<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:wfw="http://wellformedweb.org/CommentAPI/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	xmlns:slash="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/slash/"
	>

<channel>
	<title>Loaded Couch Potatoes &#187; Up</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.loadedcouchpotatoes.com/tag/up/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.loadedcouchpotatoes.com</link>
	<description></description>
	<lastBuildDate>Tue, 30 Aug 2011 05:17:40 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<language>en</language>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.2.1</generator>
		<item>
		<title>Box-Office Review: July 10-12, 2009</title>
		<link>http://www.loadedcouchpotatoes.com/2009/07/13/box-office-review-july-10-12-2009/</link>
		<comments>http://www.loadedcouchpotatoes.com/2009/07/13/box-office-review-july-10-12-2009/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Mon, 13 Jul 2009 06:18:09 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Honk Mahfah</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Box-Office Review]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Harry Potter]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Movies]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Harry Potter and the Half-Blood Prince]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Johnny Depp]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Michael Bay]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Pu]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Public Enemies]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Ryan Reynolds]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Sacha Baron Cohen]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[The Hangover]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Transformers]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Up]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.loadedcouchpotatoes.com/?p=2064</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[After a couple of high-profile box-office weekends, this one was just plain old boring.  Thing are going to be lively enough come Wednesday, though, so don&#8217;t feel too bad for all those ticket sellers and popcorn slingers. (1)  Bruno ($30.4 million, $11,040 per screen):  As a de-facto sequel to Borat &#8212; which made nearly as [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>After a couple of high-profile box-office weekends, this one was just plain old boring.  Thing are going to be lively enough come Wednesday, though, so don&#8217;t feel too bad for all those ticket sellers and popcorn slingers.</p>
<p><span id="more-2064"></span>(1)  <em>Bruno</em> ($30.4 million, $11,040 per screen):  As a de-facto sequel to <em>Borat</em> &#8212; which made nearly as much in its <em>second</em> weekend as this one did in its debut&#8211; there is simply no way to look at this as anything other than a disappointment.  Consider the fact that its Friday numbers accounted for nearly half of its overall weekend, and I think it&#8217;s clear that <em>Bruno </em>is little more than a blip on the summer-movie radar, destined to be all but forgotten by this time next week.  Move along, nothing to see here.</p>
<p>(2)  <em>Ice Age: Dawn of the Dinosaurs </em>($28.5 million, $6948 per screen, $120.5 million total):  Down roughly thirty percent this weekend, it&#8217;s a solid hold for the toon, for &#8212; as I believe I said last week, too &#8212; I can&#8217;t shake the feeling that Fox must have wanted more.  If nothing else, this offers proof that summer really <em>isn&#8217;t </em>the be-all, end-all of blockbuster release dates; the previous two films in this series opened in the spring, and this one is only doing about as well as those did; clearly, at least in this case, it&#8217;s the movie, not the release date.</p>
<p>(3)  <em>Transformers: Revenge of the Fallen </em>($24.2 million, $5637 per screen, $339.2 million total):  Dropping only about forty percent this weekend, the Autobots continue to chug along, damn their hollow metal souls.  They&#8217;re likely to suffer a bit at the hands of Hogwarts next week, though.</p>
<p>(4)  <em>Public Enemies </em>($14.1 million, $4230 per screen, $66.5 million total):  Down 45% this weekend, that&#8217;s not bad, but neither is it an omen of particularly good word of mouth.  Look for this movie to top out at about $85 million and enjoy a long, comfortable life in the home market.</p>
<p>(5)  <em>The Proposal </em>($10.5 million, $3327 per screen, $113.7 million total):  Down less than twenty percent this weekend, Ryan Reynolds has considerable cause to celebrate this weekend; between this and the news that he&#8217;s been cast as the Green Lantern in that movie, he&#8217;s doing okay for himself the past few days.</p>
<p>(6)  <em>The Hangover </em>($9.9 million, $3308 per screen, $222.4 million total):  If someone had told you on May 1 that <em>The Hangover </em>would make close to $250 million, would you have believed them?  Yeah, me neither.</p>
<p>(7)  <em>I Love You Beth Cooper </em>($5 million, $2691 per screen):  That&#8217;s a miserable debut, but Fox dumped the movie, so it probably could have been even worse.  Clearly, Hayden Panettiere is going to have to wait to become a star.</p>
<p>(8)  <em>Up </em>($4.6 million, $2115 per screen, $273.7 million total):  It doesn&#8217;t appear that <em>Up </em>is going to be able to make it to the $300 million mark, but it&#8217;s still got an outside shot.  Definitely one of this summer&#8217;s biggest success stories, and probably its best movie.  Until <em>G-Force </em>comes out, that is.</p>
<p>(9)  <em>My Sister&#8217;s Keeper </em>($4.1 million, $1710 per screen, $35.8 million total):  Yawn&#8230;</p>
<p>(10)  <em>The Taking of Pelham 1 2 3 </em>($1.6 million, $1434 per screen, $61.4 million total):  &#8230;so sleepy&#8230;</p>
<p>Wednesday brings us <em>Harry Potter and the Half-Blood Prince</em>, and if the reviews are any indication, it&#8217;s not only the best film of the series, but it&#8217;s the best by a large margin.  Advance ticket sales are through the roof, so look for the record for midnight-show openings to possibly be toppled.  This is a perennially strong series, so who knows how high the opening weekend could go.  I don&#8217;t think the five-day record being broken is in the cards &#8230; <strong>but</strong> &#8230; those advance sales <em>are </em>awfully strong.</p>
<p>My prediction: from Wednesday through Sunday, $185 million.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.loadedcouchpotatoes.com/2009/07/13/box-office-review-july-10-12-2009/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Box-Office Review: July 3-5, 2009</title>
		<link>http://www.loadedcouchpotatoes.com/2009/07/07/box-office-review-july-3-5-2009/</link>
		<comments>http://www.loadedcouchpotatoes.com/2009/07/07/box-office-review-july-3-5-2009/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Tue, 07 Jul 2009 07:37:51 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Honk Mahfah</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Box-Office Review]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Movies]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Pixar]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Bruno]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Disney]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Johnny Depp]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Michael Bay]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Public Enemies]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Sacha Baron Cohen]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Transformers]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Up]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.loadedcouchpotatoes.com/?p=1933</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[July the 4th fell on a Saturday this year, so rib bones and corn-on-the-cobb put a bit of a dent in the box-office.  Or did it? (1)  Transformers: Revenge of the Fallen ($42.3 million, $9995 per screen, $293.3 million total):  Well, I&#8217;m not claiming it was a bad weekend for the ghettobots, but the big-ticket [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>July the 4th fell on a Saturday this year, so rib bones and corn-on-the-cobb put a bit of a dent in the box-office.  Or did it?</p>
<p><span id="more-1933"></span>(1)  <em>Transformers: Revenge of the Fallen </em>($42.3 million, $9995 per screen, $293.3 million total):  Well, I&#8217;m not claiming it was a bad weekend for the ghettobots, but the big-ticket sequel <em>did </em>slide by 61% this weekend.  It&#8217;s tempting to chalk that up to the holiday, but I&#8217;m not convinced punching England in the eye was actually to blame, at least not fully.  Likely, that combined with bad reviews, the opening of <em>Ice Age</em>, and the monster opening week to limit the number of people buying tickets this weekend.  It&#8217;s still going to make a serious run at $400 million, but for a movie that opened only a hair less impressively than <em>The Dark Knight</em>, which ended up making well over $500 million total &#8230; well, all of a sudden, <em>Revenge of the Fallen </em>starts looking a little weaker.  Only a little, but hey, I&#8217;ll take what I can get, &#8217;cause that movie sucks three-day nutsack.</p>
<p>(2)  <em>Ice Age: Dawn of the Dinosaurs </em>($41.6 million, $10,171 per screen, $66.7 million total):  I&#8217;m gonna classify this one as a mild disappointment.  It managed to make only about as much in its first five days as the previous film in the series, and that&#8217;s despite the summer release date and the premium 3D ticket prices.  Sure, the holiday hurt, and the Transformers hurt more.  So what?  I think Fox ought to have been able to get more out of this movie.</p>
<p>(3)  <em>Public Enemies </em>($25.2 million, $7580 per screen, $40.1 million total):  $40 mil in five days is pretty decent for a gangster movie, but I don&#8217;t think it&#8217;s much more than decent, and you can thank Johnny Depp for that number.  Whatever he made on this movie, it was probably worth it.  Nobody seems to be raving about the movie, though, so I&#8217;m guessing legs aren&#8217;t going to be as good as might normally be the case for an older-skewing movie like this one.</p>
