aka Me, Yeah I lost interest in the fantasy movie thing...just thought you should know.
I've been sickly lately, and while that would suggest I have more time for blogging (and it did) the fact is I still just didn't feel like it. And I still don't.
Friday, February 19, 2010
Thursday, February 11, 2010
2007-2008: Fantasy Movies
2007 and 2008 were fairly heavy years when it comes to Family Fantasy Movies, so these will all be brief.
2008
City of Ember
Worldwide Box Office: $17.9 million
Budget: $55 million
I'm rather saddened by how poorly this film did in the box office. It's hardly fantastic, but it is somewhat unique, and I love the steampunk atmosphere.
What they do right: As I said, Steampunk=awesome. A fairly unique story.
What they do wrong: October release is not good for these kinds of movies. Furthermore, much like last year's "9" there was a lot of advertising early on and not enough closer to release. Also, the book isn't that famous.
Journey to the Center of the Earth
Worldwide Box Office: $242 million
Budget: $60 million
The first film listed that actually turned out successful. I haven't seen this one.
What they do right: Based on a novel that's genuinely famous to the point where most people have at least heard of it. 3-D is a gimmick to me, but it's no joke that it pulls in money. Summer release=more kiddies out of school=more moneys. Haven't seen the film so I can't comment on quality.
What they do wrong: Again, haven't seen it, but it doesn't look like it follows the book, like at all.
The Chronicles of Narnia: Prince Caspian
Worldwide Box Office: $419 million
Budget: $225 million
I'll save my thoughts on the first film for further along, stay tuned.
What they do right: Based on a genuinely popular novel and sequel to an even more popular one. The keep the same cast and ad a few new characters, who are all well cast (except perhaps the title character).
What they do wrong: They put the book through a paper shredder and stuck together a few lines from the leftovers, after which they filled the movie with boring action scenes. The film is way over-budgeted, if they would have followed the book closer it would have been a far smaller budget and they probably would have profited. Furthermore, the movie was released in summer, and with the exception of Harry Potter, releasing a sequel to a holiday movie in summer never works. People want to see the same kinds of movies around the same time of year. Also, they faced a lot of competition from Indiana Jones, opening the film's second weekend.
The Spiderwilk Chronicles
Worldwide Box Office: $162.8 million
Budget: $90 million
What they do Right: This movie, I'm glad to say, is genuinely good. Not great, but it certainly gets the job done, and I was say, 10 years old I would have absolutely adored it.
What they do Wrong: This kind of movie hasn't been shown to play well early in the year like this. Furthermore, following the releases of some late 2007 movies with similar themes, it can reasonably be inferred that there was some viewer fatigue. Also, $90 million is a steep budget for a movie released in February (typically a dry time).
2007
The Water Horse: Legend of the Deep
Worldwide Box Office: $102.8 million
Budget: Unknown, probably too embarrassing to reveal
Never saw this one, hopefully never will.
What they do right: They advertised it as "From the Studio who brought you Chronicles of Narnia". They almost got the release date right. It has that kid from "Millions"
What they do wrong: Releasing on Christmas Day is a little late for this kind of picture. It clearly wanted to avoid "The Golden Compass" but this movie's advertisements probably appealed to a much younger audience anyway. "The Water Horse" is a boring title.
The Golden Compass
Worldwide Box Office: $372 million
Budget: $180 million
Once again haven't seen, so won't comment on quality.
What they do right: Some of the film is Steampunk styled. The visual effects look impressive. The book is at least fairly well known.
What they do wrong: $180 million is too much money to spend on a film of this caliber. The film's criticism of the church alienated much of their audience (at least stateside). They definitely lost nearly all of the Narnia kids. Aside from the visuals, the advertising wasn't very appealing. The PG-13 rating further alienated conservative families.
The Seeker: The Dark is Rising
Worldwide Box Office: $31.4 million
Budget: $45 million
What they do right: The film is only 99 minutes, much shorter than most of these movies.
What they do wrong: The subtitle "The Dark is Rising" is probably the most cliche thing I've ever heard. This cliche generic-ness drips into every aspect of the film, and it's awful. Once again I must point out that October is a sucky time to release this kind of film. Finally, no one knows this book.
