. They didn’t make the cut and I never predicted they would. Most of all, I’m glad to see my Django pick turned out right! With this category, I’ll give myself a nice little pat on the back…

Best Director

How I Did: 2/5

And with these picks, you can slap me on the back as hard as you like. Still, I can’t feel that bad because nobody and I mean nobody envisioned the five directors that got nominated this morning.

Why? For starters, as I’ve written about, Steven Spielberg (Lincoln), Kathryn Bigelow (Zero Dark Thirty), and Ben Affleck (Argo) have been considered shoo-in nominees for a couple of months now. Many experts were predicting a close three-person race between them to win the award. The most shocking thing about the Oscar announcements today is easily the exclusion of Bigelow and Affleck for Best Director. I wasn’t as sure about my other pick, Tom Hooper for Les Miserables but figured he’d get in. He didn’t.

The three that replaced my picks: David O. Russell for Silver Linings Playbook which is not a big surprise. Then there’s Michael Haneke for Amour, which is a fairly big surprise. Then there’s Benh Zietlin for Beasts of the Southern Wild, which is a complete and utter jaw-dropping shock. The only other pick besides Spielberg I got right is Ang Lee for Life of Pi. How these nominations for Best Director affect the Best Picture cannot be overstated.

Let me explain in simple terms. When a movie wins Best Picture, it’s Director is always nominated. The last time that didn’t happen was 23 years ago when Driving Miss Daisy won Best Picture and its director Bruce Beresford wasn’t nominated. In the 84-year history of the Oscars, a movie winning Best Picture without the director being nominated has happened three times. You do the math.

This is very unexpected because this year’s Oscars seemed to feature a really open field for Best Picture winner, much more than normal. Argo, Les Miserables, Lincoln, and Zero Dark Thirty were all seen as very real possibilities to win the award. With these Best Director nominations shocking Hollywood, the race is totally reshaped. It is now highly unlikely that Argo or Les Mis or Zero Dark Thirty will win Best Picture. By my count, that leaves Lincoln as the undisputed front runner to nab the top award and Steven Spielberg in a position to take home his third directing honor.

I would expect both Life of Pi and Silver Linings Playbook to take those other three movies place as the dark horse candidates to win Best Picture and Director.

To add to the surprise, as I explained in my directing nominations predictions earlier this week, the Directors Guild of America (DGA) nominations are usually a safe prognosticator of this category. Those came out earlier this week and their five picks mirrored my predictions for the Oscar category. In the last ten years, the DGA nominations have exactly matched the Oscar nominations three times. It’s been four out of five – six times. It’s only been three out of five… just one time. This is the first time ever that only two DGA nominees became Best Director Oscar nominees. Wow.

Best Actor

How I Did: 4/5

As I’ve written about extensively, there were six actors competing for five slots. I incorrectly had Bradley Cooper from Silver Linings Playbook off the list. He made it and John Hawkes from The Sessions was the odd man out. I’m most pleased that I still included Joaquin Phoenix for The Master when most other predictors had him out. With Cooper and Phoenix in, they join Daniel Day-Lewis (Lincoln), Denzel Washington (Flight), and Hugh Jackman (Les Miserables).

Best Actress

How I Did: 4/5

Again, no major surprises here. I wrongly predicted Marion Cotillard for Rust and Bone and it was 9 year-old Quevenzhane Wallis from Beasts of the Southern Wild that made it instead. My four correct picks: Jessica Chastain in Zero Dark Thirty, Emmanuelle Riva in Amour, Jennifer Lawrence in Silver Linings Playbook, and Naomi Watts in The Impossible. This category did make a bit of history today: Wallis, at 9, is the youngest ever nominated for this category and Riva, age 84, is the oldest ever recognized for this award.