<p>(4)  <em>The Proposal </em>($12.8 million, $4149 per screen, $94.3 million total):  Down only 31% despite the holiday, <em>The Propsal </em>has turned into a significant hit, and as far as date movies go, it&#8217;s got a few more weeks before any real competition shows up.  A major success for Disney this summer.</p>
<p>(5)  <em>The Hangover </em>($11.2 million, $3670 per screen, $205 million total):  Speaking of major successes, this one might be able to make it to $250 million before it&#8217;s all said and done.  It might get hurt by <em>Bruno </em>this weekend, though.</p>
<p>(6)  <em>Up </em>($6.5 million, $2455 per screen, $264.8 million total):  Dropping 50% this weekend, that&#8217;s its worst decline so far, but not too shabby considering that <em>Ice Age </em>opened.  It became Pixar&#8217;s second-highest-grossing movie, which is awesome (news that is tempered somewhat when you realize that if inflation is considered, it ranks only seventh on the list &#8230; although really, that&#8217;s still pretty frickin&#8217; good).</p>
<p>(7)  <em>My Sister&#8217;s Keeper </em>($5.7 million, $2221 per screen, $26.5 million total):  Crumbling 53%, that&#8217;s not a result conducive to many more weeks in cinemas.</p>
<p>(8)  <em>The Taking of Pelham 1 2 3 </em>($2.5 million, $1328 per screen, $58.5 million total):  For a movie that cost $100 million, this is a fairly pathetic performance.  Can we get Tony Scott to stop making movies now?  Who am I kidding; he&#8217;ll probably direct the inevitable <em>Voltron </em>movie and make something even worse than <em>Transformers</em>.</p>
<p>(9)  <em>Year One </em>($2.3 million, $1037 per screen, $38.3 million total):  Continuing its unimpressive run, I&#8217;m pleased that this will be the final week in which I write about this movie.</p>
<p>(10)  <em>Night at the Museum: Battle of the Smithsonian </em>($2 million, $1440 per screen, $167.7 million total):  Ditto.</p>
<p>Next week we get <em>Bruno </em>and <em>I Love You, Beth Cooper</em>.  The Austrian gets about $27 million, and the cheerleader saves neither the world nor the box office, pulling in, oh, I&#8217;m a-gonna say $13 million.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.loadedcouchpotatoes.com/2009/07/07/box-office-review-july-3-5-2009/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Box-Office Review: June 26-28, 2009</title>
		<link>http://www.loadedcouchpotatoes.com/2009/06/29/box-office-review-june-26-28-2009/</link>
		<comments>http://www.loadedcouchpotatoes.com/2009/06/29/box-office-review-june-26-28-2009/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Mon, 29 Jun 2009 20:52:23 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Honk Mahfah</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Box-Office Review]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Movies]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Bad Robot]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Disney]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Johnny Depp]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Michael Bay]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Michael Mann]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Public Enemies]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Ryan Reynolds]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Sam Mendes]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Sandra Bullock]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Star Trek 11]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[The Hangover]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Transformers]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Up]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.loadedcouchpotatoes.com/?p=1852</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[What the fuck, America? (1)  Transformers: Revenge of the Fallen ($112 million, $26.453 per screen, $201.2 million total):  America, you got a &#8220;what the fuck&#8221; from me once already this year after the opening weekend of Paul Blart: Mall Cop, but this time, you&#8217;ve really done it.  Honestly, what the fuck?!?  As a giant fan [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>What the fuck, America?</p>
<p><span id="more-1852"></span>(1)  <em>Transformers: Revenge of the Fallen </em>($112 million, $26.453 per screen, $201.2 million total):  America, you got a &#8220;what the fuck&#8221; from me once already this year after the opening weekend of <em>Paul Blart: Mall Cop</em>, but this time, you&#8217;ve really done it.  Honestly, <strong>what the fuck</strong>?!?  As a giant fan of the movie industry, I&#8217;m thrilled to see any movie pull in $200 million in five days, but I am genuinely mystified and unsettled for <em>Revenge of the Fallen </em>&#8211; a movie with virtually no actual value &#8212; to be the one to have done it.  There are positives I am going to choose to take away from all this: one, that the industry as a whole is still quite strong in terms of its potential; and, two, that this is probably a good omen for how future sequels such as <em>Iron Man 2 </em>and <em>Star Trek 2/12 </em>will perform.</p>
<p>All ire aside, it&#8217;s a phenomenal debut, and once the final figures are released, there&#8217;s a possibility that <em>The Dark Knight </em>could be unseated as the top five-day earner in movie history.  The question now is, how much more will <em>Revenge of the Fallen </em>make during its run?  It&#8217;ll almost certainly be well past $300 million by the time I write this column again, and $400 million would seem to be a lock.  Past that, frankly, I don&#8217;t care to think about.</p>
<p>(2)  <em>The Proposal </em>($18.4 million, $6039 per screen, $69 million total):  The rest of the top 10 seems almost irrelevant considering how well <em>Transformers </em>did, but let&#8217;s soldier on anyways.  The giant robots threw everything for a loop, but <em>The Proposal </em>held up relatively well, considering, and now qualifies as a genuine hit.  It&#8217;s going to make $100 million, and for a movie starring Sandra Bullock and Ryan Reynolds, that&#8217;s awesome.  Both are suddenly bankable, at least on paper and in contract negoatiation meetings.</p>
<p>(3)  <em>The Hangover </em>($17.2 million, $4884 per screen, $183.2 million total):  Dropping 36% this weekend (steeper than has been the case, but still good), <em>The Hangover </em>continues to chug along.  It&#8217;ll pass the $200 million mark sometime around the 4th of July, marking a time of celebration for missing-toothed dentists and roofie salesmen everywhere.</p>
<p>(4)  <em>Up </em>($13 million, $3741 per screen, $250.2 million total):  It&#8217;ll take a big hit this week when <em>Ice Age 3 </em>opens and takes away most of its 3D screens, but even if <em>Up </em>earned nary another dime in cinemas, it&#8217;s had an awesome run.  And the fact is, it&#8217;s not finished.  It&#8217;s a long, long way to $300 million, but <em>Up </em>might have what it takes to get there.  Then again, it might not: it was down nearly 45% this weekend, a steeper drop than it has been experiencing, which suggests that families opted for Autobots instead of Octogenarians this weekend.  With <em>Transformers </em>and <em>Ice Age </em>on screens, and the kids at Hogwarts just arund the corner, the competition may simply be too fierce for Pixar to hit $300 million with <em>Up</em>.  If so, nobody will feel it was a let-down.</p>
<p>(5)  <em>My Sister&#8217;s Keeper </em>($12 million, $4616 per screen):  I&#8217;m nt sure anybody expected much from this movie, so with that in mind, <em>My Sister&#8217;s Keeper </em>actually had a pretty good weekend.  Per screen, it made more than <em>Up</em>, in fact.  With the choices for adults still pretty slim, this might be able to stick around for a few weeks and end up being a mild sleeper hit.</p>
<p>(6)  <em>Year One </em>($5.8 million, $1918 per screen, $32.2 million total):  Plummeting 70% this weekend, <em>Year One </em>is clearly not a well-liked film.  It&#8217;s going to make even less than <em>Land of the Lost</em>, probably putting an end to comedies set in ancient times for a while.</p>
<p>(7)  <em>The Taking of Pelham 1 2 3 </em>($5.4 million, $1803 per screen, $53.4 million total):  Dropping another 55%, this movie is simply not doing very well.  It isn&#8217;t an outright bomb, but it was misplaced in the summer, and Sony is probably kicking themselves for it.</p>
<p>(8)  <em>Night at the Museum: Battle of the Smithsonian </em>($3.6 million, $1619 per screen, $163.3 million total):  Down 53%, the museum-comes-to-life movie was obviously hurt by the robotic-cars-come-to-life movie.  Of the two, I&#8217;d pick the one with Amy Adams, but hey, that&#8217;s just me.</p>
<p>(9)  <em>Star Trek </em>($3.6 million, $1978 per screen, $246.2 million total):  Given that <em>Transformers 2 </em>will make as much in something like ten days, it&#8217;s hard to get too impressed by <em>Star Trek</em>&#8216;s total gross.  But it <strong>is </strong>fairly impressive, and the movie continues to play well from week to week.  It made more per screen this weekend than the three films above it in the top ten, which is a good sign of how devoted people are to it.  I continue to wonder, though, if it&#8217;s new fans finding it each weekend, or if Trekkies are just going to see it nine times each.  I&#8217;m hoping it&#8217;s about half and half.</p>
<p>(10)  <em>Away We Go </em>($1.6 million, $3390 per screen, $4 million total):  Making a surprise appearance in the top 10, the Sam Mendes dramedy expanded to semi-wide status this weekend, and got decent results.  Clearly, this is no <em>Little Miss Sunshine </em>or <em>Juno</em>, at least not yet, but if Focus can continue to get good results from the larger cities, maybe the smaller burgs will follow suit.  It&#8217;s going to be hard to get those screens freed up, though.  Netflix will be the beneficiary of this one.</p>
<p>Next weekend should be an absolute barnburner.  With one Optimus Prime-sized colossus already in theatres, the industry also offers up a 3D sequel to a very popular animated series.  Oh yeah, and some Johnny Depp gangster movie, too.</p>
