Bridge of Martian Spies with Crimson Goosebumps
Sunday, October 18, 2015 at 3:33PM Family movies continue to be a fairly safe bet for box office glory as Goosebumps took the top spot despite an extremely competitive weekend. Perhaps its secret was that it had no direct competition except for the month old animated picture and, vaguely if you're stretching, the new del Toro picture. People are calling Crimson Peak a flop but that's unduly harsh. With a budget of only $55 million he didn't overspend and, despite media's interest in him, and expectations always saying otherwise he's never been a mainstream director. His biggest hit Pacific Rim certainly didn't earn more than double the gross of any of his other pictures globally because it was awash in del Toro idiosyncracies. It was a straight up, giant robots fighting monsters movie and easy to mistake for Transformers vs Godzilla if you squinted.
Box Office charts and more on the new films after the jump...
BOX OFFICE WIDE
800+ screens (Oct 16th-18th)
01 Goosebumps $23.5 NEW
02 The Martian $21.5 (cum. $143.7) Podcast, Matt's foot-in-mouth tour
03 Bridge of Spies $15.3 NEW Review
04 Crimson Peak $12.8 NEW Review
05 Hotel Transylvania 2 $12.2 (cum. $136.4) Tim on the director Genny Tartakovsky
06 Pan $5.8 (cum. $25.7) Peter Pan Movies
07 The Intern $5.4 (cum. $58.7) Review
08 Sicario $4.5 (cum. $34.6) Podcast, Emily Blunt
09 Woodlawn $4.1 NEW
10 Maze Runner: Scorch Trials $2.7 (cum. $75.4)
The Martian's popularity also probably caused a bit of trouble for Bridge of Spies since Spielberg, no matter the topic, courts the populist (but grown-up) audience. It was tougher out there for the adult pictures since they all chose the same weekend to open. Usually studios avoid these direct face-offs so one wonders what led to this? It surely has to do with studios worrying that you can't begin platforming your Oscar movies until October despite all the evidence to the contrary.
Truth for example, which is quite entertaining playing like a mainstream picture rather than a heady artful endeavour and features two bonafide movie stars (Blanchett and Robert Redford) had a rough bow. At only six theaters it couldn't drum up enough business to land in the top ten of the platformers! It's easy to imagine it opening a lot better AND a lot wider in August or September when it would have stood out a little more. Will it catch on as it expands? Beasts of No Nation fared even worse but Netflix aint worried
Steve Jobs continued to be a very hot ticket (it goes wide next weekend) but the weekend's best per screen average went to TIFF's Audience winner Room, the Brie Larson & Child drama which is so so good and hopefully Oscar bound. I can't wait for y'all to see it (but don't watch the trailer if you can avoid. Gives too much away)
BOX OFFICE LIMITED (excluding prev. wide)
(Oct 16th-18th)
01 Steve Jobs (60 screens) $1.5 (cum. $2.2) Review
02 Ladrones (375 screens) $.6 (cum. $2.4)
03 Goodbye Mr Loser (40 screens) $.3 (cum. $.9)
04 He Named Me Malala (477 screens) $.3 (cum. $1.5)
05 Grandma (136 screens) $.1 (cum. $6.5) Poster Blurb, Lily Tomlin's Filmography
06 Freeheld (148 screens) $.1 (cum. $.3) Reviewish
07 99 Homes (347 screens) $.1 (cum. $1.2) The return of Andrew Garfield Review
08 Room (4 screens) $.1 NEW First Impression
09 Pyaar Ka Punchnama 2 (49 screens) $.1 NEW
10 Goodnight Mommy (90 screens) $.09 (cum. $.8) Interview, Oscar Submission
What did you see this weekend?
I took in Bridge of Spies and the documentary Tab Hunter: Confidential. More on those to come.
Reader Comments (32)
Saw Bridge and Steve Jobs at press screenings last week; enjoyed both a lot. Crimson Peak I went to yesterday with excitement and trepidation. Came away a big fan. Hopefully del Toro will do more of this and less of Pacific Rim or even Hellboy.
watched Crimson Peak yesterday and I almost hated it; I'll probably need to wait a bit with my comments but this probably is my least favorite Jessica Chastain role; she's almost miscast; Blanchett and Close would totally ace such roles, even in an almost-trainwreck of a film, which to me Crimson Peak really is.
First I've heard of this one:
<<09 Woodlawn $4.1 NEW>>
"A gifted high school football player must learn to embrace his talent and his faith as he battles racial tensions on and off the field." With Caleb Castille, Sean Astin, Jon Voight.
Someone? Anyone?
Saw Room and Spotlight, a pretty well-matched (thematically) weekend double bill. Liked them both very, very much.
The under performance of Crimson Peak has me concern for Chastain. Had it been a box office smash she could have been in contention again this year. Now we have to wait for her holocaust zoo keeper movie.
