2009 Selections to the National Film Registry Announced

Twenty five motion pictures have been selected by Librarian of Congress James H. Billington that will be preserved as cultural, artistic and/or historical treasures. The list, which is comprised of motion pictures released between 1911-1995, contains such diverse films as "Dog Day Afternoon", "Jezebel", "Little Nemo" (1911), "Once Upon A Time in the West", "The Muppet Movie" (!) and Michael Jackson's long-form video for the song "Thriller". The entire list is as follows:

1. Dog Day Afternoon (1975)
2. The Exiles (1961)
3. Heroes All (1920)
4. Hot Dogs for Gauguin (1972)
5. The Incredible Shrinking Man (1957)
6. Jezebel (1938)
7. The Jungle (1967)
8. The Lead Shoes (1949)
9. Little Nemo (1911)
10. Mabel’s Blunder (1914)
11. The Mark of Zorro (1940)
12. Mrs. Miniver (1942)
13. The Muppet Movie (1979)
14. Once Upon a Time in the West (1968)
15. Pillow Talk (1959)
16. Precious Images (1986)
17. Quasi at the Quackadero (1975)
18. The Red Book (1994)
19. The Revenge of Pancho Villa (1930-36)
20. Scratch and Crow (1995)
21. Stark Love (1927)
22. The Story of G.I. Joe (1945)
23. A Study in Reds (1932)
24. Thriller (1983)
25. Under Western Stars (1938)

I can't admit to seeing all of these films. In fact, I've only seen a quarter of them at best so I can't say if all of the choices are good ones. However, it will help me out when I am looking for something different to watch. And if you want to add your choices for 2010's list, you can click here to do so.

The most (illegally) downloaded films of 2009

According to Torrent Freak (by way of Dark Horizons.com), the most illegally downloaded film of 2009 was not the most popular at the box office, although that one was certainly close. J.J. Abrams' successful reboot of "Star Trek" was the top download, with 10.9 million files of the film making their ways to computers everywhere. I'm sure the fact that a copy from both the DVD and the blu-ray disc were available close to two months ahead of their official home video releases might have helped boost that total. That amount is slightly ahead of "Transformers: Revenge of the Fallen" with 10.6 million downloads.

While the majority of the top ten was comprised of big box office hits, there were a few surprises. The first being number three on the list, Guy Ritchie's "RocknRolla", which made $26 million via limited worldwide theatrical release. Another was the Russell Crowe thriller "State of Play", which was a bigger box office hit ($86 million worldwide) than "RocknRolla", but not by much. The other surprise was the Nic Cage sci-fi film "Knowing", which rounded out the top ten list.

So, where was the much-buzzed bootleg of the "Wolverine" workprint? Was it near the top? Not even close. The film landed at number nine, right between "State of Play" (#8) and "Knowing" (#10). 7.2 million files of the "X-Men" prequel were downloaded from bittorrent sites. The first "Twilight" film was also on the list, but oddly enough the more-popular sequel "New Moon" was not.

The full list is as follows:

1) Star Trek (10.97 million files downloaded)
2) Transformers: Revenge of the Fallen (10.6 million)
3) RocknRolla (9.43 million)
4) The Hangover (9.18 million)
5) Twilight (8.72 million)
6) District 9 (8.28 million)
7) Harry Potter and the Half Blood Prince (7.93 million)
8) State of Play (7.44 million)
9) Wolverine (7.2 million)
10) Knowing (6.93 million)

Studios were estimating that they lost close to $770 million in revenue due to the above illegal downloads, but those numbers are no doubt inflated a bit to stress the point of what piracy is capable of doing to the business. Still, it's kind of hard to feel too bad for the fat cats on the top of the studio system food chain (who are usually the ones making all the dough). Despite the high numbers, Hollywood reported a record $10 billion revenue haul for 2009. They also just reported that this past Christmas week was the highest-grossing weekend in the history of motion pictures.

The game was certainly afoot at the national box office over Christmas weekend

Audiences in North America gave Hollywood a huge Christmas gift in the form of a record box office this weekend. There seemed to be a little something for everyone to venture out and see at cinemas, which should continue over the next ten days and help push the record $10 billion box office even further into the books.

Turning into an even bigger event than anticipated, James Cameron's megahit "Avatar" grabbed another $75 million in sales from 3,456 screens (most in 3-D and some in IMAX 3-D) to bring its ten-day total to an unreal $212.5 million (with overseas added in, the film has made $617 million to date) with no slowing down in sight. Higher ticket prices are helping, but word-of-mouth is really what is driving the film through the roof. 20th Century Fox is no doubt breathing a major sigh of relief as the super-expensive film is playing exactly the way they were hoping: as a must-see cinematic event.

Upcoming business this week and next holiday weekend should help the film soar to the $320-350 million domestic mark by the start of the new year. Considering how much people love the film, I think it's a no-brainer that "Avatar" will wind up becoming 2009's highest grossing film when all is said and done. Despite my indifference to the film, I will be only more than happy to see Cameron's 3-D opus displace what is currently the number one film of the year: the cinematic abortion known as "Transformers: Revenge of the Fallen".

Warner Brothers is another studio having a very Merry Christmas with its big release, Guy Ritchie's "Sherlock Holmes". Opening on a wide 3,626-screen count, the Robert Downey Jr./Jude Law mystery thriller pulled in a huge $65.4 million in estimate ticket sales. A mix of comedy, action and mystery, the film's debut gave Ritchie his biggest opening yet. In fact, the three-day take for what is sure to be the start of a new franchise was more than all of the director's films overall North American gross combined. Like "Avatar", word-of-mouth is solid on "Sherlock Holmes" and should play just fine throughout the upcoming weeks.