Best Supporting Actor

How I Did: 4/5

Well, I picked the wrong Django actor. Instead of Leonardo DiCaprio, it was Christoph Waltz who made it Tarantino’s film. He’ll join my correctly predicted Tommy Lee Jones in Lincoln, Philip Seymour Hoffman in The Master, Robert De Niro in Silver Linings Playbook, and Alan Arkin in Argo. Little history here, too: this is the first time where all nominees are previous winners. Waltz won for another Quentin flick, Inglourious Basterds. Jones won in 1993 for The Fugitive. Hoffman won for Capote in 2005. De Niro won Supporting Actor in 1974 for The Godfather – Part II and Best Actor in 1980 for Raging Bull. Arkin won in 2006 for Little Miss Sunshine.

Best Supporting Actress

How I Did: 3/5

This is always a tough category to predict and I didn’t fare as well here. I correctly got Anne Hathaway in Les Miserables, Helen Hunt in The Sessions, and Sally Field for Lincoln.  I incorrectly guessed Maggie Smith for The Best Exotic Marigold Hotel and Ann Dowd for Compliance, which I knew was a bit of an outside-the-box pick anyway. In their place for the two slots: Amy Adams for The Master and Jacki Weaver for Silver Linings Playbook. Strangely enough, my initial Supporting Actress predictions from October were exactly right! Guess I should have stuck with them, but alas only three for five here.

Other Observations

Silver Linings Playbook did something very rare today. By getting nominations in all four acting categories, it became the first picture to do that in 31 years, since 1981’s Reds. While Skyfall didn’t get that Best Picture nomination some were guessing, Adele got nominated and let’s hope she performs that great Bond theme during the ceremony!

So where does this leave us now that nominations are out? Before the ceremony, I’ll write a post predicting the winners. Here’s where my head’s at now:

As discussed, Lincoln is now the clear favorite to win Best Picture, based on the directors that were left out of that category. This leaves Spielberg as the favorite, too. However, the Academy showed a lot of love to Life of Pi today and I believe Ang Lee now poses a real threat to Spielberg.

For Best Actor, I’m glad I can finally say this since nominations are out: Daniel Day-Lewis is going to win. 99.9% sure. Only Jackman poses a small threat and by small, I mean .1%.

Best Actress still looks like a toss-up between Lawrence and Chastain, with Riva as a potential spoiler.

Best Supporting Actor looks more wide open and the possibility of a surprise winner is not hard to envision here. I would say Tommy Lee Jones is the slight favorite.

The category of Supporting Actress has seen its share of upset winners over the years. If anyone other than Anne Hathaway wins, it would be an upset. She is the clear front runner in this race.

So there you have it, my loyal readers! The nominations are out and I did pretty decent except for Best Director. Check back later for my final picks for winners, which I’ll make in every single category, as opposed to the six biggies I focused on here. Stay tuned!

The 007 Files: For Your Eyes Only

After the mostly unfortunate experience of re-watching Moonraker, I couldn’t get the Blu Ray disc for its followup, 1981’s For Your Eyes Only, in the player fast enough. I was trying to erase my memories of James Bond fighting a Star Wars-style laser gun battle in space as quickly as possible.

The 007 producers, despite the financial success of Moonraker, decided to go in a different direction with this film: back to basics. Decrease the silliness. Make it more serious than the previous Moore entries. Considering its predecessor, it was time to bring Bond back down to earth, literally and figuratively.

For Your Eyes Only gets off to a rather interesting start in the pre-title credit sequence, hearkening back to the Bond pictures of old. We begin with 007 visiting the grave of his wife Tracy from On Her Majesty’s Secret Service. Other than a very brief mention of her in The Spy Who Loved Me, this is the first time her character is acknowledged since her death that took place 12 years earlier in Bond world. This leads right into an action sequence where Bond has one last battle with Blofeld, the famous villain who served as 007’s arch nemesis in several earlier pictures. Due to legal issues involving using Blofeld’s likeness that would take far too long to explain, we actually never see Blofeld’s face in the scene and the character is never called Blofeld. However, there’s no doubt it’s Blofeld. I mean… the fluffy white kitty is on his lap and everything! There’s been other Bond films where the pre-credit sequence has nothing to do with the rest of the film, but this one really doesn’t and it does feel a little out of place. Still, it’s refreshing to see the producers establishing a continuum that we don’t often see in the franchise.