I LOVED every minute of Crimson Peak and would see it again in a heartbeat, but it's right up my alley so that should come as no surprise. My main worries (based on the trailer) were that Chastain wouldn't be able to pull off the campy vibe she was going for and that the ghosts would look too CGI/phony, but I was relieved on all fronts. Her accent may be wonky, but Chastain delivers in spades and is clearly having a ball. In fact, the whole cast (except maybe Charlie Hunnam) works so well together and they all seem to clearly get what GDT is aiming for. As for the ghosts, a lot of people are complaining, but they didn't seem as glaringly cartoonish as the one from Mama.
And the film is just a marvel of set design on top of all of that.
I'm a bit annoyed with critics. So many are praising Del Toro's sincerity in making a throwback gothic romance for women. Well, I'm a woman and a hardcore lover of gothic romance since I was a child. I grew up reading the Brontes, Dracula, Wilkie Collins, and Du Maurier's Rebecca over and over.
But this film is NOT a good gothic romance. It's pleasurable enough to watch because of the design elements, but even though Del Toro's references all the above sources as well as numerous Hitchcock films, he doesn't seem to have learned from these great works how to create a satisfying narrative. The "romance" in this film seems perfunctory. Edith (Wasikowska) and the audience need to be courted and seduced by Thomas Sharpe/Del Toro. Instead, I was wondering why she couldn't see right through him from the beginning. The set-up sucks, so the follow through doesn't land.
I saw Room last night, which I loved--especially the first half. I sincerely hope that both Brie Larson and Jacob Tremblay are nominated.
I have been watching Borgen for the last 3 days in preparation for voting in Canada's election on Monday. I feel ready.
If it's a minority Liberal government I will have to go see "The Walk".
If the conservatives win again I will go see... "The Room"?
I saw "The Martian" which I liked even though it's a bit too long. Damon is excellent as "Robinson Crusoe on Mars". Scott as usual creates a hyper real sci-fi world but I do wish the film had gone bit farther. A well crafted uplifting survival story a must for space geeks and Matt Damon fans.
I'm so annoyed that I saw the trailer for "Room" It really revealed too much of the plot. But I can't wait to see it anyway.
Nat - Agreed on the stockpiling of movies this time of year. I actually think the Malala documentary and 99 Homes would have performed a lot better a month or two ago as well.
Kate, I agree. Del Toro and many of the film's bigger fans have said "it's not a horror movie, it's a gothic romance", yet it places far too much emphasis on the ghosts (visually, I mean) than it does the romance. We get half a sex scene and apart from some early scenes between Hiddleston and Wasikowska it never feels like either has particularly strong feelings for each other.
3rtful, no, Jessica Chastain would have NEVER been contention. This isn't the 1960s and she isn't Agnes Moorehead.
I'm glad someone agrees, Glenn! It really felt like Del Toro was afraid to grab ahold of full-blown sensuality, eroticism, and courtship. That doesn't necessarily mean sex scenes or nudity. The Age of Innocence is really erotic, for example. The fireside scenes in Fukunaga's Jane Eyre are full of tension but are merely conversations. And Thomas Sharpe's mercenary intentions and ambivalent feelings aren't any excuse either, since we're seeing the story through Edith's POV. Great films like The Heiress and Hitchcock's Suspicion are able to tread that line of making the heroine's seduction/freefall into love completely credible while we also know that their lover may not be someone to be trusted.
I saw two movies about boys living in prisons who are rolled up in rugs. One, Beats of no Nation, felt authentic and had a vivid performance at its center. There was gradual tension and the experiences that boy went through felt organic and his reaction to his surroundings was varied and truthful. It's a very silent performance, which in itself makes it truthful because he would be silent a lot. The best scene to me was when suddenly he is in this surreal world. He is in the battle. He's lost any sense of reality and is programed to do what he has to do.
The other, Room, had a more coached performance that, not unlike the book it was based on, had little to no surprise in behavior. It felt expected and choppy. The first half was most compelling because of Larson's understanding of this depressed, broken person trying to conceal that state from her kid and that was nuanced and compelling, That first half, as long it must have been, felt too condensed and there was no real sense of how time passes on a given day. I felt the screenplay was too precious in trying to show all the little moments and it became a distraction for how the movie would benefit from giving us a real sense of dread. I wanted to feel claustrophobic and bothered, but it just seemed like an interesting experience to be trapped there and stakes didn't seem as high as they were. The second half is even worse in establishing the passage of time. Brie has little to do and felt less convincing. The scenes were too short, the confrontation at the table with the father being a good example. Joan Allen is reduced to yelling: Joy! Robert! Joy! Robert! She is never really given a scene that develops..with a beginning, middle and end. Neither is Larson in the second half. It is really a monotone sequence of scenes about the boy experiencing his new world, which gets old after a while. I feel the book and the movie both share an interesting premise that is sidelined in order to give way to a writer who is too much in love with her ideas.
I saw the National Theatre broadcast of Benedict Cumberbatch in Hamlet. They broadcast it to movie theatres in different countries. According to Playbill, 225,000 people watched this one. I hadn't seen one of these before.