<p>My prediction for <em>Ice Age: Dawn of the Dinosaurs </em>is that for the five-day, it makes over $100 million and ends up in first place.  This could easily fail, however, if <em>Transformers </em>manages to hold its audience.  I&#8217;m betting half of it evaporates, but if that doesn&#8217;t happen, it&#8217;ll be on top for a second straight weekend, and <em>Ice Age </em>will have to settle for the silver.</p>
<p>As for <em>Public Enemies</em>, it&#8217;s a dark horse, but also a bit of a wild card (if I may be allowed that many metaphors in a single sentence).  The appeal of Johnny Depp shouldn&#8217;t be underestimated, and neither should the perpetual appeal of the gangster flick.  Also, there haven&#8217;t been too many movies lately for grownups.  If all of those factors come together just right, John Dillinger will be culturally relevant again; if it doesn&#8217;t, then we&#8217;ve got a movie that is going to fail to make much of a dent.  Personally, I think the latter scenario is the likeliest: I&#8217;m predicting $30 million for the five-day.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.loadedcouchpotatoes.com/2009/06/29/box-office-review-june-26-28-2009/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Oscar to Begin Honoring Ten Best Picture Nominees</title>
		<link>http://www.loadedcouchpotatoes.com/2009/06/24/oscar-to-begin-honoring-ten-best-picture-nominees/</link>
		<comments>http://www.loadedcouchpotatoes.com/2009/06/24/oscar-to-begin-honoring-ten-best-picture-nominees/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Wed, 24 Jun 2009 18:40:53 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Honk Mahfah</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Movies]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Bad Robot]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Disney]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Oscars]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Pixar]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Star Trek 11]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[The Hangover]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Transformers]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Up]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.loadedcouchpotatoes.com/?p=1735</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[According to Variety, the Oscars will, beginning in 2010, begin nominating ten movies for Best Picture.  This will be the first time since 1943 that the Academy has nominated that many films for its top prize; that year&#8217;s winner was Casablanca. The move toward more nominess seems to be specifically engineered to include more popular [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p><a href="http://www.variety.com/article/VR1118005322.html?categoryid=13&amp;cs=1" target="_blank" onclick="pageTracker._trackPageview('/outgoing/www.variety.com/article/VR1118005322.html?categoryid=13_amp_cs=1&amp;referer=');">According to <em>Variety</em></a>, the Oscars will, beginning in 2010, begin nominating ten movies for Best Picture.  This will be the first time since 1943 that the Academy has nominated that many films for its top prize; that year&#8217;s winner was <em>Casablanca</em>.</p>
<p>The move toward more nominess seems to be specifically engineered to include more popular films, and, I suspect, to boost ratings for the telecast of the show.</p>
<p>So, what box-office champs will benefit from the decision this year?  Could we be looking at the first-ever Best Picture-nominated <em>Star Trek </em>movie?  Or could Pixar finally get their due?  I&#8217;ll go ahead and put my bet on <em>The Hangover</em>, and I make to you this promise: if <em>Transformers: Revenge of the Fallen </em>is nominated for Best Picture, I will never watch the Oscars again.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.loadedcouchpotatoes.com/2009/06/24/oscar-to-begin-honoring-ten-best-picture-nominees/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Box-Office Review: June 19-21, 2009</title>
		<link>http://www.loadedcouchpotatoes.com/2009/06/22/box-office-review-june-19-21-2009/</link>
		<comments>http://www.loadedcouchpotatoes.com/2009/06/22/box-office-review-june-19-21-2009/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Mon, 22 Jun 2009 06:12:52 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Honk Mahfah</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Box-Office Review]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Movies]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Bad Robot]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Disney]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Pixar]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Ryan Reynolds]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Sandra Bullock]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Star Trek 11]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[The Hangover]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Transformers]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Up]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Woody Allen]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.loadedcouchpotatoes.com/?p=1709</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[So &#8230; did the three dudes with headaches hang over to a third weekend at the top of the box office? Hah-hah-heh-hah-hah!  Get it?  Hang over?  Ooh-eeh-hooh-hah-hah!  (EDITOR&#8217;S NOTE: Ting-tang, walla-walla bang-bang&#8230;?) You know, like the movie The Hangover!  Is big hit!  You like! (1)  The Proposal ($34.1 million, $11,163 per screen):  No, they did [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>So &#8230; did the three dudes with headaches <em>hang over</em> to a third weekend at the top of the box office?</p>
<p>Hah-hah-heh-hah-hah!  Get it?  <em><strong>Hang over</strong></em>?  Ooh-eeh-hooh-hah-hah!  (EDITOR&#8217;S NOTE: Ting-tang, walla-walla bang-bang&#8230;?)</p>
<p>You know, like the movie <em>The Hangover</em>!  Is big hit!  You like!</p>
<p><span id="more-1709"></span>(1)  <em>The Proposal </em>($34.1 million, $11,163 per screen):  No, they did <strong>not </strong><em>hang over </em>to a third consecutive #1 performance.  Top of the heap this weekend belongs to Sandra Bullock (having a career-best opening weekend) and Ryan Reynolds (possibly cementing his status as an A-lister).  The writing was on the wall for this one when sneak previews did extremely well last weekend, and while <em>The Hangover </em>&#8211; a de facto date movie &#8212; might have hurt it in Spock Prime&#8217;s universe, in this one it doesn&#8217;t seem to have hurt it a bit.  Legs could be long, because they usually are for romantic comedies.</p>
<p>(2)  <em>The Hangover </em>($26.8 million, $7575 per screen, $152.9 million total):  Down a measly 18% this weekend, this movie is starting to look less like a word-of-mouth hit and more like a word-of-mouth phenomenon.  For stinging red fuck&#8217;s sake, Hollywood, please pay attention to this: a movie that isn&#8217;t a superhero flick or a remake <strong>CAN </strong>still be an enormous hit.</p>
<p>(3)  <em>Up </em>($21.3 million, $5568 per screen, $224.1 million):  Speaking of which &#8230; please take notice of <em>Up</em>.  Actually, don&#8217;t.  Unless you actually <em>are </em>Pixar, you ain&#8217;t Pixar, and I&#8217;d truly hate to see what Hollywood aping Pixar would look like.  It&#8217;s down 31% this weekend, and will likely take some abuse from both <em>Transformers </em>and <em>Ice Age </em>over the next couple of weeks, but its status as a classic and as a big old fat hit is already in the bank; everything from this point on is gravy.  And there may yet be a lot of gravy.</p>
<p>(4)  <em>Year One </em>($20.2 million, $6684 per screen):  Not nearly as bad an opening as it might have had, when you consider how bad the reviews were, and how well the considerable competition (specifically, from <em>The Proposal </em>and <em>The Hangover</em>) did this weekend.  Where will the movie go from here?  My inclination is to say straight to the $5 bin at Wal-Mart, but I didn&#8217;t think it would open this well, so maybe I&#8217;m not the best judge of <em>Year One</em>&#8216;s appeal.</p>
<p>(5)  <em>The Taking of Pelham 1 2 3 </em>($11.3 million, $3672 per screen, $43.3 million total):  Yikes.  Down 52% this weekend; not good for an adult-centric movie.  Unless this thing levels out quickly, it&#8217;s not going to make even $75 million.  And if that gets Tony Scott to stop making movies, then I&#8217;m all for it.  People: go see <em>The Hangover </em>or <em>Up </em>instead!</p>
<p>(6)  <em>Night at the Museum: Battle of the Smithsonian </em>($7.3 million, $2465 per screen, $155.9 million total):  With summer in full swing, parents are getting desperate to get their children out of the house &#8230; so desperate, in fact, that they&#8217;ll stoop so low as to take them to see this movie.  It&#8217;s down only 24% this weekend, which is really quite good.  Fox is doing extremely well with this movie in its later weeks, and while it&#8217;s still not going to get close to the performance of its ancestor, it&#8217;s doing okay.</p>
<p>(7)  <em>Star Trek </em>($4.7 million, $2037 per screen, $239.4 million total):  Ah, yes, <em>Star Trek</em>.  This movie is doing extremely well at this point in its run.  This weekend, it dropped a best-in-the-top-ten 14%(!), and managed to sneak past <em>Star Trek: The Motion Picture </em>to become (arguably) the most successful Trek movie of all time.  Until somebody does a better job, J.J. Abrams has set the bar for how to properly do a remake, or a reboot, or a reimagining, or whatever you want to call this.  I can&#8217;t wait to see where it goes from here (not just for the franchise, but for the director and his new superstars).  Here&#8217;s hoping Chris Pine can avoid Shatner&#8217;s mistakes, and that Zachary Quinto&#8217;s agent can get him out of that <em>Heroes </em>contract, stat.</p>
<p>(8)  <em>Land of the Lost </em>($3.9 million, $1350 per screen, $43.6 million total):  Fading fast, the Will Ferrell-led sci-fi comedy is going to go down in history as a grave misstep for all involved, except for composer Michael Giacchino, who&#8217;s got <em>Star Trek </em>and <em>Up </em>to keep him warm at night.</p>