Moving on to the title credits, the song “For Your Eyes Only” is sung by Sheena Easton. It’s a pretty solid ballad and the title credits are notable because Easton actually appears in them singing the song. This is the first (and I believe only) time this occurred. This probably happened because the film was released in 1981. MTV debuted in 1981 as well so music videos were the hot thing around at the moment. Easton would go on to play Sonny Crockett’s wife in an episode arc of “Miami Vice” and have some of her songs produced by Prince. Why mention this? No real reason really. I’m just a huge fan of Prince and “Miami Vice”.

The plot involves Bond investigating the sinking of a British spy boat. A marine archaeologist and his wife who were contracted by the Brits to find the sunken boat are murdered in front of their daughter, Melina (Caroline Bouquet), who serves as the main Bond girl this time around. Her part is a little more integral to the story than lots of Bond babes because her mission to track the bad guys is much more personal than 007’s.

The bad guy turns out to be Aristotle Kristatos, who works for the KGB and is initially presented an ally to Bond before we find out otherwise. The villain is played by Julian Glover in a solid performance, even if the character isn’t particularly memorable.

Of course, we get a number of action scenes that are handled well. This is the first time in the 007 director’s chair for John Glen, who served as 2nd unit director on three previous Bond pictures. 2nd unit director essentially means he shot a lot of the action sequences and that experience shows here. There’s great underwater action footage. At a couple points, Bond and Melina nearly meet their demise by sharks. And yet again, none of these sharks have giant laser beams attached to their frickin heads.

Of particular note is the climax in the beautiful mountains of Greece, which is very well-directed and exciting. We also get yet another ski chase scene, but this one’s damn good and involves motorbikes and bobsleds too!

Director Glen would go on to direct five Bond movies in a row, which means every 80s 007 flick. This makes Glen the man who’s directed the most films in the franchise.

One of Bond’s allies in For Your Eyes Only is Columbo, played in a winning performance by Topol, who you may know as Tevye from Fiddler on the Roof. The secondary Bond girl is Bibi, an ice skating prodigy being sponsored by the villain. Played by Lynn-Holly Johnson, her character serves no real purpose in the story and she could have been cut out completely and that probably would’ve been better. The other Bond girl here represents an interesting bit of Bond history. Actress Cassandra Harris plays Columbo’s mistress, who ends up sleeping with 007, naturally. At the time of filming, Harris was married to an up-and-coming actor by the name of… Pierce Brosnan, who I’m confident you’ll read a lot about in later blog posts. Sadly, Harris would pass away in 1991 due to complications from cancer.

To show that this Bond was going back to basics, 007 even kills a character in cold blood by kicking his car as its falling down a cliff. It’s a little startling at first because this doesn’t really match Roger Moore’s characterization of the super spy. We believe it when Connery did it, as he did in Dr. No. Apparently, Moore had to be coaxed into this scene by the writers and producers. It worked for me, even though Moore will never be as menacing as Connery. At least he knew it.

For Your Eyes Only does contain some overly silly elements that are par for the course with the Moore films. Quite a few of them, however, are unintentional and more a product of the early 80s time frame. There’s “Q” showing 007 the “3D Identigraph”, high-tech technology using 3D effects for facial recognition of a suspect. When you watch the scene, it’s basically just Bond explaining what the dude generally looks like (hair color, style of glasses) and all of a sudden… we’ve got him!! The absence of composer John Barry is missed, too. Bill Conti is the composer here. For most of the film, he does an adequate job. However, there is a scene on the ski slopes where the synth-driven and ever-so-eighties sounding instrumentals sound like they’d comfortably belong in one of that era’s raunchy sex comedies. Not exactly the lush sounds we’re used to from Barry, but oh well.

The film would fall a little short of Moonraker‘s box office performance, but it still made a killing at the box office, earning nearly $200 million worldwide. In the U.S., it earned $54 million, placing it eighth for that year’s releases.