Third place went to "Alvin and the Chipmunks: the Squeakquel", which pulled in $50.2 million over the weekend and $77 million since last Wednesday. The follow up to the 2007 family hit, also released during Christmastime, predictably got hammered by critics (you expected otherwise?) but families didn't care as they got the film off to a huge start. Fox is no doubt putting in motion plans for a part three for 2011. God help us all.

Fourth and fifth went to two films aimed squarely at the adult market. In fourth place was the Nancy Myers comedy "It's Complicated" with an uncomplicated $22 million in ticket sales, while Paramount finally opened Jason Reitman's "Up in the Air" wide and pulled in $11.8 million over the weekend for a $24.5 million gross to date. In contrast to the top three films, "Complicated" and "Air"s grosses seemed rather small. But films aimed at adults rarely open like gangbusters. They usually open smaller and stick around longer due to word-of-mouth. "Up in the Air" will have a bigger advantage thanks to the upcoming awards shows.

In sixth place was Warner's long-running winner "The Blind Side", which saw its grosses jump up 17% despite losing 641 screens in its sixth week. Adding $11.7 million to its gross, "Blind Side" now stands at a superb $184.4 million to date with the $200 million mark sure to be tackled within the next seven days or so. Not too bad for a movie that opened the same weekend as the "Twilight" sequel, which itself pulled in another $3 million this weekend to land in eleventh place and pull its total to the $280 million mark.

Seventh place went to Disney's traditionally-animated musical "The Princess and the Frog", which went against the tide and dropped 28% from the week before to haul in $8.7 million to bring its take up to $63.5 million. No doubt effected by the opening of the Seventh Seal, I mean, the "Chipmunks" film, the Disney film is not performing as well as anticipated. While the movie might finish around the $90 million mark domestically, the gross will still be well below those generated by Pixar.

Expanding from four screens to 1,418, Rob Marshall's much-maligned movie version of the Broadway musical "Nine" imploded with a weak $5.5 million weekend take. While a critically-maligned film such as "Alvin and the Chipmunks" or "New Moon" can do just fine without good reviews, a film such as "Nine" or "The Lovely Bones" is dead in the water without positive critical praise.

Rounding out the top ten were two other box office disappointments, "Did You Hear About the Morgans?" and the Clint Eastwood sports drama "Invictus". "Morgans" dropped 25% from its awful opening to pull in $5 million to bring the film's ten-day take to just under $16 million, while "Invictus" rose 5% to pull in $4.4 million to bring its three-week take to $23.5 million, well below what Eastwood has been accustomed to this past decade.

The last opener for Christmas weekend was a four-screen debut of Terry Gilliam's latest fantasy, "The Imaginarium of Doctor Parnassus", which pulled in a decent $132,000 from the quartet of cinemas. The film may pull in the Gilliam faithful as well as those who want to see the late Heath Ledger in his final role, but I doubt many others will bother. I saw the film in Paris back in November and I thought it was a tedious mess that was a chore to sit through despite the best efforts of Ledger, Christopher Plummer and Tom Waits (as The Devil!).

Next weekend will no doubt see the top five repeat their positions as no new films debut, aside from a NY/LA debut of the foreign film "The White Ribbon".

Bernie Madoff rings the bell to start off the day on Wall Street

Happy Holidays, everyone!

Brittany Murphy

Here's a sad bit of news that Variety.com is reporting: actress Brittany Murphy, who starred in such films as "Clueless", "8 Mile" and "Sin City" and also provided voice talent on the long-running Fox show "King of the Hill", died this morning from a sudden heart attack. She was just 32 years of age.

Weekend Box Office: "Avatar" big, "Morgans" DOA

Despite the best efforts of Mother Nature on the East Coast as well as last-minute holiday shopping and parties, James Cameron's mega-budgeted sci-fi epic "Avatar" easily commanded the box office this weekend. While it didn't set any records, it's huge debut does bode well for its run through the upcoming holiday weeks.

Debuting in 3,452 theaters (over 2,000 being 3-D and 180 in IMAX 3-D), James Cameron's return to the world of cinema after a 12-year hiatus hauled in a big $73 million. A major snowstorm on the East Coast and the final weekend before Christmas no doubt held the grosses for Saturday down for the $300 million film. After opening on Friday to $27 million, the grosses dropped five percent to $25 million (Fox is estimating a 20% drop on Sunday to $20 million). Despite the higher ticket prices for 3-D and IMAX presentations, the film couldn't top the December opening of 2007's "I Am Legend" which opened with $77 million. If the estimates hold, "Avatar" will dislodge "The Lord of the Rings: Return of the King" as the second-highest opening in December. Adjusted for inflation, however, "King" would hold its ground without any sort of issue.

Reviews for "Avatar" were overall positive (you can read mine below), and viewers also were quite supportive of the film as well, bestowing it with a Cinemascore rating of "A". With the holidays kicking up over the next two weekends, and no real competition to speak of, "Avatar" should dominate the box office for at least the next two weeks if not longer. The pricey film needs to pull in $750 million in ticket sales just to break even. While it certainly won't do that in the States alone, I wouldn't be surprised to see that amount amassed worldwide by the middle of January. Variety.com is reporting that the first weekend worldwide gross for "Avatar" is $230 million (this includes the domestic gross). Whoa. With grosses like this, you can count on an "Avatar 2" in a few years time.