<p>(9)  <em>Imagine That </em>($3.1 million, $1030 per screen, $11.3 million total):  Somehow, this movie managed to add three screens this weekend.  Seriously&#8230;?  Who looked at its performance last weekend and said, &#8220;Yep, better get me some o&#8217; that&#8221;?  Regardless, it&#8217;s a huge dud for Murphy and Paramount, and will be long gone two weeks from now.</p>
<p>(10)  <em>Terminator Salvation </em>($3 million, $1599 per screen, $119.5 million total):  Continuing to slink off in disgrace, McG&#8217;s magnum opus spends one final week in the top ten in America.  No word yet on how it did overseas this weekend; it&#8217;s been doing admirably outside the states, though, so maybe all is not yet lost for the franchise.</p>
<p>(17)  <em>Whatever Works</em>:  Opening on nine screens and averaging $31,222 per, Woody Allen&#8217;s latest comedy got mostly good reviews and did standard opening-weekend Woody business.  It likely won&#8217;t go much further from there, but hey, you never know.</p>
<p>Next week &#8212; Tuesday around midnight, in fact &#8212; brings us the much-anticipated <em>Transformers: Revenge of the Fallen</em>.  Yawn, says I.  &#8220;Sure, we&#8217;ll be <em>thrilled</em> to part with our $175 million,&#8221; says America by the time Monday has arrived.</p>
<p>Also opening, for some unknown reason, is <em>My Sister&#8217;s Keeper</em>, a Cameron Diaz/Abigail Breslin movie.  It hits on Friday, and I&#8217;ll be surprised if it cracks the top ten.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.loadedcouchpotatoes.com/2009/06/22/box-office-review-june-19-21-2009/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Box-Office Review: June 12-15, 2009</title>
		<link>http://www.loadedcouchpotatoes.com/2009/06/15/box-office-review-june-12-15-2009/</link>
		<comments>http://www.loadedcouchpotatoes.com/2009/06/15/box-office-review-june-12-15-2009/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Mon, 15 Jun 2009 18:58:45 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Honk Mahfah</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Box-Office Review]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Movies]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Disney]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Drag Me to Hell]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Pixar]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Terminator Salvation]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[The Hangover]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[The Terminator]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Up]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.loadedcouchpotatoes.com/?p=1447</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[The Hangover spends a second consecutive weekend at the number one spot, barely staving off a blockbuster opening by Eddie Murphy&#8217;s Imagine That. To find out which part of that is bullshit, keep reading. (1)  The Hangover ($33.4 million, $9960 per screen, $105.3 million total):  Dropping a mere 26% from its excellent debut weekend, the [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p><em>The Hangover </em>spends a second consecutive weekend at the number one spot, barely staving off a blockbuster opening by Eddie Murphy&#8217;s <em>Imagine That</em>.</p>
<p>To find out which part of that is bullshit, keep reading.</p>
<p><span id="more-1447"></span>(1)  <em>The Hangover</em> ($33.4 million, $9960 per screen, $105.3 million total):  Dropping a mere 26% from its excellent debut weekend, the Vegas-themed comedy is opening cans of whoop-ass every day.  Box-office analysts &#8212; the amateur ones (like me!), at least &#8212; tend to be a bit myopic, paying attention only to weekend numbers.  Anybody doing that would have missed the fact that after its opening weekend, <em>The Hangover </em>grossed just under $27 million from Monday through Thursday; word of mouth was strong, and so were ticket sales.  You&#8217;d have to be a retard to think this wasn&#8217;t going to translate into a phenomenal second weekend.  The movie&#8217;ll have no trouble whatsoever hitting $200 million; I&#8217;d wager that the film&#8217;s key creative personnel both in front of and behind the camera are going to be getting big raises &#8230; as will everyone at Warner Bros. responsible for greenlighting and marketing the movie.</p>
<p>(2)  <em>Up </em>($30.5 million, $7853 per screen, $187.1 million total):  Everybody at Pixar deserves a raise too &#8230; but Christ, when <em>haven&#8217;t </em>they?  Speaking of solid weekday totals, <em>Up </em>brought in nearly $19.5 million between last weekend and this one.  The movie is on pace to be Pixar&#8217;s biggest hit since <em>The Incredibles</em>, and it&#8217;s got a shot at topping even that one.</p>
<p>(3)  <em>The Taking of Pelham 1 2 3</em> ($25 million, $8133 per screen):  The box-office allure of both Denzel Washington and John Travolta has sometimes been overestimated; the truth is, neither of those guys has ever been a name that would drive a truly blockbuster opening.  What they both <em>have </em>done is been fairly consistent at at least getting people to notice their movies.  And that&#8217;s basically what happened here: nothing grand or notable, but big enough that in a few year&#8217;s time, people will still be at least aware that such a movie exists.  If that seems like an uninteresting way to describe it, well, you&#8217;re probably right, but that don&#8217;t make <em>me</em> wrong.</p>
<p>(4)  <em>Night at the Museum: Battle of the Smithsonian</em> ($9.6 million, $2853 per screen, $143.4 million total):  Down only 34% this week, the sequel has done fairly well for itself after a somewhat disappointing opening.  Unquestionably hurt by <em>Up</em>, I wonder if it&#8217;s begun to benefit from sold-out shows of Pixar&#8217;s hit?  Possibly.  I doubt we&#8217;ll see a third film in this franchise, but if we do, I&#8217;ll betcha it opens at Christmastime.</p>
<p>(5)  <em>Land of the Lost </em>($9.1 million, $2590 per screen, $34.9 million total):  The Will Ferrell flick dropped 51% this weekend, which isn&#8217;t great &#8230; but I&#8217;ve seen far worse.  Can it be that people who saw it last weekend didn&#8217;t hate it quite as much as I predicted they would?  I don&#8217;t know, but it now appears that the movie will at least be able to make it to the $50 million mark.  It&#8217;s still a bit of a hemorrhoid for Universal &#8230; just maybe not a bleeding one.</p>
<p>(6)  <em>Imagine That </em>($5.7 million, $1895 per screen):  No, the Bleeding Hemorrhoid award for the week goes to Eddie Murphy, who has opened his second straight comedy beneath $6 million.  And I use the word &#8220;opened&#8221; loosely.  Come to think of it, I use the word &#8220;straight&#8221; loosely, too.  This guy&#8217;s career as a leading man is all but finished.  I&#8217;m sure there&#8217;ll be another sequel to <em>The Nutty Professor </em>or even <em>Beverly Hills Cop </em>to aim at reclaiming his place in people&#8217;s wallets, but if whatever that comeback role is fails, then Murphy is well advised to hang on for dear life to the check he&#8217;ll be getting for <em>Shrek 4</em>.</p>
<p>(7)  <em>Star Trek </em>($5.6 million, $2123 per screen, $232 million total):  Down 32% this weekend, <em>Star Trek </em>continues to hold well.  It&#8217;s going to be a hard road to $250 million, but the <em>Enterprise </em>might yet make it.</p>
<p>(8)  <em>Terminator Salvation </em>($4.6 million, $1772 per screen, $113.8 million total):  One weekend to go before <em>Transformers </em>opens and makes more in five days than this movie will make in its entire run.  Poor McG; all that bluster, wasted.  I don&#8217;t feel sorry for the guy, though, partly because he made a weak movie, but also because that weak movie is doing much better business elsewhere in the world than it is doing here in America.  Its international total is up to $165.5 million; if it can manage to double that, then I&#8217;d be willing to call it a hit.</p>
<p>(9)  <em>Angels &amp; Demons </em>($4.2 million, $1724 per screen, $123.3 million total):  <em>Angels &amp; Demons</em>, on the other hand, is definitely a hit.  It&#8217;s up to $315 million internationally, which is pretty darn good.  It&#8217;s been an underperformer stateside, but in this instance, it doesn&#8217;t much matter.</p>
<p>(10)  <em>Drag Me to Hell </em>($3.8 million, $1700 per screen, $35.1 million total):  If you are a horror movie fan and you haven&#8217;t been to see this movie, then go fuck yourself.  Some of the pure shit you were willing to shell out for, and you won&#8217;t support a genuinely <em>good </em>horror movie?  Yep.  You should go fuck yourself.</p>
<p>(14)  <em>Away We Go</em>:  The Sam Mendes dramedy expanded to 45 theatres, and averaged $12,311 per.  That&#8217;s not spectacular, but it&#8217;ll probably warrant further expansion and result in the movie being added to a lot of Netflix queues.</p>
<p>(20)  <em>Moon</em>:  Sam Rockwell&#8217;s sci-fi flick debuted on eight screens and averaged $18,125 per.  Please see the second sentence of the <em>Away We Go </em>results.</p>
<p>Opening next weekend: <em>The Proposal </em>and <em>Year One</em>.</p>
<p><em>The Proposal </em>had a sneak preview this past Saturday night, and played to 88% capacity, <a href="http://www.variety.com/article/VR1118004934.html?categoryid=10&amp;cs=1" target="_blank" onclick="pageTracker._trackPageview('/outgoing/www.variety.com/article/VR1118004934.html?categoryid=10_amp_cs=1&amp;referer=');">according to <em>Variety</em></a>.  That probably means the movie is going to be a hit; I&#8217;m a-gonna say &#8230; $29 million opening.</p>
<p><em>Year One </em>may be lucky to earn half that.  I&#8217;ve been wrong before &#8212; shocking, I know &#8212; but I don&#8217;t get the sense that anyone wants to see this movie.  Jack Black and Michael Cera will pull in a few hipsters while they&#8217;re not busy ironing their t-shirts and Febrezing their cabbies, but I&#8217;m guessing the rest of the country is going to be entirely unmoved.  Also, the hipsters will still be busy seeing <em>The Hangover</em>.  I&#8217;m going to say $11 million for <em>Year One</em>.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.loadedcouchpotatoes.com/2009/06/15/box-office-review-june-12-15-2009/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Carl Fredricksen = Dr. Malcolm Crowe?</title>