For Your Eyes Only is not in the very upper echelon of 007 pictures, but I found it quite entertaining and the change of pace worked for me, especially after the horribly silly levels that Moonraker took us to. Watching it, I kind of wished the producers had used this approach to the Moore flicks. Seeing the Roger Moore entries switch back and forth in tone contributes to a kind-of box of chocolates like mentality the producers seemed to have during this time period. The exception, of course, is the terrific Spy Who Loved Me from four years earlier. This picture isn’t on that level, but it’s a step above the other features in Moore’s tenure for sure.

Here are the facts:

Film: For Your Eyes Only

U.S. Release Date: June 26, 1981

Director: John Glen

Screenplay: Michael G. Wilson and Richard Maibaum

Bond: Roger Moore

Main Bond Villain: Aristotle Kristatos (Julian Glover)

Main Bond Girl: Melina Havelock (Caroline Bouquet)

Theme Song: “For Your Eyes Only” – performed by Sheena Easton

Budget: $28 million

Worldwide Box Office: $195.3 million

FINAL Oscar Predictions: Best Picture

And here we are. After multiple Oscar predictions posts over the last couple of months and final predictions for Best Director, Actor and Actress, and Supporting Actor and Actress through the week, we arrive at the biggest category of all… Best Picture.

Unlike all other races which are set at five nominees, the selections for Best Picture can be anywhere between five and ten films. This, of course, makes it tougher to predict but I gotta do what I gotta do.

Last year was the first time for the 5 through 10 format and 9 pictures were nominated. I am predicting that nine movies once again will make the cut.

In my mind, there are five shoo-in nominees: Steven Spielberg’s Lincoln, Ben Affleck’s Argo, Tom Hooper’s Les Miserables, David O. Russell’s Silver Linings Playbook, and Kathryn Bigelow’s Zero Dark Thirty. If any one of these movies miss the cut, I’d be very surprised. Sitting at #6 as a near shoo-in is Ang Lee’s Life of Pi.

Then it gets complicated. Really complicated.

Quentin Tarantino’s Django Unchained is an enormous question mark. It’s tough to determine whether or not the Academy will honor it, with some of the controversy involved with it. Django is one of the best reviewed films of the year and it’s on its way to becoming Tarantino’s highest grosser ever. I have gone back and forth on whether I believe it gets in. At the end of the day, I’m predicting its nomination with the caveat that its exclusion will not surprise me all that much.

The French drama Amour was very well reviewed and has picked up some critic organizations awards. This one could also go either way. So could Moonrise Kingdom, Wes Anderson’s comedy released last summer that seems to be gaining a lot of steam lately. The indie favorite Beasts of the Southern Wild has a lot of fans, too. So does The Best Exotic Marigold Hotel, a British pic that did well at the box office. The tsunami drama The Impossible garnered solid reviews, as did Robert Zemeckis’s alcoholism drama Flight with Denzel Washington. There’s another French film, The Intouchables, which has gained traction out of nowhere all of a sudden.

Another picture that seems to gaining traction: a little flick called Skyfall. The 007 adventure could make history by being the first Bond movie to receive a Best Picture nomination. It is a very real possibility and its inclusion would not shock me.

Lastly, we come to Paul Thomas Anderson’s The Master. When it was released in early fall, it was immediately considered a near shoo-in for a Best Picture nod. Then it started falling off the radar in a major way. Two factors contributed to this: while lots of critics adored it, others were ambivalent and audiences didn’t respond well. Also, a lot of the movies released after The Master made good on their Oscar potential – Lincoln, Argo, Les Mis, Life of Pi, Zero Dark Thirty, Silver Linings Playbook. This has caused most Oscar prognosticators to leave The Master off the list, including me when I made my last round of predictions. So consider this my dark horse pick: I’m going against the conventional wisdom and putting it back in because I think those who love this movie really loved it. That might be enough to put it back in the mix.

I mentioned a number of films because I wanted to give you the names of all titles that I believe could possibly get in. Of course, not all of them can.