In a bit of counter-programming, Sony Pictures unleashed the poorly-reviewed Hugh Grant/Sarah Jessica Parker comedy "Did You Hear About the Morgans?". Apparently, most people have not since the film landed with a thud in fourth place and a poor $7 million take from 2,758 runs. Whether audiences discover the film in the next few weeks is anyone's guess, but I doubt it. If opening the film against the likes of "Avatar" wasn't bad enough, "Morgans" will soon face the Meryl Streep comedy "It's Complicated", which opens next Friday. Since both films aim at the same target audience, you can plan on hearing about the "Morgans" on Netflix shortly.

Second place went to last week's champ, Disney's "The Princess and the Frog" with an estimated gross of $12.25 million. Off 50% from last weekend, the film should rebound strongly over the holiday period as kids will be out of school and parents will hopefully be smart enough to keep them away from the "Alvin & The Chipmunks" sequel opening on Friday (I haven't seen it yet, but those ads are utter torture to sit through). "Frog"s gross to date is $45 million.

Third place went to Warner's winner "The Blind Side", which picked up another $10 million to bring its gross up to an amazing $165 million to date. "Blind Side" officially passes Sandra Bullock's other 2009 blockbuster, "The Proposal", as her highest grossing film to date. Fifth place went to "The Twilight Saga: New Moon" with $4.4 million and a to-date gross of roughly $275 million.

Clint Eastwood's sports drama "Invictus" hit a wall and dropped roughly 50% to a $4.1 million gross and a $15.2 million take to date. Disney's 3-D blockbuster "A Christmas Carol" hung tough with another $3.3 million and a gross of $131 million to date. Paramount added more theaters to "Up in the Air"s limited run, the final weekend of such prior to its wide opening on Wednesday. From 175 screens, Jason Reitman's film pulled in $3.1 million to bring its cume to $8.1 million to date. "Brothers" pulled in another $2.3 million for a $22 million gross to date, while the Disney comedy "Old Dogs" barked up another $2.2 million to bring its total to $43.5 million.

Well, next week is Christmas week. With the holiday landing on a Friday, the weekend grosses should be huge across the board. The "Alvin and the Chipmunks" sequel opens on Christmas Day and should be a big draw, but I doubt it will dislodge "Avatar" from the number one spot. I'm sure 20th Century Fox, the studio releasing both films, will be fine with that.

Film Review: Avatar

“Avatar” takes place in 2154 and centers around a paraplegic Marine named Jake Sully (Sam Worthington). Jake has been persuaded to take the place of his recently-deceased brother for a mission on the far away moon of Pandora. Via an avatar that mixes human and alien DNA, Jake inhabits the body of a Na'vi, a blue, ten-foot tall native of Pandora. The scientific team led by Dr. Grace Augustine (Sigourney Weaver) wants Jake to learn more about the Na’vi and its culture.

Greedy corporate head Parker Selfridge (Giovanni Ribisi) and gung-ho military Colonel Quartich (Stephen Lang) have other plans for Sully. In order for Selfridge's company to obtain Pandora's largest deposit of the valuable mineral Unobtanium, Selfridge and Quartich want Jake to infiltrate and gather info on the Na'vi in order to drive the natives out of their homes.

Jake dives into his assignments (literally) and eventually begins to bond with the Na'vi, falling in love with the daughter of the tribe's leader, Neytiri (Zoe Saldana), in the process. As the next few months progress, Jake begins to become more conflicted about what he's doing for the corporation. When things go south, Quaritch begins to implement his plan to remove the Na'vi by any means necessary (read: deadly force). This forces Jake to take a stand - and fight in an epic battle that will determine the ultimate fate of Pandora.

If you go solely for the visual experience, you will find that "Avatar" doesn't disappoint. James Cameron spent years waiting for technology to catch up to what he had in mind for the movie. He then another couple of years in production, with most of that period focused on perfecting the film's computer animation (which, as you would expect, is incredible). The end result is a film that is a beautiful-looking film. A mix of the latest in 3-D and motion-capture technology, Cameron succeeds when it comes to immersing viewers with Pandora's exotic plant, animal and alien life. Many a film of late have made use of 3-D technology, but nothing like this.

While the technical aspects of "Avatar" knock our movie going socks off, Cameron's writing and directing does anything but. Now, we all know that Cameron isn't the world's best storyteller. Look at his last narrative film, 1997's "Titanic". The screenplay was as basic and corny as they get. A junior-high version of "Romeo and Juliet" with stereotypical characters and groundbreaking visual effects. But Cameron made the story work. He overrode the rudimentary plot and people by evoking great performances from his leads and connecting with the viewer on an emotional level while smartly balancing the human aspects with the technical.

Not so here. With "Avatar", which comes across as "Dances With Wolves" (itself a variation on 1976's "A Man Called Horse") by way of the video game "Halo", we get a James Cameron that is only obsessed with the technical side of film making. Like George Lucas with his "Star Wars" prequels and Robert Zemeckis with his work of late, Cameron just doesn't seem interested in anything outside of how far he can push the latest technology. I can forgive him for the lack of story originality, clunky dialogue and character development (the latter despite the best intentions of the cast). But I can't excuse the lackadaisical attitude that Cameron shows while dealing with them. While he succeeds in immersing us in the world of Pandora, he never gets us to connect with the characters and events. Even the big action sequences, Cameron's area of directing excellence, lack the sense of excitement of his earlier work.

I didn't hate "Avatar". Something this beautiful to look at is hard to entirely dismiss, especially when you experience it on the big screen and in 3-D. No, I was just massively disappointed with it. It certainly isn't the first movie to put the visuals before the plot and it won't be the last. But given James Cameron's track record in the sci-fi genre, one can't help but expect more. Much more. Many will love the film, and I wish I could be one of them. Perhaps there is an avatar out there that will allow me to do that. Rated PG-13. 163 minutes. Two stars out of four.

Fox bullying the press on "Avatar"? It appears so.