		<link>http://www.loadedcouchpotatoes.com/2009/06/13/carl-fredricksen-dr-malcolm-crowe/</link>
		<comments>http://www.loadedcouchpotatoes.com/2009/06/13/carl-fredricksen-dr-malcolm-crowe/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Sat, 13 Jun 2009 07:05:36 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Honk Mahfah</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Movies]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Pixar]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Cort and Fatboy]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Disney]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Up]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.loadedcouchpotatoes.com/?p=1444</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[On their most recent podcast, KUFO-Portland&#8217;s Cort and Fatboy had an interesting talk with local film critic Mike Russell in which they discussed Pixar&#8217;s current box-office goldmine Up. Russell floated an interesting theory about how to interpret the film &#8230; one involving Carl dying at an early point in the movie after being court-ordered to [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>On their most recent podcast, KUFO-Portland&#8217;s Cort and Fatboy had an interesting talk with local film critic Mike Russell in which they discussed Pixar&#8217;s current box-office goldmine <em>Up</em>.</p>
<p>Russell floated an interesting theory about how to interpret the film &#8230; one involving Carl dying at an early point in the movie after being court-ordered to vacate his home.  In this reading of the film, everything in the movie beginning with the morning on which Carl and his helium-powered home take flight represents a deathbed fantasy of how the elderly widower wishes his life could play out.</p>
<p>I have to say that I definitely come down on the Fatboy side of this argument in feeling like this particular reading is probably the wrong way to go.  However, Russell makes some good points, and it&#8217;s an entertaining discussion no matter which side of the issue one lands on.</p>
<p>What I ended up taking away from the conversation was no small amount of amazement that a summer kiddie movie could spark this type of conversation.  That, and a renewed conviction that Pixar is the best thing going in Hollywood.</p>
<p>Click <a href="http://www.cortandfatboy.com/" target="_blank" onclick="pageTracker._trackPageview('/outgoing/www.cortandfatboy.com/?referer=');">here</a> to visit Cort and Fatboy&#8217;s website.  The podcast in question is the one labelled Thursday, June 11, 2009 (Part II).  The talk about <em>Up </em>begins at about the 28-minute mark, but as always with Cort and Fatboy, the entire show is well worth a listen.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.loadedcouchpotatoes.com/2009/06/13/carl-fredricksen-dr-malcolm-crowe/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Box-Office Review: June 5-7, 2009</title>
		<link>http://www.loadedcouchpotatoes.com/2009/06/08/box-office-review-june-5-7-2009/</link>
		<comments>http://www.loadedcouchpotatoes.com/2009/06/08/box-office-review-june-5-7-2009/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Mon, 08 Jun 2009 20:04:19 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Honk Mahfah</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Box-Office Review]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Movies]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Disney]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Drag Me to Hell]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Land of the Lost]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Michael Giacchino]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Pixar]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Star Trek 11]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Terminator Salvation]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[The Hangover]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[The Terminator]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Up]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Will Ferrell]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.loadedcouchpotatoes.com/?p=1411</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Who won the weekend?  Was it Will Ferrell, Ed Asner, or Mike Tyson? Here&#8217;s a hint: it wasn&#8217;t Will Ferrell. (1)  The Hangover ($44.9 million, $13,759 per screen):  In a surprise upset, Sunday estimates pegged Up as the number one film for a second consecutive weekend.  However, in a Shyamalanesque last-scene plot twist, Variety broke [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Who won the weekend?  Was it Will Ferrell, Ed Asner, or Mike Tyson?</p>
<p>Here&#8217;s a hint: it wasn&#8217;t Will Ferrell.</p>
<p><span id="more-1411"></span>(1)  <em>The Hangover </em>($44.9 million, $13,759 per screen):  In a surprise upset, Sunday estimates pegged <em>Up </em>as the number one film for a second consecutive weekend.  However, in a Shyamalanesque last-scene plot twist, <em>Variety </em>broke the <a href="http://www.variety.com/article/VR1118004657.html?categoryid=13&amp;cs=1" target="_blank" onclick="pageTracker._trackPageview('/outgoing/www.variety.com/article/VR1118004657.html?categoryid=13_amp_cs=1&amp;referer=');">news</a> today that <em>The Hangover </em>had rallied and reclaimed the #1 position thanks to stronger than expected grosses on Sunday.  Man, that&#8217;s excitinger than NASCAR!</p>
<p>No matter which position <em>The Hangover </em>occupies, it had a <strong>terrific </strong>weekend.  In fact, the entire industry seems to be fairly stunned by the movie&#8217;s success.  R-rated comedies simply don&#8217;t open this strongly very often, and every time they do, it&#8217;s big news; everyone loves a surprise.  I&#8217;d have to say that if there&#8217;s one element of this film&#8217;s success that deserves the credit, it&#8217;s the trailer campaign.  Those trailers were outstanding, delivering a steady stream of unexpectedly weird (yet totally relatable) humor that got progressively weirder as they went along.  And thus it is that Mike Tyson became one of the deadliest secret weapons unleashed so far this year.</p>
<p>Here&#8217;s how to interpret that greater-than-expected Sunday gross, by the way: people are flipping right the fuck out about how much they like this movie.  Personally, I wasn&#8217;t quite as impressed, but hey, that&#8217;s just me; the rest of the country had a blast, told friends, and will possibly be responsible for this movie having a second weekend at the top of the box-office heap next weekend.</p>
<p>(2)  <em>Up </em>($44.1 million, $11,561 per screen, $137.2 million total):  Okay, sure, <em>Up </em>might not actually have been number one for the weekend &#8230; but don&#8217;t let that make this film&#8217;s second weekend seem any less impressive.  It&#8217;s down only about 35% from its excellent debut, and for a movie doing blockbuster business, that&#8217;s outstanding.  The word of mouth seems to be fantastic, which is great news for Pixar&#8217;s long-term prospects.  Those more-expensive 3D tickets are helping, and the lack of any direct competition until <em>Ice Age 3 </em>opens on July 1 means that <em>Up </em>has an entire month with the family-film field more or less all to itself.  This movie may turn out to be Pixar&#8217;s highest-grossing since <em>Cars</em>, and given how ambivalent certain segments of the industry seemed to be over <a href="http://www.nytimes.com/2009/04/06/business/media/06pixar.html" target="_blank" onclick="pageTracker._trackPageview('/outgoing/www.nytimes.com/2009/04/06/business/media/06pixar.html?referer=');">the movie&#8217;s commercial prospects</a>, that would be a major success.</p>
<p>(3)  <em>Land of the Lost </em>($18.8 million, $5350 per screen):  Ouch.  For as high-profile a movie to open this poorly is disastrous.  Unmitigatedly, career-devastatingly disastrous.  We&#8217;re in an era in which a big-business film can easily make twice as much <em>on its opening day</em>; an opening weekend this miniscule is simply not acceptable.  Will Ferrell is likely to find his salary lowered, and his ability to instantly have a project greenlit damaged; director Brad Silberling will have a hard time getting another large budget; and the director of the marketing campaign, if there&#8217;s any justice, will be working at a Target.</p>
<p>Part of this seems to have been simple bad luck.  There were two ways the movie could have been sold: as a family-friendly sci-fi adventure or as a satirical absurdist comedy for hipsters.  The latter approach would have been much more accurate to the actual content of the film, and might have at least made the film seem more interesting (with a bit of editing to downplay the plot in some scenes, the movie itself might have been successful on those grounds) &#8230; but even then, <em>The Hangover </em>would have annihilated it.  Sold as a family action film, the effects and sets and makeup looked like garbage, and the few bits of humor clean enough to preserve the illusion of family-friendly fun were feeble and unfunny; what family would opt for this over <em>Up </em>and <em>Night at the Museum</em>?</p>
<p>Expect the dropoff next weekend to be in the 70% range, if not more; exhibitors are going to dump this thing as quickly as they are contractually allowed.  The final gross will be less than $50 million, which is possibly even more disappointing a performance for Universal than Warner Bros. had last summer with <em>Speed Racer</em>.</p>
<p>(4)  <em>Night at the Museum: Battle of the Smithsonian</em> ($14.6 million, $3844 per screen, $127.3 million total):  Down only about 40% this weekend, the Ben Stiller comedy had a fairly good third weekend.  This is proving to be a strong summer for family movies at the box office &#8230; which makes <em>Land of the Lost </em>seem like even more of a bomb.  The museum sequel has still been hit hard by Pixar, but not quite as hard as it appeared last weekend.</p>
<p>(5)  <em>Star Trek </em>($8.3 million, $2595 per screen, $222.7 million total):  Spending a fifth consecutive weekend in the top five, <em>Star Trek </em>is doing terrific business.  It&#8217;s on track to become the highest-grossing of all the Trek movies even with inflation taken into account (adjusted to 2009 dollars, <em>Star Trek: The Motion Picture </em>made roughly $239 million).  That has to be considered a major success for Paramount.</p>
