The Decline of the American Empire

In a wisely deleted scene, Mater finds a vending machine where you can buy other cars' used oil filtersEveryone’s learned to steer clear of Pixar’s chosen weekend, so this is a pleasantly calm frame at the megaplex. (And god knows we can use one.) Here’s what’s new at a theatre near you:

Bad Teacher“: Jake Kasdan invigorates what seems to have been a pretty rote script with spot-on casting and weirdly unpredictable comic rhythms. (I don’t know why we’re all surprised; he did the same thing with “Orange County”.) And Cameron Diaz and Jason Segel remind us that they’re at their most appealing when spewing utterly profane dialogue.

“Beginning of the Great Revival”: Han Sanping and Huang Jianxin’s political epic — released in China as “The Founding of a Party”, the companion piece to “The Founding of a Republic” — is nearly two and a half hours long, very expensive and features John Woo in the cast. Beyond that, I know nothing.

Cars 2“: Hey, kids, guess what? Someone decided that a sequel to “Cars” should (a) focus on its most annoying character, (b) aggressively court American rednecks with a weirdly xenophobic take on a world of talking vehicles and (c) deliver the most garbled statement about fossil-fuel technology since, um, ever. I take no pleasure in pointing out that the critical consensus sounds remarkably like my take on “Toy Story 3”. I take no pleasure in any of this, really; I love Pixar and I think John Lasseter is a genius. But they’ve both dropped a very big ball on this one.

The Future is Now!“: In a feature-length homage to the 1949 French film “Life Begins Tomorrow”, Gary Burns and Jim Brown tell the story of a cynic (Paul Ahmarani) given the chance by a journalist (Liane Balaban) to speak to various philosophers and artists in order to convince him that the future will be so bright as to requite some sort of sunglasses. It doesn’t exactly work as a concept, but it is chock-full of ideas, and that’s never a bad thing.

Oh, and TIFF is screening “To Die Like a Man” at the Lightbox this weekend as part of a New Auteurs spotlight Joao Pedro Rodrigues. Glenn has some things to say about that, too. Also, I’m doing another Defending the Indefensible screening tonight, serving as the prosecutor to Adam Nayman’s promotion of “The Butterfly Effect“. He’s wrong, he’s just so wrong. Come down to the Underground tonight at 7 pm and support me as I help him see the light. It’s just eight bucks, and it’s for a good cause. Join me?

Shaping Reality

... well, sure, there'll be hair in the future. For special people.Open this week’s NOW and you’ll find me talking to Gary Burns and Jim Brown, two swell guys who made the terrific exurb study “Radiant City”. They’re back this week with “The Future is Now!“, an intriguing if deeply flawed philosophical inquiry into the way we live today, and will be living tomorrow. You should read it. After all, as a great man once said, the future is where you and I will be spending the rest of our lives.

Also, I review “The Rendezvous“, a Toronto-shot adaptation of Tom Noonan’s “What Happened Was …” that makes its world premiere at the Revue tonight. Not so great, unfortunately. So I guess I hate Canadian cinema again.

The Power To Adjust Expectations

The power ring can manifest anything, except a decent razorSavaged by critics, the summer’s latest superhero movie “Green Lantern” nevertheless enjoyed a $52.7 million opening weekend … which is somehow being read as disappointing, despite it being just a hair short of the $55.1 million pulled in by “X-Men: First Class” earlier this month — which was also read as a weak opening.

I guess Warner’s early projections of a $60 million weekend got everyone’s blood up for a bigger number than ultimately resulted, but $52.7 million is pretty respectable for a Green Lantern movie, especially since last week’s top earner, “Super 8”, only pulled in $38 million. (Let us not forget that GL is one of DC’s second-tier heroes, beloved by fanboys but not terribly popular among the general public — and all that space-opera stuff in the trailer probably turned off the mildly curious, who might have responded better to a sell that focused on the earthbound adventures of the character.)

I’m not trying to rationalize the movie’s failure to do better, mind you. It’s pretty lame, and frankly I’m surprised it made as well as it did. Of course, I also thought “Mr. Popper’s Penguins” would do a lot better than a middling $18.2 million, which put it in third place below “Super 8” (which enjoyed a decent second-weekend gross of $21.3 million).