A week ago, the press got a chance to see "Avatar". As I'm not officially part of the press, I didn't go. But I do know many a person who did attend the press screening in Boston back on the afternoon of December 10th. I've told you how my friend Brett felt about it, and he wasn't alone in his negative point of view on the 3-D sci-fi film. Another reviewer who lives in the Boston area but writes for a newspaper outside the city, was planning on giving James Cameron's film a star and a half, which is what my friend Brett would give it if he wrote a review for it. This reviewer didn't post his review in advance of the film's opening, but he did indicate what he was going to give the film via a post on Facebook. That shouldn't be any big deal, I put my .02 on films in advance (when I see them in advance) on Facebook all the time. Last Friday, I was taking a healthy -and justified- critical dump on Peter Jackson's dire adaptation of "The Lovely Bones", which doesn't open in the Boston area until Christmas Day (o lucky us!).

Well, apparently when a novice reviewer does this, the studios and their local reps couldn't give a shit. But when an actual journalist does, they go ballistic. The 20th Century Fox rep from Allied Advertising apparently got in touch with the journalist and told them that if they posted a negative review of "Avatar", they would henceforth be banned from future 20th Century Fox press screenings. Now, I can understand the studio being nervous about negative word-of-mouth. After all, they've poured how much money into this film? But to agressively threaten members of the press for merely expressing their opinion is pretty draconian if you ask me (that or the local rep was PMS'ing up a storm and needed to vent on someone). One has to wonder if they threatened the other reviewers who had actually written up and posted a negative review in adavnce as well.

I'm off to Pandora (that is what it's called, right, Pandora?)

After months of talk and hype James Cameron's return to commercial cinema after a 12-year break, the mega-budget fantasy "Avatar", is unveiled to the worldwide masses tonight at 12:01 am. I'll be heading over to see it at a screening in Boston at 7pm tonight and will post my .02 (for what that is worth) afterwards.

The reviews have, for the most part, been positive thus far. Most have noted that the story and characters aren't exactly up to snuff, but the pre-release press is largely unified in one respect: it's a visual knockout and on a visceral level, a pretty awesome theatrical experience thanks to the 3-D technique used throughout.

I have to say that despite the negative things I have heard, I'm kind of excited to see the film and experience the 3-D effect in completed form. The 15 minutes or so of footage that I saw back in August didn't exactly wow me. The 3-D effects were decent, but the visual effects were rough and from what I could detect from the footage shown, this was going to be "Dances With Wolves" in deep space. Those feelings aside, I am more than willing to go in fresh and wiht an open mind (yes folks, it does occasionally happen). Let's face facts: the first two "Terminator" films and 1986's "Aliens" aside, James Cameron's films have never been known for their great plots, characters or dialogue. They have been known for their spectacle, which is where my appreciation is for "True Lies", "The Abyss" and "Titanic" (okay, Kate Winslet's drawing room scene kicked all sorts of ass as well). We'll see tonight which Cameron club "Avatar" joins.

The 2009 Golden Globe Nominations

The 67th Annual Golden Globe Nominations were announced this morning, and there were few if any surprises to be had. As expected, "Up in the Air", "Precious", the musical "Nine" and "Inglourious Basterds" received a fair amount of nods in the major categories, with perhaps the biggest surprise being that James Cameron's mega-budget action epic "Avatar" nabbed four nominations: Best Picture, Director, Score and Song. I can't vouch for the first two since I haven't seen the movie yet, but James Horner's score and the end credits song "I See You" are both pretty damn awful.

Critics award favorite "The Hurt Locker", which has become a front runner for the Academy Awards, nabbed three nominations: Best Picture (Drama), Best Director (Kathryn Bigelow) and Best Screenplay (Mark Boal), tied with the not-yet-released Nancy Myers comedy "It's Complicated" (Picture-Comedy, Actress and Screenplay). Unfortunately, neither Jeremy Renner nor Anthony Mackie were bestowed a nomination for their great work in "Locker". Perhaps if Summit Entertainment had bought off the Hollywood Foreign Press the way 20th Century Fox did with an advanced "Avatar" screening, the Press may have thought otherwise.

Other headscratchers include "The Hangover" for Best Picture (Comedy). Don't get me wrong: I thought it was fairly amusing. I did not dislike the film. But to put it in the running for Best Picture of any sort outside of an awards ceremony held by Spike TV is a bit...puzzling. Even more puzzling is that the film didn't recevie a single nomination anywhere else for the ceremony (translation: they needed something to fill slot five with). I wouldn't be surprised if even "Hangover" director Todd Phillips stopped and said "Wow....really?" when he heard the news.

The Golden Globes are supposed to be some sort of barometer to the Academy Awards, and to an extent I guess it may be. But overall, is this ceremony even relevant anymore? I mean, the year the Globes weren't broadcast (was that last year?), did anyone miss it? It's fun to see stars that are half in the bag (they should really consider serving booze at the Oscars) go up on stage and make an ass of themself. But then there's the whole awards ceremony attached to that spectacle that's about as appealing as a trip to the dentist.

Video Pick of the Week: Inglourious Basterds

Set ‘Once upon a time in Nazi-occupied France, 1941’, ‘Inglourious Basterds’ tells two stories: Story one revolves around Shosanna Dreyfus (Mélanie Laurent), a young Jewish woman who witnesses the execution of her family at the hand of sadistic Nazi Colonel Hans Landa (Christoph Waltz). Narrowly escaping her own execution, Shosanna flees to Paris, where she forges a new identity as an owner of a movie theater.