The Oscar nominations are out tomorrow morning at 8:30 AM Eastern time. After a lot of blogging and thinking, I will predict the nine movies that will be nominated for Best Picture tomorrow will be…

FINAL PREDICTIONS: BEST PICTURE

Amour

Argo

Django Unchained

Les Miserables

Life of Pi

Lincoln

The Master

Silver Linings Playbook

Zero Dark Thirty

 

 

Box Office Predictions: January 11-13

The first weekend of 2013 at the box office gave us only one new major release, Texas Chainsaw 3D, to mix in with the holiday leftovers. The Leatherface saga exceeded most expectations, including my own, and had a solid opening of nearly $22 million. The second weekend of 2013 brings three new offerings: Kathryn Bigelow’s Zero Dark Thirty, the 30s era shoot-em-up Gangster Squad, and A Haunted House, a horror spoof starring Shawn Wayans.

Zero Dark Thirty, about the raid to kill Osama Bin Laden, has been in the news a lot lately, in addition to receiving heavy Oscar buzz. Starring Jessica Chastain in an Academy-buzzed about performance, the film has been scorching at the box office in its limited release. That does not always translate to big numbers upon wide release, but I believe the factors are there for a hefty haul this weekend. It doesn’t hurt that Oscar nominations come out Thursday and it will likely receive Picture and Director nominations the day before its release.

Gangster Squad features an all-star cast including Ryan Gosling, Josh Brolin, Emma Stone, and Sean Penn. The film was originally scheduled for release in October 2012, but was delayed after the tragic theater shooting in Colorado. A scene showing violence in a movie house was edited out. Squad looks to capitalize on its cast and pretty effective trailer. It’s been met with mixed reviews, however, and its buzz doesn’t seem to be real strong. I expect a fairly decent opening, though nothing spectacular.

Last and probably least is the horror spoof A Haunted House starring Shawn Wayans. Granted, the combo of Wayans + horror spoof has worked quite well before with the Scary Movie flicks. This one seems to be flying under the radar, though and I don’t expect big business here. It’s a tough one to call – it could potentially over or under perform my prediction, so I’ll keep it in the middle range of its possibilities.

I would expect typical mid 30s-mid 40s dropoffs for the holiday holdovers. There is an exception. Horror flicks tend to open big and drop huge in their second weekend. I expect this is the fate Texas Chainsaw 3D will experience. My predictions reflect a rare slide, from the #1 spot to seventh.

And with that, my weekend predictions:

1. Zero Dark Thirty

Predicted Gross: $29.1 million

2. Gangster Squad

Predicted Gross: $20.7 million

3. Django Unchained

Predicted Gross: $13.2 million (representing a drop of 34%)

4. A Haunted House

Predicted Gross: $10.8 million

5. Les Miserables

Predicted Gross: $9.5 million (representing a drop of 41%)

6. The Hobbit: An Unexpected Journey

Predicted Gross: $9.5 million (representing a drop of 46%)

7. Texas Chainsaw 3D

Predicted Gross: $7.6 million (representing a drop of 65%)

There you have it… check the blog’s Facebook page for updates this weekend and the blog for final results on Sunday!

FINAL Oscar Predictions: Best Director

With the Oscar nominations coming out Thursday morning, I have been blogging my nominee predictions in the six major categories. I’m through the acting predictions and this brings us to only Best Picture (coming tomorrow) and now… Best Director.

This category is often seen as a good prognosticator of the movies that will be nominated for Best Picture. As you may be aware, Best Picture nominees can be anywhere from five to ten films. All other categories are a finite five. With this new rule change that’s only been in effect since last year, it’s probably fair safe to assume that every director nominated will see their movie nominated, too. So here’s a good indication of movies I think will get Best Picture nominations when I reveal those tomorrow.

Just this afternoon, a major harbinger of the Best Director Oscar category was released… the Director’s Guild of America (DGA) nominations. This association nominates five directors for their award every year. To give you an idea of the consistency of DGA nods to Oscar nods, in the last 10 years these nominations have exactly matched three times. It’s been a 4 out of 5 ratio six times. And only a 3 to 5 ratio once. In other words, it’s quite safe to assume that 4 out of 5 DGA nominees will get Best Director Oscar nominations. And maybe even all five could match.

The five DGA nominees announced today: Ben Affleck for Argo, Kathryn Bigelow for Zero Dark Thirty, Tom Hooper for Les Miserables, Ang Lee for Life of Pi, and Steven Spielberg for Lincoln. These are top five that I’ve been predicting on the blog for some time now and I’m having a hard time seeing any reason to change it….