I guess what I’m asking is, when did $50 million become a disappointing number? Not every superhero picture is going to be “Iron Man” or The Dark Knight” — that’s just the way these things go — so why sink $100 million or more into your movie in the first place? “Green Lantern” is a perfect example of a movie that was made by people trying to protect their investment by dumbing down their product in order to reach the widest audience … without ever realizing said product was never going to be a mainstream monster hit. A smaller scale of production would have allowed for more creativity, and amost certainly would have resulted in a better movie. (Or they could have just hired a director with a feel for the material, but that’s a whole other issue.)

I dunno. It’s still a way better opening than “Jonah Hex”, so I don’t know what everyone’s complaining about. Thoughts?

Remember the Goldman Rule

I'm placing my career in this tiny floating ringWell, you can file this week’s release slate under Nobody Knows Anything”: The silly-looking Jim Carrey family comedy is more entertaining and engaging than the Ryan Reynolds superhero movie?

Honestly. I just don’t understand it. But there’s a far darker power in the universe than either “Mr. Popper’s Penguins” or “Green Lantern” this week, and it’s first up on the list.

The Art of Getting By“: The price we pay for a brilliant, idiosyncratic cinematic breakthrough like “Rushmore” is that far less talented filmmakers think they can make a movie just like it. And maybe rip off “Annie Hall” too. I call bullshit on Gavin Wiesen’s attempt.

Beautiful Boy“: Maria Bello and Michael Sheen are exceptionally well-paired as parents coping with grief and guilt after their college-age son commits a monstrous act. Shawn Ku directs them with considerable intelligence and restraint; I just wish his script had thrown a single curve ball at the story.

“Beginners”: I’m still trying to catch up to Mike Mills’ semiautobiographical family drama, which casts Ewan McGregor as a son reeling from the revelation that his recently widowed dad (Christopher Plummer) is gay. Susan‘s been high on it since TIFF, and the Oscar talk for Plummer has been a-building. So put me down as interested.

Green Lantern“: In brightest day, in blackest night, the script could use one more rewrite. Let those who worship DC’s might beware their product — this Lantern’s light. On substance. Get it? Yeah, the filmmakers won’t either.

Mr. Popper’s Penguins“: Yes, on some level it’s a distant echo of “Liar Liar”. But on another, more practical level, it’s a movie that remembers Jim Carrey is at his best when he’s surrounded by other funny things. And someone needs to give Ophelia Lovibond her own children’s franchise RIGHT NOW.

“True Legend”: Revered chop-socky filmmaker (and “Matrix” wire-fu wizard) Yuen Woo-Ping returns with this Hong Kong actioner about a famed 19th century general (Chiu Man-Cheuk) drawn back into battle when a rival steals his son. Andrew thinks it feels a little overloaded, but honestly from Yuen I’d expect nothing else.

There, that’s everything. And now, back to work.

Notes from the Red Zone

Well, maybe a little evilThis week’s NOW features my interview with Mark Strong, who plays a villain-in-waiting in “Green Lantern”, and another conversation with Maria Bello, who plays a mother grappling with a horrible loss — and an even more terrible discovery — in “Beautiful Boy”.

I also review a couple of NXNE films, and take a look at Rainer Werner Fassbinder’s 1973 sci-fi curio “World on a Wire“, which the Lightbox is screening in a new 35mm presentation Friday and Sunday. But given that it’s three and a half hours long and was originally produced for television, you might want to wait for the Criterion edition and catch it at home.

Just a thought.

Ambling Through “Super 8”

... wait, so which one of us is Dee Wallace Stone?If you’re like most North Americans, there’s a good chance you haven’t seen “Super 8” yet — for shame! It’s really good!

Anyway, if you haven’t yet watched J.J. Abrams’ suburban summer adventure, you’re going to want to hold off on reading my latest MSN Movies feature, which breaks down the movie’s DNA in handy list form.