The Last Mimzy
Worldwide Box Office: $27.3 million
Budget: Unknown, that's probably a good thing.
What they do right: It manages to look different from all these movies, and it genuinely is. The film builds tension well and is, in my opinion, a good kids movie. They got a good cast.
What they do wrong: The title is weird and frankly makes no sense. I never would have watched it if I hadn't been on an airplane. This isn't based on a book, but a short story that kids (the target audience) would never have heard of, and probably neither have their parents. Finally, late March isn't a great time to release this type of movie.
Bridge to Terabithia
Worldwide Box Office: $137.6 million
Budget: Unknown, Disney is almost always tight-lipped.
What they do right: The movie is based on a popular kids book (imagine that!) and a literary classic. This came out before people were burned out on this kind of picture. The movie is good, dare I say great, definitely the best of its kind from 2007.
What they do wrong: The film's marketing is sort of deceptive. All of the creatures and imaginary stuff is just that, imaginary. The movie isn't really even a fantasy, it was just marketed that way, and a lot of people were downright angry because it wasn't what they expected. Furthermore, the ending is a downer. (in a good way!)
more to come! (this undertaking is a lot more epic than I first percieved!)
2008
City of Ember
Worldwide Box Office: $17.9 million
Budget: $55 million
I'm rather saddened by how poorly this film did in the box office. It's hardly fantastic, but it is somewhat unique, and I love the steampunk atmosphere.
What they do right: As I said, Steampunk=awesome. A fairly unique story.
What they do wrong: October release is not good for these kinds of movies. Furthermore, much like last year's "9" there was a lot of advertising early on and not enough closer to release. Also, the book isn't that famous.
Journey to the Center of the Earth
Worldwide Box Office: $242 million
Budget: $60 million
The first film listed that actually turned out successful. I haven't seen this one.
What they do right: Based on a novel that's genuinely famous to the point where most people have at least heard of it. 3-D is a gimmick to me, but it's no joke that it pulls in money. Summer release=more kiddies out of school=more moneys. Haven't seen the film so I can't comment on quality.
What they do wrong: Again, haven't seen it, but it doesn't look like it follows the book, like at all.
The Chronicles of Narnia: Prince Caspian
Worldwide Box Office: $419 million
Budget: $225 million
I'll save my thoughts on the first film for further along, stay tuned.
What they do right: Based on a genuinely popular novel and sequel to an even more popular one. The keep the same cast and ad a few new characters, who are all well cast (except perhaps the title character).
What they do wrong: They put the book through a paper shredder and stuck together a few lines from the leftovers, after which they filled the movie with boring action scenes. The film is way over-budgeted, if they would have followed the book closer it would have been a far smaller budget and they probably would have profited. Furthermore, the movie was released in summer, and with the exception of Harry Potter, releasing a sequel to a holiday movie in summer never works. People want to see the same kinds of movies around the same time of year. Also, they faced a lot of competition from Indiana Jones, opening the film's second weekend.
The Spiderwilk Chronicles
Worldwide Box Office: $162.8 million
Budget: $90 million
What they do Right: This movie, I'm glad to say, is genuinely good. Not great, but it certainly gets the job done, and I was say, 10 years old I would have absolutely adored it.
What they do Wrong: This kind of movie hasn't been shown to play well early in the year like this. Furthermore, following the releases of some late 2007 movies with similar themes, it can reasonably be inferred that there was some viewer fatigue. Also, $90 million is a steep budget for a movie released in February (typically a dry time).
2007
The Water Horse: Legend of the Deep
Worldwide Box Office: $102.8 million
Budget: Unknown, probably too embarrassing to reveal
Never saw this one, hopefully never will.
What they do right: They advertised it as "From the Studio who brought you Chronicles of Narnia". They almost got the release date right. It has that kid from "Millions"
What they do wrong: Releasing on Christmas Day is a little late for this kind of picture. It clearly wanted to avoid "The Golden Compass" but this movie's advertisements probably appealed to a much younger audience anyway. "The Water Horse" is a boring title.