Story two deals with a group of Jewish- American soldiers, organized by Lieutenant Aldo Raine (Brad Pitt), to engage in targeted acts of retribution against the Nazis. Because they collect the scalps of their victims as a prize (each solider owes Raine 100 scalps), the group is dubbed by the fascists as "The Basterds". Raine's squad is chosen for a rather important, and possibly suicidal, mission: taking down several prominent leaders of The Third Reich (including Landa) who are in Paris to attend the premiere of the Nazi propaganda film ‘Nation’s Pride’. As fate would have it, the Basterds’ mission and Shosanna’s opportunity for revenge converge under a cinema marquee.

A film set in 1940s Europe is a long way from the modern-day California crime capers Quentin Tarantino is known for, but in many ways ‘Inglourious Basterds’ still very much feels like one of the films that made Tarantino a household name. Like ‘Pulp Fiction’, ‘Kill Bill’ and ‘Reservoir Dogs’, ‘Basterds’ is chock full of cinematic homage, an eclectic selection of music and long, slow-building, tension-filled passages of dialogue that usually result in a euphoric eruption of sudden violence. And like QT’s other works, ‘Basterds’ seldom plays by genre rules, opting instead to go in audacious, unexpected and wholly satisfying directions. Wartime revenge has rarely had it so well.

The man knows his movies; the man also knows how to put together a great cast. Pitt is wonderfully over-the-top as Raine, while Diane Krueger is suitably sexy as the Aryan actress out to help the Basterds carry out their big mission. ‘Hostel’ director Eli Roth turns in a surprisingly good turn as ‘The Bear Jew’, a Basterd that has quite a way with a baseball bat, while Laurent nicely conveys Shosanna’s long-simmering quest for revenge.

The real standout of the cast, however, is Waltz. The German actor, who should have a draft of his Best Supporting Actor speech ready by now, gives us a villain that is capable of being charming and sadistic without missing a beat. Landa is a wonderfully-realized character, one of Tarantino’s best, and Waltz’s wonderful performance more than solidifies that.

In a summer movie season where most filmmakers felt content phoning in their work, it was a relief to have Quentin Tarantino pop up for some late summer fun. ‘Inglourious Basterds’ is a gift to movie fans everywhere, and is easily one of the most entertaining movies of 2009.

"Inglourious Basterds" is available on DVD and Blu-Ray disc from Universal Home Video on December 15th.

Weekend Box Office: 'Princess' kisses 'Frog' and makes a lot of money by doing so

Hand-drawn animation make a big comeback this weekend at the national box office. After playing for two weeks in New York and Los Angeles exclusively, Walt Disney's "The Princess and the Frog" expanded nationwide with solid results. Opening in over 3,400 screens, the new animated musical pulled in $25 million in ticket sales ($27.6 million to date). The feature, the first animated film to have an African-American girl as its lead character, was not only a hit with audiences, it was bestowed with the title of Best Picture of the year by Time Magazine (over "UP"? Really?). That accolade might not drive ticket sales with the younger set, but it certainly may help push older viewers to check it out over the next few weeks. Unless interest drops off considerably over the next few weeks (doubt it), this "Frog" will turn into a $100 million box office prince with great ease.

Hanging tough in its fourth weekend was the first of Warner Brothers sports dramas, "The Blind Side", pulling in another $15.4 million in sales to bring its gross up to the $150 million mark. Next stop: $200 million. Third place went to the other WB sports drama, Clint Eastwood's "Invictus", which debuted with a lukewarm $9 million. A tough sell to American audiences despite the presence of Morgan Freeman and Matt Damon, the film will have to benefit from strong word-of-mouth to survive the competitive Christmas movie season (they may have been better off platforming the film into a wide release in January). The film may also play better overseas, where Rugby is a better-known sport. Reviews were generally upbeat.

Fourth spot went to the "Twilight" sequel, "New Moon" with $8 million and a $268 million domestic gross to date. Fifth went to Disney's "A Christmas Carol", which is taking advantage of the upcoming holiday to keep afloat with a $6.8 million weekend take. The gross to date is $125 million with a possible $150-160 million final domestic gross when all is said and done.

In limited release this weekend, Peter Jackson's delayed drama "The Lovely Bones" debuted in three theaters for a healthy $120,000 estimated gross. Initial interest aside, this movie is going to need a miracle to become a hit. I saw the film the other night and I thought it was one of the worst films of the year (and this is coming from someone who read and liked the book). Apparently, I'm not alone in my dislike of the film. Whether audiences click where critics do not will be anyone's guess until the movie opens wide on January 15th.

Jason Reitman's "Up in the Air" added 57 more screens this weekend and pulled in an estimated $2.45 million from 72 screens and a solid $4 million to date. The film will continue to add screens next week prior to its wide debut on Christmas Day. Also debut in limited release this weekend with strong results is the Colin Firth drama "A Single Man", which pulled in a big $225,000 from only nine screens. Firth is being touted as a possible front-runner for Best Actor, so plan on hearing and seeing more about this film over the next few weeks.

Next week bring James Cameron's 3-D epic "Avatar" to theaters. Despite my friend declaring it "the death of cinema" (he apparently wasn't sitting next to me during "Transformers: Revenge of the Fallen"), the uncertainty about Cameron's $300 million sci-fi epic has been replaced by anticipation thanks to a majority of favorable reviews from those worldwide who have seen it. Myself? I have to admit that now I am actually looking forward to seeing it for myself. And I can tell you right now that good, bad or otherwise, this movie is going to be HUGE at the box office this holiday season (sorry, Brett).