<p>The news isn&#8217;t quite as rosy for the movie&#8217;s grosses outside of America: internationally, it&#8217;s made only about $112 million.  However, the franchise has traditionally performed poorly overseas relative to its domestic performance; the previous high earner in the franchise was <em>Star Trek: First Contact</em>, which earned a mere $57.4 million (or $78 million adjusted).</p>
<p>What does all that mean?  Well, it means that Trek is primarily an American phenomenon.  However, consider this: using the adjusted totals, <em>Star Trek </em>(2009) domestic box-office gross is currently 92.8% as much as the gross for the previous top earner in the series &#8230; whereas its international gross is 43.5% <em>more </em>than the previous top earner.  In other words, compared to the previous benchmark for the franchise, the international grosses are actually outpacing the domestic grosses by a substantial margin.  What that says to me is that Paramount has succeeded not only in rejuvenating the series at home, it has succeeded in greatly boosting its international appeal.  From that perspective, the international grosses begin to look rather impressive, which is probably great news for the sequel, provided they can maintain the quality level.</p>
<p>It&#8217;s also worth noting that composer Michael Giacchino has three films in the top five this weekend (<em>Up</em>, <em>Land of the Lost</em>, and <em>Star Trek</em>), a significant achievement for anyone working in Hollywood.</p>
<p>(6)  <em>Terminator Salvation </em>($8.2 million, $2496 per screen, $105.5 million total):  Down 50% this weekend, the slide is easing a bit, but it&#8217;s too little, too late.  A bit of good news from the overseas markets: its opening weekend brought in $67.5 million internationally.  It&#8217;s at slightly more than $100 million internationally, and great international grosses are the one thing which could potentially save the franchise; if the worldwide total can get to, say, $400 million, then there might yet be another sequel.  Hopefully, it will be without this film&#8217;s writers and director.</p>
<p>(7)  <em>Drag Me to Hell </em>($7 million, $2805 per screen, $28.2 million total):  Down nearly 54% this weekend, which puzzles me a bit.  I felt sure this would be a big word-of-mouth success; after all, what horror fan wouldn&#8217;t have had a blast watching this movie?  Can it be that the circa-2009 horror movie audience is composed of idiots who wouldn&#8217;t know a good horror movie if it vomited bugs onto their faces?  That&#8217;s my theory.  How dreck like <em>The Haunting in Connecticut </em>could post better earnings than <em>Drag Me to Hell </em>is a mystery to me &#8230; or is it?  I wonder if this might have something to do with the release date?  Horror films are largely attended by high-school students, and since school is currently out for everyone except those too retarded in their progress to advance to the next grade, might it be that reduced lunchroom gatherings have translated into reduced social planning, and reduced ticket sales for Sam Raimi&#8217;s triumphant return to his stomping grounds?  I&#8217;m not sure, but it makes as much sense to me as any other theory.  Either way, it was an inexpensive production, and its life on Blu-ray and DVD will be a long one.  The per-screen average is better than both <em>Trek </em>and <em>Terminator</em>, so screen count appears to be an ongoing downside.</p>
<p>(8)  <em>Angels &amp; Demons </em>($6.5 million, $2239 per screen, $116.1 million total):  Another decent weekend, but it&#8217;s close to being played out in America.  It will be hurt by <em>The Taking of Pelham 1 2 3 </em>next weekend.  Internationally, though, the movie is up to $293 million, so there&#8217;s no question that Sony has produced a hit film worldwide.</p>
<p>(9)  <em>My Life In Ruins </em>($3.2 million, $2769 per screen):  Opening on less than 1200 screens, the Nia Vardalos romcom was certainly no <em>My Big Fat Greek Wedding </em>(not that that one had a giant opening weekend, either), but its per-screen numbers were better than several of the movies ahead of it on this list.  Fox was crazy to open this movie during the first weekend of June; according to reviews, it&#8217;s a shite movie, but if it had opened on some other weekend (preferably not one smack dab in the middle of the summer), then it might have done decent business.  As it is, it&#8217;s going to fade fast.</p>
<p>(10)  <em>Dance Flick </em>($1.9 million, $1147 per screen, $22.6 million total):  Yuck.  I can&#8217;t stop writing about this one fast enough.</p>
<p>Elsewhere in box-office news, <em>The Brothers Bloom </em>has now officially failed to find traction in limited release, grossing only $2457 per screen in its fourth weekend (it&#8217;s at a bit more than $2 million total, which is weak).</p>
<p>The news might be better for <em>Away We Go</em>.  The Sam Mendes/John Krasinksi/Maya Rudolph dramedy opened on a whopping four screens and averaged $35,750 per; expansion might turn this one into a small-scale summer sleeper, but the slightness of the selling makes that a slippery slope to &#8230; climb.</p>
<p>Next weekend: <em>The Taking of Pelham 1 2 3 </em>and <em>Imagine That</em>.  I think <em>The Hangover </em>will be #1 again, but Denzel Washington and <em>Pelham </em>might be able to eek one out.  I think it&#8217;s going to make $20-25 million, and that <em>Imagine That </em>will be good for only about $11 million.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.loadedcouchpotatoes.com/2009/06/08/box-office-review-june-5-7-2009/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Pixar: &#8220;Worst&#8221; to Best</title>
		<link>http://www.loadedcouchpotatoes.com/2009/06/02/pixar-worst-to-best/</link>
		<comments>http://www.loadedcouchpotatoes.com/2009/06/02/pixar-worst-to-best/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Wed, 03 Jun 2009 03:44:53 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Honk Mahfah</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Movies]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Pixar]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[A Bug's Life]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Cars]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Disney]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Finding Nemo]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Michael Giacchino]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Monsters Inc.]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Ratatouille]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[The Incredibles]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Toy Story]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Up]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[WALL*E]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.loadedcouchpotatoes.com/?p=1322</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Honk Mahfah ranks the ten feature films from Pixar, worst to best.  Heh.  &#8220;Worst.&#8221;  What a silly word to type in an article about Pixar. (10)  Cars Was there any doubt?  Hands down THE worst Pixar movie, this is still better than all but a small handful of the CGI-animated features all the other studios [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Honk Mahfah ranks the ten feature films from Pixar, worst to best.  Heh.  &#8220;Worst.&#8221;  What a silly word to type in an article about Pixar.</p>
<p><span id="more-1322"></span><span style="text-decoration: underline;">(10)  <a rel="nofollow" href="http://www.amazon.com/Cars-Blu-ray-Mario-Andretti/dp/B000V1Y43W/ref=sr_1_2?ie=UTF8&amp;s=dvd&amp;qid=1243998955&amp;sr=1-2loadcoucpota-20"  target="_blank" onclick="pageTracker._trackPageview('/outgoing/www.amazon.com/Cars-Blu-ray-Mario-Andretti/dp/B000V1Y43W/ref=sr_1_2?ie=UTF8_amp_s=dvd_amp_qid=1243998955_amp_sr=1-2loadcoucpota-20&amp;referer=');"><em>Cars</em></a></span></p>
<p>Was there any doubt?  Hands down THE worst Pixar movie, this is still better than all but a small handful of the CGI-animated features all the other studios have ever produced.  (In my opinion, of course.)  <em>Kung Fu Panda </em>is better; that&#8217;s one.  Um &#8230; um &#8230; um &#8230; hold on a sec, I feel certain there are others &#8230; um &#8230; um &#8230; oooh!  <em>Bolt</em>!  That one&#8217;s better.  Um &#8230; oh!  <em>Surf&#8217;s Up</em> is better, arguably.  Yep, that&#8217;s about it.</p>
<p>So for this to be Pixar&#8217;s &#8220;worst&#8221; movie is hardly an insult.</p>
<p>Truth be told, it&#8217;s marvelous, with some of the best animation Hollywood has ever produced, and it seems to have an imaginative hold over small children that is perhaps unparalleled.  I guess I can sympathize with some people not liking certain of the vocie actors (Owen Wilson, Larry the Cable Guy, George Carlin, Cheech Marin; all have their detractors), but I like them all, and my goodness, Paul Newman&#8230;?  Awesome.</p>
<p>Points off for having the least-inspired music of any Pixar film.  The Randy Newman score is unmemorable, and at least one of the songs &#8212; the James Taylor ballad &#8212; is nausea-inducingly bad.  A few points returned for use of &#8220;Sh-Boom.&#8221;</p>
<p><span style="text-decoration: underline;">(9)  <em>Up</em></span></p>
<p>I think most of the rest of the moviegoing world is a leeeetle more impressed by <em>Up </em>than I was, but don&#8217;t take that as an insult against the movie.  It&#8217;s an(other) instant classic from the studio.  However, some of the adult content &#8212; all of which is exceedingly lovely &#8212; feels a bit out of touch with the more fantastical, childish elements.  I mean, really, it&#8217;s a little hard to believe that the scene in which Ellie sits in her front yard (eyes closed to the wind, calmly trying to accept the fact that she and Carl can&#8217;t have children) exists in the same movie as dogs who pilot fighter planes.</p>
<p>Really, in <em>Up</em>, it&#8217;s the sillier elements that feel out of touch with the serious moments.  Weird to say, but it&#8217;s true.</p>