The Golden Compass
Worldwide Box Office: $372 million
Budget: $180 million
Once again haven't seen, so won't comment on quality.
What they do right: Some of the film is Steampunk styled. The visual effects look impressive. The book is at least fairly well known.
What they do wrong: $180 million is too much money to spend on a film of this caliber. The film's criticism of the church alienated much of their audience (at least stateside). They definitely lost nearly all of the Narnia kids. Aside from the visuals, the advertising wasn't very appealing. The PG-13 rating further alienated conservative families.
The Seeker: The Dark is Rising
Worldwide Box Office: $31.4 million
Budget: $45 million
What they do right: The film is only 99 minutes, much shorter than most of these movies.
What they do wrong: The subtitle "The Dark is Rising" is probably the most cliche thing I've ever heard. This cliche generic-ness drips into every aspect of the film, and it's awful. Once again I must point out that October is a sucky time to release this kind of film. Finally, no one knows this book.
The Last Mimzy
Worldwide Box Office: $27.3 million
Budget: Unknown, that's probably a good thing.
What they do right: It manages to look different from all these movies, and it genuinely is. The film builds tension well and is, in my opinion, a good kids movie. They got a good cast.
What they do wrong: The title is weird and frankly makes no sense. I never would have watched it if I hadn't been on an airplane. This isn't based on a book, but a short story that kids (the target audience) would never have heard of, and probably neither have their parents. Finally, late March isn't a great time to release this type of movie.
Bridge to Terabithia
Worldwide Box Office: $137.6 million
Budget: Unknown, Disney is almost always tight-lipped.
What they do right: The movie is based on a popular kids book (imagine that!) and a literary classic. This came out before people were burned out on this kind of picture. The movie is good, dare I say great, definitely the best of its kind from 2007.
What they do wrong: The film's marketing is sort of deceptive. All of the creatures and imaginary stuff is just that, imaginary. The movie isn't really even a fantasy, it was just marketed that way, and a lot of people were downright angry because it wasn't what they expected. Furthermore, the ending is a downer. (in a good way!)
more to come! (this undertaking is a lot more epic than I first percieved!)
Tuesday, February 9, 2010
Fantasy in the 00's
Ever since "Harry Potter and the Sorcerer's Stone" hit theaters in late 2001, there has been a steady stream of films trying to capitalize on the newly realized "family fantasy films". Some good, some bad, some embarrassing. This Friday, the latest of this ilk "Percy Jackson & the Olympians: The Lightning Thief" (extremely long titles are normal for these films) hits theaters, so now is as good a time as any to review the Family Fantasy Movies of the past decade. Such as it is, this post will just cover the 2009 films I felt met this mold. More posts coming soon.
2009
Cirque du Freak: The Vampire's Assistant
Worldwide Box Office: $28.2 million
Budget: $40 million
This one aimed for a very difficult audience to pull, the pre-teen/early teen market is downright finicky. It can't be too young looking or they won't go for it, these kids can just as well go for something aimed at adults as kids. It's troublesome, and it's something a lot of these movies struggle with. Furthermore, Cirque Du Freak is PG-13, so when they failed to grab their target, younger kids didn't find their way in either and they were basically screwed.
What it does right: Don't know haven't seen it
What it does wrong: Based on a book no one knows. Vampires are associated with Twilight which is hated passionately by the target audience for this film.
Where the Wild Things Are
Worldwide Box Office: $89.6 million, and still trucking
Budget: $100 million
Stories based on short children's books like this are easy to sell, but hard to make. This one is different from the others on this list, because it's not based on a series of chapter books, or even a full novel.
What it does right: Nostalgic appeal in the trailers. Haven't seen it yet.
What it does wrong: 100 million dollar films should never be launched in the off-season like October. This was a thanksgiving film.
Inkheart
Worldwide Box Office: $62.5 million
Budget: $60 million
The only one from 2009 that was actually a little bit successful, even though technically it probably lost a lot of money.
What it does right: Not sure, but it must have done something right for 62.5 million.
What it does wrong: Looks as cliche as it can get from the trailer, not based on a super-popular source. Has Andy Serkis as a main role, people inevitably associate him with Gollum and he can't be taken seriously.