Review: Invictus

Based on the novel by John Carlin, "Invictus" is set in South Africa during the first half of the 1990s. The film, directed by Clint Eastwood, chronicles the efforts of newly-elected president Nelson Mandela (Morgan Freeman) to unify his country through sports, in particular Rugby. The only problem is that the national team, captained by Francois Piennar (Matt Damon), is a bit of a joke. In fact, when Mandela gets his unification idea, the team downright stinks. With their work cut out for him, backed by a little bit of inspiration from Mandela, Piennar and his team become determined to make it to the 1995 World Rugby Cup while helping Mandela lift his country above the crime and apartheid that still plagues it.

Ever since his 1992 Oscar-winning triumph "Unforgiven" pushed him into the realm of great American filmmakers, Eastwood has been on a pretty remarkable creative streak. Sure, there have been a few bumps in the road, such as last year’s "Changeling", 1999’s "True Crime" and 2002’s "Blood Work". More often than not though, the Man from Malpaso has been consistently turning out solid, sometimes great, directorial efforts over the past two decades. "Invictus" falls somewhere in between. While it’s a film from the 79-year old that keeps you entertained from start to finish, it's also one that could have been so much more.

The film’s debits certainly do not lie in the subject matter: the effort of a political prisoner-turned-president to unify a country torn apart by racism and crime through a second-rate national rugby team? You’d be hard-pressed to find better material to make an underdog story from. It's also not the fault of the solid cast, led by two strong turns by Freeman and Damon (both handle the tricky South African accent very well), whose performances keep us engaged throughout.

The blame lies with Anthony Peckham's screenplay and Eastwood’s directing, both which get the work done but do so disappointingly. Plenty of material worth developing is hinted at: Mandela’s family troubles, the struggle of Piennar to motivate his team and unite the fans, South Africa’s continuing troubles after Mandela takes office, etc. But that’s it. It’s brought up, but rarely developed or further examined. And if you are unfamiliar with the ins and outs of Rugby, you can also forget about getting an overview here (apparently, the sport was explained in the film but the scene was cut). The well-shot finale is somewhat exciting, but I had no idea as to what the hell was going on.

Eastwood’s directing takes the story competently from point A to B to C, but it’s done in such (forgive the expression) black-and-white terms that while the viewer might find themselves enjoying the movie as it plays out, they’ll be hard pressed to remember anything memorable afterwards. I would expect this type of directing from the likes of a younger, newer filmmaker, but not one as seasoned as Eastwood. Then again, I’ve always said that a director’s work can only be as good as the screenplay that they are given to work from.

“Invictus” certainly is no “Changeling” or "Absolute Power", but then again it's no “Letters From Iwo Jima”, "Unforgiven" or “Million Dollar Baby”. If you’re looking for a rudimentary sports drama with nothing terribly deep or depressing attached to it for your holiday viewing, you could do far worse than this film. But if you’re looking for an inspiring underdog tale with some meat on its storytelling bones, you’d be advised to look someplace else. Rated PG-13. 134 minutes. Two and a half stars out of four.

Weekend Box Office: Touchdown!

After two weeks of being in second place, the Sandra Bullock football drama "The Blind Side" stepped up to the number one spot this weekend at the U.S. box office. Former two-time champ "The Twilight Saga: New Moon" slipped to second place, several wide-release newcomers were met with indifference and one limited release met with great results. Overall, the national box office was slightly ahead of the same weekend last year as Hollywood continues to cruise along to a record 2009.

Despite dropping 49%, "The Blind Side" still remained a very popular choice among filmgoers. Adding $20.4 million in ticket sales, the 17-day cume for the inspirational drama hit the $129 million mark. Depending on how well the film holds up in the next few weeks, the $180-190 million mark may still be possible. One thing is for certain: Bullock is having one hell of a good year at the box office. Heck, even her unwatchable dud "All About Steve" pulled in $35 million.

Fading faster than you can "bloodsucker", the blockbuster sequel "New Moon" dropped another 63% for a $15.7 million weekend and a new overall domestic total of $255.6 million. The film will pass Paramount's "Star Trek" in the next day or so to become the fifth highest grossing motion picture of 2009. As with "Blind Side", where "New Moon" finishes all depends on how steep the drops are over the next few weeks. If it continues to drop 60-70% each successive weekend, the film will end up with roughly $285-290 million. If it can level out a bit, the $300 million mark might still be within reach. Any way you slice it, the film is a huge and profitable hit for indie Summit Entertainment. Maybe now they can actually afford to promote "The Hurt Locker" for Oscar consideration.

A quartet of wide releases made little if any impact on the box office. In fact, the three-week-old "Blind Side" grossed more this weekend than all four wide releases combined. At the top of the heap was Lionsgate's drama "Brothers" with an estimated $9.7 million. A remake of a Danish film from 2004, the Jim-Sheridan directed tale starring Jake Gyllenhaal, Tobey Maguire and Natalie Portman did better than I figured it would given its heavy-duty subject matter. Reviews were mostly positive. Sony's heist pic "Armored" sputtered with an estimated $6.6 million from close to 2,000 screens. Miramax's remake of the Italian film "Everybody's Fine" was DOA with a puny $3.7 million gross, and something called "Transylmania" pulled in an embarassing $272,000 from 1,007 screens for a wretched $272 per screen average.

Aside from "Blind Side" climbing to the number one spot after three weeks of release, two films in limited release posted some superb numbers. Debuting on a small, 15-screen count, Jason Reitman's "Up in the Air" pulled in a huge $1.2 million, averaging $79,000 per screen. Arriving with strong reviews and the honor of being named film of the year by the National Board of Review, "Air" connected with adult viewers in a big way. If the Paramount release can maintain its altitude, the film could blossom into a huge hit as it expands throughout December.