<p>However, on their own merits, those silly moments are awfully amusing and satisfying.  My only complaint with <em>Up </em>isn&#8217;t much of a complaint: that it doesn&#8217;t quite manage to fully work as an entire, complete movie in the way that Pixar&#8217;s other movies have.  But who cares?  All of the parts are awesome.</p>
<p>Awesome score by Michael Giacchino, his best to date as of this writing.</p>
<p><span style="text-decoration: underline;">(8)  <a rel="nofollow" href="http://www.amazon.com/Bugs-Life-Blu-ray-Kevin-Spacey/dp/B00168OIIU/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&amp;s=dvd&amp;qid=1243999303&amp;sr=1-1loadcoucpota-20"  target="_blank" onclick="pageTracker._trackPageview('/outgoing/www.amazon.com/Bugs-Life-Blu-ray-Kevin-Spacey/dp/B00168OIIU/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8_amp_s=dvd_amp_qid=1243999303_amp_sr=1-1loadcoucpota-20&amp;referer=');"><em>A Bug&#8217;s Life</em></a></span></p>
<p>Hilarious, exciting, and beautifully animated, this take-off of <em>Seven Samurai </em>and <em>The Magnificent Seven </em>had people worried for Pixar prior to its release.  DreamWorks had the similarly-themed <em>Antz </em>in the pipeline at the same time, and rushed it into release several months before Pixar&#8217;s film was ready, prompting fears that the showdown between the two would be a serious case of early-bird-gets-the-worm.</p>
<p>Instead, it was a serious case of tortoise-beats-hare; <em>A Bug&#8217;s Life </em>got better reviews AND made more money.  It&#8217;s also still talked about over a decade later, whereas <em>Antz </em>(an admittedly decent movie), not so much.</p>
<p>A wonderful score by Randy Newman is one of the film&#8217;s highlights, and if you don&#8217;t love those pill bugs, then go sit in the corner and think about it for a while until you&#8217;ve changed your mind.  The voice cast (including Dave Foley, Dennis Leary, and Kevin Spacey) is typically awesome, and those end-credits &#8220;bloopers&#8221; remain an often-imitated, never-bettered exit plan.</p>
<p><span style="text-decoration: underline;">(7  <a rel="nofollow" href="http://www.amazon.com/Ultimate-Collection-Incredibles-Monsters-Ratatouille/dp/B0015ET3XK/ref=sr_1_6?ie=UTF8&amp;s=dvd&amp;qid=1243999543&amp;sr=1-6loadcoucpota-20"  target="_blank" onclick="pageTracker._trackPageview('/outgoing/www.amazon.com/Ultimate-Collection-Incredibles-Monsters-Ratatouille/dp/B0015ET3XK/ref=sr_1_6?ie=UTF8_amp_s=dvd_amp_qid=1243999543_amp_sr=1-6loadcoucpota-20&amp;referer=');"><em>Toy Story</em></a></span></p>
<p>Shocking that the classic <em>Toy Story </em>would be this far down my list, is it?  Stripped of my credibility, am I?  Well, I can live with that, and I stand by my ranking like Joachim stood by Khan even after Kirk blew &#8216;em all to hell.</p>
<p><em>Toy Story </em>IS a great movie, there&#8217;s no disputing that.  The animation is (still) great, the voiceover work is some of the best animation has ever seen (it remains a signature role for both Tom Hanks and Tim Allen), the Randy Newman songs and score are lovely, the concept is genius, the execution practically flawless.  There is practically nothing bad you can say about this movie, and it single-handedly changed the entire industry.</p>
<p>That&#8217;s just how good the next six movies on this list are.</p>
<p><span style="text-decoration: underline;">(6)  <a rel="nofollow" href="http://www.amazon.com/Ratatouille-Blu-ray-Brad-Bird/dp/B000VBJEFK/ref=sr_1_2?ie=UTF8&amp;s=dvd&amp;qid=1243999741&amp;sr=1-2loadcoucpota-20"  target="_blank" onclick="pageTracker._trackPageview('/outgoing/www.amazon.com/Ratatouille-Blu-ray-Brad-Bird/dp/B000VBJEFK/ref=sr_1_2?ie=UTF8_amp_s=dvd_amp_qid=1243999741_amp_sr=1-2loadcoucpota-20&amp;referer=');"><em>Ratatouille</em></a></span></p>
<p>Here&#8217;s how good Pixar is: they took a movie with a title most people can&#8217;t pronounce about a <em>sewer rat </em>who<em><strong> not only spends most of the movie in a kitchen in and around people&#8217;s food </strong></em>but<em> <strong>BECOMES A GOURMET CHEF </strong></em>and they turned it into a hit.  A BIG hit, at that.  Even in France; hell, <em>especially </em>in France.</p>
<p>What&#8217;s next, a charming romance between cockroaches set inside a septic tank?  If Pixar makes it, it stands a decent chance at success.</p>
<p>A great Parisienne score by Michael Giacchino is one of the movie&#8217;s many virtues; others include gorgeous animation (particularly the backgrounds), good characters,  and Pixar&#8217;s continued refusal to pander by including lowest-common-denominator jokes every ten seconds.</p>
<p><span style="text-decoration: underline;">(5)  <em>Toy Story 2</em></span></p>
<p>Creating a sequel to a genuine classic is never an easy task, especially when the sequel is mostly unnecessary.  So, of course, leave it to Pixar to make a movie that is not only better than the first, but quite a bit better.  Along with several other 1999 animated releases (such as the classics <em>The Iron Giant </em>and <em>South Park: Bigger, Longer &amp; Uncut</em>), <em>Toy Story 2 </em>was instrumental in convincing the Academy to introduce an Oscar for Best Animated Feature.  After all, there was serious talk of <em>Toy Story 2 </em>receiving an Oscar nomination for Best Picture, and if it hadn&#8217;t come out during a relatively strong year for movies, it might have happened.</p>
<p>As with all the best sequels, this one doesn&#8217;t settle for rehashing the plot of the first film; instead, it takes the themes of the first film and grafts them onto a new story, deepening the meanings that were present initially.  More (most?) importantly, it&#8217;s just as entertaining, if not more so, and introduces new characters who fit seamlessly into the mix.  This is all a good omen for <em>Toy Story 3</em>, although the bar is raised so incredibly high that they&#8217;ll be forgiven if they can&#8217;t quite manage to clear it this time.</p>
<p><span style="text-decoration: underline;">(4) <a rel="nofollow" href="http://www.amazon.com/Wall-E-Two-Disc-BD-Live-Blu-ray/dp/B001EOQWF8/ref=pd_bxgy_d_text_bloadcoucpota-20"  target="_blank" onclick="pageTracker._trackPageview('/outgoing/www.amazon.com/Wall-E-Two-Disc-BD-Live-Blu-ray/dp/B001EOQWF8/ref=pd_bxgy_d_text_bloadcoucpota-20?referer=');"><em>WALL*E</em></a></span></p>
<p>Remember the &#8220;complaints&#8221; I had about <em>Up </em>feeling a bit like two movies that don&#8217;t quite mesh together?  Well, a lot of people feel that way about <em>WALL*E</em>, claiming that the silent-film section with WALL*E and EVE is betrayed by the tubbo-humans-in-space resolution.  I can see where they&#8217;re coming from.</p>
<p>They&#8217;re wrong, of course, as far as I&#8217;m concerned.</p>
<p>The whole point of the movie is that WALL*E&#8217;s optimism and exuberance and determination are exactly what humanity &#8212; not just the ones on the future, but the ones in the present (us, in other words) &#8212; needs to avoid ruining the planet.  It&#8217;s a heavy topic for a kid&#8217;s movie, but who said this was actually a kid&#8217;s movie?</p>
<p>Not only is it one of Pixar&#8217;s best, it&#8217;s one of the best sci-fi movies that&#8217;s ever been made.  Some of the animation is so good it&#8217;ll make you wonder how it was even possible.  I mean, that CGI Fred Willard looks just like the real thing!</p>
<p><span style="text-decoration: underline;">(3)  <a rel="nofollow" href="http://www.amazon.com/Monsters-3-Disc-Blu-ray-Billy-Crystal/dp/B00168OIOE/ref=sr_1_2?ie=UTF8&amp;s=dvd&amp;qid=1244000076&amp;sr=1-2loadcoucpota-20"  target="_blank" onclick="pageTracker._trackPageview('/outgoing/www.amazon.com/Monsters-3-Disc-Blu-ray-Billy-Crystal/dp/B00168OIOE/ref=sr_1_2?ie=UTF8_amp_s=dvd_amp_qid=1244000076_amp_sr=1-2loadcoucpota-20&amp;referer=');"><em>Monsters, Inc.</em></a></span></p>
<p>With perhaps THE best final shot in movie history (I&#8217;ll put it up there against anything, you just bring it right on), <em>Monsters, Inc. </em>was probably marked the moment in time in which Pixar became an entity separate from Disney in the minds of moviegoers.  <em>Toy Story </em>had certainly been primarily seen as a Disney movie, and neither <em>A Bug&#8217;s Life </em>nor <em>Toy Story 2 </em>was entirely able to reverse that trend.  By the time <em>Monsters, Inc. </em>left theatres, however, something had changed, and the world has never really looked back.</p>
<p>To think that <em>Shrek </em>got the first Oscar for feature animation instead of this movie makes me want to poo in a box and mail it to someone.  I don&#8217;t have Oscar&#8217;s address, though, so I might have to settle for sending it to the local newspaper, and I&#8217;m just not sure how effective that would be.</p>
<p>Aided once again by an excellent Randy Newman score, this movie has everything: laughs, thrills, even a couple of very mild scares.  The chase inside the door factory remains one of the best action set pieces ever committed to film; it&#8217;s good enough that you can imagine Spielberg and Cameron nodding their heads in appreciation.</p>
<p><span style="text-decoration: underline;">(2)  <a rel="nofollow" href="http://www.amazon.com/Finding-Nemo-Two-Disc-Collectors-Eric/dp/B00005JM02/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&amp;s=dvd&amp;qid=1244000264&amp;sr=1-1loadcoucpota-20"  target="_blank" onclick="pageTracker._trackPageview('/outgoing/www.amazon.com/Finding-Nemo-Two-Disc-Collectors-Eric/dp/B00005JM02/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8_amp_s=dvd_amp_qid=1244000264_amp_sr=1-1loadcoucpota-20&amp;referer=');"><em>Finding Nemo</em></a></span></p>
<p>Pixar&#8217;s biggest hit, this undersea tale hits all the right notes on every count: Thomas Newman&#8217;s score is a classic, the voice cast is terrific (especially Albert Brooks and Ellen Degeneres), the colors are vibrant as vibrant can be without being in a movie titled <em>Speed Racer</em>, the story is exciting and touching and sentimental without being gooey.</p>
<p>The mind shudders to think how many times the word &#8220;mine!&#8221; has been blurted out by the people who have seen this movie.</p>
<p>Pixar might have lost the first Oscar for Best Animated Feature, but they won on their second nomination, with this movie &#8230; and they&#8217;ve only lost one since.</p>