I mean, it’s not a shocker to learn it’s mostly Spielberg stuff. But there are a couple of other elements you might not have noticed rattling around in there — and discussing them risks minor spoilers, which I wouldn’t want to inflict on anyone who hasn’t already experienced the movie. Take that under advisement.

And go see “Super 8”! It’s a big-screen kind of movie, and the Blu-ray won’t be out for months. Why deprive yourself?

Bring the Pain

In fairness, those ARE some big eyes she has ...In this week’s MSN DVD column, I hike up my pants and wade into the pure, unmitigated ruin of “Red Riding Hood”, “Big Mommas: Like Father, Like Son” and “Hall Pass”.

I won’t lie to you. It ain’t pretty. But that’s what the wasteland of winter studio pictures produces every year …

A Hit, But Not a Monster

Hey, J.J. ... 38 is one of the good numbers, right?Does every movie need to have the biggest opening in the history of ever? Well, no, but it would have been nice if J.J. Abrams’ “Super 8” — one of the most purely satisfying summer movies I’ve seen in a very long time — had done “Fast Five” or “Hangover II” business this weekend, just to shut people up about mass audiences shunning intelligent films in favor of simplistic bang-bang. Hell, I’d have settled for “X-Men” numbers.

Instead, “Super 8” opened with $38 million, which is entirely respectable for a non-franchise movie with no major stars on a non-holiday weekend, blah blah blah. In fact, the linked AP piece qualifies it specifically as:

the first original, live-action non-sequel to take the No. 1 slot in almost three months. The thriller “Limitless” led the field during the weekend of March 18-20.

And that “Limitless” opening was just $19 million, so “Super 8” is clearly the better picture.

Look, the box-office shouldn’t matter. All it tells us is which movie people most wanted to see in a given week; it says nothing about how many of those people actually enjoyed the film. At the same time, it’s great that “Super 8” tops the charts, because that might entice other people to go and check it out … but surely they’d be just as drawn to the movie by strong word-of-mouth, right?

More to the point, art isn’t a popularity contest. “The Tree of Life”, which is nudging at the top of my list of the year’s best films, has earned just $2.4 million in three weeks of North American release. I don’t think anyone in Terrence Malick’s office is keeping a close eye on the tally, though.

Have you seen “The Tree of Life”, by the way? Because you really should.

Everything Under the Sun

TendernessNow, this is the sort of movie week we’ve been hoping for for a very long time … no, not everything’s top-flight, but we’re getting a terrific studio picture, a flawed but promising debut and a genuine masterpiece, and that’s more than good enough.

“Cell 213”: The presence of Eric Balfour — who’s just about the least compelling actor working today — kept me well away from this Canadian prison-horror thriller. Andrew‘s review suggests my instincts were dead on.

“Judy Moody and the Not Bummer Summer”: Apparently this is based on one of them beloved children’s books, now with added barfing, shrieking and farting. Rad says it’s no “Diary of a Wimpy Kid”, so … yeesh.

“Loose Cannons”: Ferzan Ozpetek delivers an Italian bedroom farce with a twist: The main character keeps trying to come out to his family, and can’t. Glenn calls it derivative but fun, so if that’s what you’re after …

Submarine“: Richard Ayoade’s quirky coming-of-age drama hits the right notes and features three excellent supporting performances from Sally Hawkins, Noah Taylor and the terrific Paddy Considine. I seem to be the only person who think it stumbles in the second half, though.

Super 8“: J.J. Abrams salutes Steven Spielberg — and finds the chronological and thematic mid-point between “Close Encounters” and “E.T.” — with this crackling kid’s adventure. But it’s the human element that’ll keep you on the edge of your seat.

The Tree of Life“: In which Terrence Malick contemplates life, the universe and everything through what feels an awful lot like an autobiographical lens. It’s one of the most remarkable experiences I’ve had in a movie theatre in years; let’s just leave it at that.

So, which will you see first? Also, Thom Andersen is presenting his short films tonight at the Lightbox, followed by a Q&A with Jesse Wente; we discuss that here. And don’t forget, “Jaws” plays the Underground Sunday at 9:30 pm. Wouldn’t want to miss that, would we?