Movies that are kind of like this, but didn't quite fit the mold: Race to witch Mountain, Land of the Lost, Aliens in the Attic.
2009
Cirque du Freak: The Vampire's Assistant
Worldwide Box Office: $28.2 million
Budget: $40 million
This one aimed for a very difficult audience to pull, the pre-teen/early teen market is downright finicky. It can't be too young looking or they won't go for it, these kids can just as well go for something aimed at adults as kids. It's troublesome, and it's something a lot of these movies struggle with. Furthermore, Cirque Du Freak is PG-13, so when they failed to grab their target, younger kids didn't find their way in either and they were basically screwed.
What it does right: Don't know haven't seen it
What it does wrong: Based on a book no one knows. Vampires are associated with Twilight which is hated passionately by the target audience for this film.
Where the Wild Things Are
Worldwide Box Office: $89.6 million, and still trucking
Budget: $100 million
Stories based on short children's books like this are easy to sell, but hard to make. This one is different from the others on this list, because it's not based on a series of chapter books, or even a full novel.
What it does right: Nostalgic appeal in the trailers. Haven't seen it yet.
What it does wrong: 100 million dollar films should never be launched in the off-season like October. This was a thanksgiving film.
Inkheart
Worldwide Box Office: $62.5 million
Budget: $60 million
The only one from 2009 that was actually a little bit successful, even though technically it probably lost a lot of money.
What it does right: Not sure, but it must have done something right for 62.5 million.
What it does wrong: Looks as cliche as it can get from the trailer, not based on a super-popular source. Has Andy Serkis as a main role, people inevitably associate him with Gollum and he can't be taken seriously.
Movies that are kind of like this, but didn't quite fit the mold: Race to witch Mountain, Land of the Lost, Aliens in the Attic.
Thursday, February 4, 2010
If Avatar wins best picture, I will strangle a kitten.
The Academy Awards nominations were announced on Monday, and of course there has been an endless amount of buzz around the internet, mostly focusing on James Cameron's brainless hippy-themed trip of a film, "Avatar". According to a poll on Yahoo Movies, 39% of voters think it deserves best picture. That might not be a majority, but it is more than 8 of the other nominees votes combined. The second place is "The Blind Side" with 27%. I haven't seen the Blind Side, but I know it probably doesn't really deserve it either. More unsettling is that 50% of voters thought Cameron deserves the "Best Director" award. Also, 72% of voters think it deserves Best Cinematography, which I strongly disagree with. I have yet to see many of the nominees, and probably will never see many of them, but I still know Avatar doesn't deserve crap.
Last year's winner, "Slumdog Millionaire" was nothing short of a masterpiece. This year is a jumble of odd picks, and the sum of their parts is so sad that Avatar is actually the frontrunner. If Avatar wins best picture on March 7th, I will be furious, and you should be too.
Here are the noms for best picture, in case you've been living under a rock and don't know yet.
Avatar (most overrated movie of all time)
The Blind Side (haven't seen)
District 9 (a fantastic movie, my pic out of the 10)
An Education (haven't seen)
The Hurt Locker (haven't seen)
Inglorious Basterds (haven't seen)
Precious (haven't seen)
A Serious Man (haven't seen)
Up (good, but overrated)
Up in the Air (haven't seen)
I have a few movies to see, but as of now my pick for best picture goes to "Zombieland". That movie rules all.
Last year's winner, "Slumdog Millionaire" was nothing short of a masterpiece. This year is a jumble of odd picks, and the sum of their parts is so sad that Avatar is actually the frontrunner. If Avatar wins best picture on March 7th, I will be furious, and you should be too.
Here are the noms for best picture, in case you've been living under a rock and don't know yet.
Avatar (most overrated movie of all time)
The Blind Side (haven't seen)
District 9 (a fantastic movie, my pic out of the 10)
An Education (haven't seen)
The Hurt Locker (haven't seen)
Inglorious Basterds (haven't seen)
Precious (haven't seen)
A Serious Man (haven't seen)
Up (good, but overrated)
Up in the Air (haven't seen)
I have a few movies to see, but as of now my pick for best picture goes to "Zombieland". That movie rules all.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)