<p><span style="text-decoration: underline;">(1)  <a rel="nofollow" href="http://www.amazon.com/Incredibles-Two-Disc-Collectors-Maeve-Andrews/dp/B00005JN4W/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&amp;s=dvd&amp;qid=1244000424&amp;sr=1-1loadcoucpota-20"  target="_blank" onclick="pageTracker._trackPageview('/outgoing/www.amazon.com/Incredibles-Two-Disc-Collectors-Maeve-Andrews/dp/B00005JN4W/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8_amp_s=dvd_amp_qid=1244000424_amp_sr=1-1loadcoucpota-20&amp;referer=');"><em>The Incredibles</em></a></span></p>
<p>It may be my inherent love of superhero movies coming through, but I do think this is marginally the best movie Pixar has yet made.  (Although really, any one of my top seven is a strong contender.)</p>
<p>This was the first time Pixar had really tried to tackle animating humans as their primary characters, and there was every possiblity that it might end up not working.  Well, so much for that fear.</p>
<p><em>The Incredibles </em>remains the best superhero (or comic-book-inspired, if you&#8217;d prefer that designation) film ever made.  And yes, I <strong>am </strong>including <em>The Dark Knight</em>, which is a great, great movie; this one is better.  The superhero action makes a great argument for the future of an entirely CGI-based film industry.  It&#8217;ll never happen, and probably shouldn&#8217;t, but if Pixar and other similarly talented companies were running the show, and they could come up with action movies as good as this one, I&#8217;d be all for it.  (And both <em>Up </em>and <em>WALL*E </em>prove that animation is perfectly capable of delivering drama as well as &#8220;real&#8221; movies.)</p>
<p>Sure, certain elements of <em>The Incredibles </em>seem to be cribbed from Marvel&#8217;s <em>Fantastic Four </em>and from DC&#8217;s <em>Watchmen</em>, but that&#8217;s okay.  Because in postmodernism, that sort of thing is not only acceptable, it&#8217;s encouraged.  And make no mistake about it: though it&#8217;s also quite traditional in its plotting, this is very much a postmodernist, deconstructionist take on superheroes.  The fact that kids seem to have either picked up on that and accepted it or just sailed right over it without a bump speaks awfully well of Brad Bird.</p>
<p>Bird also lays down some excellent refferences to the supervillainy of the more cartoonish James Bond movies (!), and he does it better than all of them do it.</p>
<p>The movie also benefits tremendously from an awesome score by Michael Giacchino, who here provides the best John Barry score John Barry never wrote.</p>
<p>Where is my sequel?</p>
<p><em><span style="text-decoration: underline;">Final Thoughts</span></em></p>
<p>Pixar is truly on a streak unlike any other in cinematic history.  I&#8217;m well aware that not every viewer loves each of their movies, but plenty of viewers &#8212; and critics alike &#8212; <strong>do </strong>love each of them, and each movie has extremely ardent admirers of all ages; there is no other filmmaking entity out there that has put together that type of track record.</p>
<p>Perhaps most importantly, Pixar is making films that are bound to last from one generation to the next, making film lovers out of millions of children every year.</p>
<p>There&#8217;s no telling how much longer this streak can continue, but it certainly shows no signs of ending any time soon, and every film fan should be very grateful for that.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.loadedcouchpotatoes.com/2009/06/02/pixar-worst-to-best/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Box-Office Review: May 29-31, 2009</title>
		<link>http://www.loadedcouchpotatoes.com/2009/06/01/box-office-review-may-29-31-2009/</link>
		<comments>http://www.loadedcouchpotatoes.com/2009/06/01/box-office-review-may-29-31-2009/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Mon, 01 Jun 2009 21:57:01 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Honk Mahfah</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Box-Office Review]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Movies]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Disney]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Drag Me to Hell]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Pixar]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Sam Raimi]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Star Trek 11]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Terminator Salvation]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[The Terminator]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Up]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.loadedcouchpotatoes.com/?p=1277</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Honk Mahfah reports on the weekend box-office, which finds Pixar going ten-for-ten at the bat. (1)  Up ($68.1 million, $18,085 per screen):  Has any company in Hollywood history ever had ten box-office hits in a row?  It seems unlikely, but Pixar specializes in making the unlikely get up and walk.  And you might as well [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Honk Mahfah reports on the weekend box-office, which finds Pixar going ten-for-ten at the bat.</p>
<p><span id="more-1277"></span>(1)  <em>Up </em>($68.1 million, $18,085 per screen):  Has any company in Hollywood history ever had ten box-office hits in a row?  It seems unlikely, but Pixar specializes in making the unlikely get up and walk.  And you might as well go ahead and mark it twelve-for-twelve, since the company&#8217;s next two films are <em>Toy Story 3 </em>and <em>Cars 2</em>.  As for <em>Up</em>, a $68 million debut is phenomenal.  Sure, sure, I know; 3D tickets are more expensive, so the attendance isn&#8217;t as impressive as it looks.  However, the fact that people are more than willing to pay that premium ticket price says something, and the fact that this many of them paid to see a movie about a 78-year-old man says that they were there for Pixar, not for the concept.  You might recall this writer suggesting a weak debut ($35-40 million) was in the cards; well, I was full of shit on that count.  If the box-office follows the pattern of most of Pixar&#8217;s films, <em>Up </em>will end the summer with anywhere from $225-275 million.  And on the toy store front, not since Obi-Wan Kenobi back in 1977 will action figures of elderly people have had this much demand.</p>
<p>(2)  <em>Night at the Museum: Battle of the Smithsonian</em> ($24.3 million, $5939 per screen, $104.1 million total):  Down 55% from its debut last weekend, Ben Stiller&#8217;s effects comedy held up reasonably well considering the big guns Pixar was hoisting.  Still, it&#8217;s got another major competitor this week, and since it is going to finish well below $200 million (the original made $250 million), I think this sequel has to be considered a disappointment.</p>
<p>(3)  <em>Terminator Salvation </em>($16.4 million, $4562 per screen, $90.9 million total):  <strong>This </strong>sequel, on the other hand, has to be considered an outright failure.  It&#8217;s not even going to make as much money as <em>Terminator 3 </em>made six years ago &#8230; and <em>that </em>one was a disappointment.  Down 61% this weekend, which is par for the course for big mediocre summer movies at this point, the McG flick is going to need to make three times as much money overseas in order for the franchise to not be dead after this.</p>
<p>(4)  <em>Drag Me to Hell </em>($15.8 million, $6310 per screen):  As wrong as I was about <em>Up </em>in my predictions last weekend, I was even more wronger about <em>Drag Me to Hell</em>.  I said I thought it could go as high as $45 million over the weekend, and it only made a third of that.  I, clearly, am dumb as &#8230; hell.  So, clearly, are moviegoers.  How many vastly inferior horror films have opened better than this one?  With a PG-13 rating and great reviews lending a hand, <em>Drag Me to Hell </em>ought to have done way, way better than this.  One bright side: the per-screen average, which was the second-best in the Top 10 this weekend.</p>
<p>(5)  <em>Star Trek </em>($12.6 million, $3597 per screen, $209.3 million total):  Down 45% this weekend, the Bad Robot production continues to impress.  It now seems very likely that it will become the highest-grossing of all the Trek movies even if inflation is taken into account (<em>Star Trek: The Motion Picture</em>&#8216;s $82.3 million would look like about $235 million in today&#8217;s dollars).  Go ahead and pencil it in: the sequel will be even more successful &#8230; unless it&#8217;s an adaptation of &#8220;The Alternative Factor.&#8221;</p>
<p>(6)  <em>Angels &amp; Demons </em>($11.3 million, $3278 per screen, $104.9 million total):  Down 47% this weekend, the Dan Brown/Ron Howard/Tom Hanks flick is doing moderate business at best.  With no other adultcentric movies in wide release, it really ought to be doing better than this.  Is it possible that adults were instead opting to see what the fuss is over <em>Star Trek</em>, or to see why critics are raving over <em>Up</em>?  Either way, Sony is raking in the bucks overseas, so <em>Angels &amp; Demons </em>will go down in the books as a big hit no matter what it ends up making in America.</p>
<p>(7)  <em>Dance Flick </em>($4.7 million, $1929 per screen, $19 million total):  Down 55% from its debut, the spoof is fading fast.</p>
<p>(8)  <em>X-Men Origins: Wolverine </em>($3.8 million, $1712 per screen, $170.8 million total):  Probably one more weekend in the top ten for this one.</p>
<p>(9)  <em>Ghosts of Girlfriends Past </em>($1.9 million, $1318 per screen, $50 million total):  Finally making it to $50 mliion, this movie won&#8217;t be an embarrassment on anyone&#8217;s resume, but it&#8217;s also not going to be much or a bargaining chip, either.</p>
<p>(10)  <em>Obsessed </em>($0.6 million, $968 per screen, $67.5 million total):  You never want to see a movie in the top ten making less than a million.</p>
<p>Next weekend brings <em>Land of the Lost</em>, <em>The Hangover</em>, and <em>My Life In Ruins</em>.  I&#8217;m going to predict $45 million for <em>Land of the Lost</em>, $25 million for <em>The Hangover</em>, and $WhoCares for <em>My Life In Ruins</em>.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.loadedcouchpotatoes.com/2009/06/01/box-office-review-may-29-31-2009/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
	</channel>
</rss>