Except for the fact that, more often than not, it’s only four out of five. So who could get in that didn’t get a DGA nod? The most likely is David O. Russell for Silver Linings Playbook. There’s also Michael Haneke for Amour, whom several experts have been picking. If the Academy really goes for Django Unchained or Moonrise Kingdom, Quentin Tarantino or Wes Anderson, respectively, could sneak in. And Paul Thomas Anderson’s work in The Master is a long-shot possibility.

Affleck, Bigelow, and Spielberg appear to be shoo-ins. Lee and Hooper seem the most vulnerable. I think Lee’s beautiful visionary direction for Life of Pi keeps him in. I am much less confident in Tom Hooper for Les Mis and could easily see Russell replacing him.

At the end of the day though, I have to stick with the five directors I’ve been going with that just happen to be the DGA nominees from a few hours ago.

FINAL PREDICTIONS: BEST DIRECTOR

Ben Affleck, Argo

Kathryn Bigelow, Zero Dark Thirty

Tom Hooper, Les Miserables

Ang Lee, Life of Pi

Steven Spielberg, Lincoln

Be sure to check back tomorrow for my predictions for the big one – Best Picture!

UPDATED – Who Will Direct Star Wars – Episode VII?

All the way back on October 31st, I wrote a post very shortly after it was announced that Disney had acquired the right to LucasFilm and would be producing Episodes VII, VIII, and IX of Star Wars.

The announcement was a shock to the industry… more Star Wars movies!!! The deal led to immediate speculation on the director that would be chosen for the monumental task of restarting the franchise. In my late October blog post, I listed 20 potential directors that I felt were most likely to be offered the gig. That post can be found here:

https://toddmthatcher.wordpress.com/2012/10/31/who-will-direct-star-wars-episode-vii/

Well, much has changed since then. Three of the directors I listed in my Top Ten have since announced that they will not be the director. They are:

My #9 pick – Sam Mendes, who most recently directed Skyfall, the 007 flick that just passed a billion dollars at the box office worldwide. He made it clear in a recent interview that he didn’t expect to be offered the job and likely wouldn’t direct it anyway. You never know, but Mendes seems out of the race.

My #5 pick – Guillermo Del Toro, the great visionary director of the Hellboy movies, Pan’s Labyrinth, and this summer’s Pacific Rim. Just yesterday, Del Toro confirmed that he received a call from Disney gauging his interest, but that his plate was too full for Star Wars.

And last, but certainly not least…

My #1 pick – Brad Bird, who earned two Animated Feature Oscars through his work with Pixar (also owned by Disney) for The Incredibles and Ratatouille. In 2011, Bird made his live-action debut with Mission Impossible: Ghost Protocol where he reinvigorated that franchise. With his Disney ties and great results with Mission, Bird seemed like an obvious choice and my preferred choice. However, he has announced that he will not be the director and is focusing on other projects.

So… where does that leave us? I thought the director announcement might come before the close of 2012. With that not occurring, we’re left to wonder whether we’ll know by month’s end. It’s certainly possible.

With all the recent movement, I’ve decided to pare down my list of 20 Likely Directors to 10 Likely Directors. If you think I’d just move everyone up a slot with Bird, Del Toro, and Mendes out, you would be exactly wrong. There are actually two new names in my now Top 10 that weren’t in my Top 20 over two months ago. Others that were in the October Top 10 have dropped out and some who were between 10-20 have moved up in the Star Wars world. Without further adieu, my Top 10 Most Likely Directors for Star Wars: Episode VII:

10. Neil Blomkamp (Previous Ranking: #3)

Blomkamp made a huge splash with his directorial debut, the original and inventive District 9. He gets a much bigger budget with this year’s Elysium with Matt Damon and Jodie Foster. Blomkamp has shown immense talent with sci-fi, but I have a sneaking suspicion he may not be as highly rated as I once thought and he’s had several move ahead in my view. Also, Blomkamp writes all his own stuff and we don’t even know if he’d want to work off someone else’s screenplay.