The other big exclusive, Walt Disney's animated "The Princess and the Frog", kissed a huge $744,000 from two pricey (tickets run between $30 and $50 each) exclusive runs in Los Angeles and New York. The two week total for the new animated featue is $2.4 million. The film opens wide this upcoming Friday and will duke it out with the new Clint Eastwood-directed sports drama "Invictus" for the number one spot next weekend.

Winter movie preview part two: This...this is it?

In the first part of my winter movie preview, I had listed a series of films that I was anticipating from the upcoming holiday movie season. One was "Fantastic Mr. Fox", which I loved immensely. Another, Peter Jackson's adaptation of "The Lovely Bones", had my friend Brett pretending to put a gun in his mouth about an hour into the movie. Not a good sign (I'll still see it anyway despite the 'warning').

Recently, I went to check on what was left to be released for the remainder of the year. While there doesn't seem to be a huge amount of must see films, there certainly are ones that have caught my eye (in addition to all the films I skipped this fall that I need to catch up on).

The second part of my wish list is as follows:

"Avatar" (opens December 18th)

Here it comes. James Cameron's super-expensive (God only knows how much 20th Century Fox spent on it) and somewhat anticipated 3-D sci-fi epic. While the 15 minutes or so of footage I saw last August really didn't do much for me one way or the other, the recent ads have at the very least made me want to see just what Jimmy has been up to over the past few years. Whether audiences flock to it or not is another story. I'm sure Fox is hoping for another "Titanic" on their hands. Something tells me they should be hoping for another "True Lies" at best.

"Nine" (limited release on December 18th)

After he turned "Memoirs of a Geisha" into a torturous 2 1/2 trip to the flicks four years ago, director Rob Marshall goes back to the genre that made him a Hollywood player: the Broadway musical. Marshall did a fine job bringing "Chicago" to the big screen, so perhaps his film version of the long-running musical "Nine" will be his next success story. At the very least, the cast is for the most part impressive: Daniel "Drinkin' Milkshakes" Day-Lewis, Nicole Kidman, Sophia Loren, Judi Dench, Penelope Cruz and Marion "Schwing!" Cotillard. Kate Hudson and Fergie from the Black-Eyed Peas also star, but I'm willing to ignore that aspect.

"Me and Orson Welles" (opening in limited release throughout December)

I wasn't sure about this film when I first heard about it. I heard Zac Effron's name pop up and I instantly rolled my eyes. But when I heard who had directed the film (Richard Linklater), my interest grew considerably. Hit or miss, Linklater is a director that is always interesting to watch, so this will be one I am going to keep my eye on.

"The Young Victoria" (opening in limited release thoughout December)

Another one I know litte about. I am guessing it is about Queen Victoria in her younger days. What caught my eye about this film is that Emily Blunt is in the lead role. Not only is Blunt quite the talented actress, she also has that mysterious British allure that makes her irresistible (pale skin, the accent, the bod...okay, I'll stop). It wouldn't suprise me to see her name bounced around the awards circuit during the next few weeks and months.

"Broken Embraces" (opening in limited release throughout December)

I have to be honest: I was not a fan of Pedro Almodovar's earlier works. In fact, with the exception of "Women on the Verge of a Nervous Breakdown" and most of "Tie Me Up! Tie Me Down!", I thought most of his output from the 1980s was pretty weak. Over the past decade, however, his films have become less camp and more mature. A perfect example of that is 1999's "Talk to Her", which I think is the best film he has made to date. Now comes "Broken Embraces", which finds Almodovar reuniting with Penelope Cruz for a drama about a blind writer. A friend of mine said it was good, but not among Almodovar's best. If they keep the camp to a minimum, I'll be happy.

And there you have it. A small list that should keep me out of trouble over the next few weeks and hopefully away from theaters showing the "Alvin and the Chipmunks" sequel.

Weekend box office preview: Thanksgiving leftovers to command top spots

The weekend after the Thanksgiving holiday is usually a quiet one at the national box office, and this year should prove to be no exception. No less than four new movies, three in wide release and one via a limited debut, are vying for box office bucks. The quartet of wide openers, however, will hardly pose a threat to last weekend's big winners.

This weekend should finally see the smash sports hit drama "The Blind Side" step up to the number one spot, a location it inhabited on Thanksgiving Day. As I have mentioned over the past couple of weeks, the Sandra Bullock film has caught everyone off guard. People who have seen it have loved it, and the critical consensus wasn't as bad as you might think (72% approval rating on Rotten Tomatoes). As with every film from last week, the film will encounter some drop off in attendance. The drop for this one, however, might not be as steep as others. Watch for "The Blind Side" to nab roughly $23 million this weekend, which should bring its total up to an amazing $132 million after 17 days of release.

Summit Entertainment's juggernaut "The Twilight Saga: New Moon" dropped 70% last week from its terrific opening the weekend before. While that number is huge, it is also to be expected. Upfront demand was through the roof, and there were more than enough screens around showing the movie to accommodate said demand. So with fans seeing it en masse opening weekend, a big drop was expected. This weekend will show another sizable erosion, but more in the 50% range. Watch for Bella and company to collar roughly $21 million more in "blood money" to bring "New Moon"s domestic total to around the $260 million range.

As for the new blood at theaters, the one that shows the most potential to make any sort of money would be the urban action flick "Armored", which stars Matt Dillon, Jean Reno and Laurence Fishburne. Sony is releasing the film in a small (for an action film) amount of theaters (1,915) and through their Screen Gems division, which usually translates into a bad film. Action fans who have seen "Ninja Assassin" might check out "Armored" to get their fill of bullets and action. Everyone else will most likely wait for the DVD release. Watch for "Armored" to nab roughly $8 million this weekend.

A remake of a 1990 Italian film, the Robert De Niro family drama "Everybody's Fine" will unspool in 2,133 screens. Early word-of-mouth has not been kind to the drama, and the previews are so sappy that I could have sworn I got three cavities during the two-minute trailer. If you have been waiting for De Niro to make a quality comeback, you might have to wait a little while longer. The success of fellow mainstream drama "The Blind Side" isn't going to help matters any for the Miramax release. Watch for the film to pull in approximately $6 million this weekend.

New release number three is the new Lionsgate drama "Brothers", starring Jake Gyllenhaal, Natalie Portman and Tobey Maguire. Directed by Irish filmmaker Jim Sheridan ("In the Name of the Father", "My Left Foot", "In America"), "Brothers" has been pulling in some solid notices, mostly for the acting from its three talented leads. However, the film's dark tone and downbeat nature will no doubt prove to be something that viewers might be more comfortable watching at home than they would in the theaters. Opening in a little over 2,000 screens, "Brothers" might tie or gross a little more than "Everybody's Fine" this weekend to pull in an estimated $6.5 million.

This weekend also sees the debut of the new Jason Reitman film, "Up in the Air" which stars George Clooney. Clooney plays a corporate downsizer whose tidy, isolated life is about to experience some much-needed turbulence thanks to two very different women that come into his life. I've seen the film twice now and I think it is the best live-action film of the year so far. The performances are excellent across the board, the script is sharp and funny, and Reitman's directing proves to be a major leap forward over his two previous efforts (both which were also quite good), "Thank You For Smoking" and "Juno". "Air" is getting a slow rollout from Paramount over the month of December, which I think is a very smart move (the film goes wide on Christmas Day). Taking off from 15 screens this weekend, "Up in the Air" could see a gross somewhere in the ballpark of $500,000 to $700,000.

Next week, Disney's 2-D animated feature "The Princess and the Frog" goes into wide release, along with the Clint Eastwood sports drama "Invictus" and, in very limited release, the Peter Jackson drama "The Lovely Bones".

WHOO HOO!

Wim Wenders official website has highlighted my recent review of Crtierion's superb blu-ray release of his 1987 masterpiece "Wings of Desire"! This is truly an honor for me. To take a review I wrote of one of the best movies made in the late 20th Century and place it on the site of the man responsible for the film is a wonderful early Christmas gift.

Thank you, Wim! By the way, I'll be reviewing "Paris, Texas" in a few weeks. :)

National Board of Review picks "Up in the Air" as Best Film of the Year

Variety.com is reporting that the National Board of Review, usually one of the first major film groups to give out year-end accolades, has given Ivan Reitman's brilliant comedy/drama "Up In the Air" top honors at their annual event. The Board gave the movie awards for Best Picture, Actor (George Clooney, who shares the honor with 'Invictus' star Morgan Freeman), Supporting Actress (Anna Kendrick) and Best Adapted Screenplay to Reitman and Sheldon Turner. Not a bad thing to add to the ad campaign as the film debuts in selected theaters on Friday (and you better pray that your theater is selected! Just kidding).

Other wins include Clint Eastwood for Best Director for "Invictus", The Coen Brothers for their original screenplay for "A Serious Man", Carey Mulligan for "An Education", "Up" for Best Animated Feature as well as a special award for Wes Anderson's stop-motion winner "Fantastic Mr. Fox" (saw it Tuesday night and loved every minute of it).

The Board also named its ten best films of 2009. They were: "(500) Days of Summer", "An Education", "The Hurt Locker", "Inglourious Basterds", "Invictus", "The Messenger", "A Serious Man", "Star Trek", "Up" and "Where the Wild Things Are". Call me crazy, but should the film named best film of the year also be included on the list? Just sayin', is all...

Now, do these awards mean anything? Well, yes and no. No in the fact that awards for films have meant little if anything to the actual quality of a film. "Up in the Air" could win zero awards and it still wouldn't take away the fact that it is a great piece of Hollywood entertainment. I would say that yes, awards mean something in regards to the fact that giving quality films like "Up in the Air", "The Hurt Locker", "(500) Days of Summer", "Fantastic Mr. Fox" and most likely "An Education" and "Invictus" (I haven't seen either one yet, unfortunately) will help more people seek out and discover them, instead of pissing away their hard-earned money and time on crap like the "Twilight" films, "Planet 51", "2012" or "A Christmas Carol".

So, let the mutual Tinseltown ass-kissing and self-congratulatory bullshit commence. Maybe all this awards-love will help people actually seek out and re-discover the increasingly rare art of cinematic storytelling this holiday season.

Yeah, right!

Paul Greengrass passes on a fourth 'Bourne' film

According to an article on Variety.com, director Paul Greengrass has decided to take a pass on a planned fourth installment in Universal's lucrative Jason Bourne franchise. According to a press release the director made, his departure is the result of "feeling the call for a different challenge".

Two possible substitutes for the directing duties would include series' scribe Tony Gilroy, who has gone on to direct "Michael Clayton" and "Duplicity", and George Nolfi, who helped write the last Jason Bourne film, "The Bourne Ultimatum".

I'm sure that either Gilroy or Nolfi would do a fine job taking over directorial duties. Hell, they may even learn to keep the camera steady for more than ten seconds. But seriously, let's face facts: do we really need another Jason Bourne film? The fact that "Ultimatum" turned out so well and finished off ol' JB's story is more than enough reason to call it a day. Now that Jason knows who he really is and the shadowy government organizations have been exposed, what is there left to do? Unless they drop a flower pot on Bourne's head, restarting the amnesia, there really is nowhere to go with the character. But hey, money talks in Hollywood, and since each successive Bourne adventure grossed more than the last one, I'm sure Universal is dying to get another JB pic in theaters.