9. Lee Unkrich (Previous Ranking: Unranked)

Unkrich simply wasn’t on my radar screen when I posted in October. He has co-directed a number of Pixar features and made his solo directing debut with 2010’s rapturously received Toy Story 3. With fellow Pixar alum Brad Bird out, might Disney turn to another one for this franchise? It seems feasible, even though having Star Wars as your first live-action movie is a pretty tall order.

8. Drew Goddard (Previous Ranking: #4)

Goddard has slipped a bit as well. His first feature, last year’s Cabin in the Woods, was a lot of fun and very well-directed. As I wrote about in October, it helps that he’s Joss Whedon’s right-hand man. Whedon, as you may know, happened to direct a little movie called The Avengers for Disney last year and that turned out about as well as humanly possible. His association with Whedon is a huge plus, but again I think there’s others that have moved ahead. Whedon, it should be noted, is all but out because he’ll be working on The Avengers sequel.

7. Joe Kosinki (Previous Ranking: Unranked)

Our second newbie to the list, Kasinki directed Disney’s 2010 film Tron: Legacy and it grossed over $400 million worldwide. His follow-up feature is this April’s sci-fi thriller Oblivion with Tom Cruise. If the word on Oblivion turns out positive, that combination coupled with Disney’s earlier success with him could make Kosinski a major contender.

6. David Yates (Previous Ranking: #12)

Yates seems like a natural choice: he directed the last four Harry Potter pictures to great acclaim and enormous box office results. He’s already proven he can successfully take a beloved franchise and keep it running with very positive results. Yates would probably rank higher here, but Warner Bros. is likely to offer him any project he desires to keep him with the company, included the eagerly-awaited Justice League movie.

5. Joe Johnston (Previous Ranking: #14)

This selection is beginning to make a lot more sense to me than in October. A veteran director, Johnston actually did the visual effects on the original Star Wars trilogy. He then moved on to direct high-profile features like Jumanji and Jurassic Park III. His connection with Disney is now strong after directing 2011’s Captain America: The First Avenger. 

4. Rupert Wyatt (Previous Ranking: #11)

Wyatt earned a lot of props with his directorial debut, 2011’s terrific Rise of the Planet of the Apes. Like Mr. Yates, Mr. Wyatt proved he could take over a well-known franchise and infuse it with energy. Wyatt was scheduled to direct the Apes sequel, but dropped out so he’s open for business right now.

3. Jon Favreau (Previous Ranking: #15)

Here’s another one who’s jumped way up. Favreau is the man responsible for starting the whole Avengers franchise after directing both Iron Man flicks to critical acclaim and huge box office. Disney reportedly loves working with him and his success with the Marvel franchise (which Disney owns) might get him the offer for this franchise.

2. Alfonso Cuaron (Previous Ranking: #2)

Cuaron is the only director to keep his previous ranking and for good reason. He’d be an inspired choice after directing the greatest Harry Potter film (Prisoner of Azkaban) and the amazingly directed Children of Men. This year, audiences will see Gravity, his sci-fi epic with George Clooney and Sandra Bullock. Cuaron has stayed conspicuously quiet and he certainly hasn’t ruled himself out, which makes this a real possibility.

But, at the end of the day, there’s got to be a number one pick and with my previous selection, Brad Bird, out of the running, the new #1 is….

1. Matthew Vaughn (Previous Ranking: #7)

Vaughn has jumped to #1 mostly because there’s a lot of rumors that he’s been offered the film. That news broke weeks ago and I wrote about it here:

https://toddmthatcher.wordpress.com/2012/11/05/we-may-already-know-who-is-directing-star-wars/

The best news: if these rumors turn out true, Vaughn is a fine choice. Like some of my other top ten picks, he’s already proven he can restart a franchise to great results, after 2011’s X-Men: First Class. I still find it noteworthy that he dropped out of directing the sequel to X-Men. His name has been swirling around for some time now and he’s said nothing, which tells me he’s probably interested.

And that’s where we are today, my friends. We shall find out soon if any of these predictions have any merit. Stay tuned!