Cumberbatch was great. It made me think that as an offspring of two actors, he must have heard Shakespeare from the cradle up. Now Shakespeare is his internal rhythm. No wonder he's so versatile.
I also loved Ciaran Hinds. His Claudius was dangerous, passionate, and criminal.
I was paid $18 million less than Matt Damon in The Martian. Who am I and do audiences even know my name? It's still tough when Meryl takes all the roles, even when she takes a year off. Namaste.
The were selling " Crimson Peak " as horror movie not a Gothic romance.
In Australia, STEVE JOBS and ROOM don't open till January. But I did get to see MACBETH and LEGEND, so I can't complain too much!
The Martian, Ex Machina, and Inside Out
"Woodlawn" is a film by a Christian production company. It's been an up-and-coming and lucrative trend in 2015 that isn't getting a lot of mainstream attention. They're relatively cheap to make and get a lot of promotion in that community, especially on faith radio and by mega-churches.
I saw The Assassin and agree with everything your review said about it. It's soooo convoluted. Even as hyped as it was in film fests this year, I'll be surprised if it gets in the FL race because I just don't imagine Academy FL voters having the patience for its incomprehensible plot. I certainly didn't.
I saw the new Jia Zhangke, Mountains May Depart, and, um...it's two pretty great movies and then one astoundingly terrible one? Did anyone else feel as ambushed and flummoxed by the final section, or was it just me? I usually really flip for his movies, so this was a big weird unwelcome surprise for me.
I saw Freeheld at the Rome Film Festival, and it isn't that bad as most critics say. Julianne is easily the best thing in it, she is absolutely great and fascinating in conveying all the inner conflicts and the integrity of her character. Shannon shines too.
I also saw Room, which is totally heart-wrenching and revelatory, and Truth, very entertaining and led by a fantastic Blanchett.
Thanks jakey!
Loved Bridge of Spies. Uncynical and humanistic. Definitely watching it again.
Hated Crimson Peak. Not a good horror film or a gothic romance. Indulgent and unconvincing.
Saw Crimson Peak and liked it a lot in the end. Took a while to get into but once I did it was great. Beautiful, very del Toro and Chastain was great. A beautiful love letter to classic horror, both in literature and in cinema.
At home it was more horror, Hammer´s Curse of Frankenstein - quite dated but not without its charm and the awful, Alan Smithee "directed", Hellraiser: Bloodline.
Kate, do you suspect that perhaps Del Toro just wasn't willing (or comfortable - I could understand that, not every filmmaker can do it) going to such... girly places with the romance? I hate to use the word, but do you know what I mean? As if he was keenly aware this was getting an October release and audiences what gothic scares over actual romance, but then the film's scares were good enough to sustain a narrative with such minor dramatic(/romantic) thrust - so to speak. Where were the scenes of Mia and Hiddles absolutely enamoured with one another and speaking poetically in erotic breath? There were none, and that's what undermined the movie. Sure, the film is technically a gothic romance, but it's not a good one. And as a horror movie it doesn't work enough, either. All very half and half, really. I would have loved and adored a director's take on the material that was as indebted to the melodrama women's pictures of yore (think Welles' JANE EYRE or how about THE HEIRESS, which you mentioned) as it was haunted houses.
Kate, Glenn - The waltz, Tom's rejection on the stairs, Mia getting the letter, their reunion in the hotel, and the way she's hanging onto him after she finds out her father is dead were more than enough to establish a pretty intense romantic connection - and for that connection to maintain and build through the rest of the movie. I suspect that may be the dividing line, on the issue of the romance, anyway. If that wasn't enough, I'm sure the rest of the movie didn't play particularly well. Can't speak to individual experience, but it sure worked for me, and I assume it worked for Del Toro as well. I don't think he was trying to half and half it or be overly calculating.
Saw Room, Bridge of Spies, and Crimson Peak this weekend. I LOVED Room and it easily became my second favorite of the year right behind Steve Jobs. But I'm interested in seeing how both these films will do when they go wide. I spoke to the Usher at angelika and he said the audiences were divided on Room. And Steve Jobs might be a little too different for the mainstream crowd. Had to rewatch Bridge Of Spies again cause i felt i needed to give it another chance. I don't think i watched it fairly and I actually enjoyed it far more the second time. I actually like it quite a bit now, but i still don't like it as much as Lincoln and Munich. Crimson Peak i believe i liked, but an annoying fellow theatergoer almost ruined it for me. He had to make a "I got it" noise like every other sentence. It was obnoxious and he was right behind me. Almost lost my cool.
Re Crimson Peak:
If Edith is supposed to express the audience's POV, how long did it take me to fall in love with Tom Hiddleston? About four seconds. Oh yes, I knew he was bad, but ... I wanted him anyway (a lot). One night with him would be better than a lifetime with the Charlie Hunnan character, who looked like he would be a pompous and oppressive husband.
I got to three movies this weekend. The best of them was Steve Jobs...loved Sorkin's rapid-fire script! Fassbender was really good, as was Winslet, but I was particularly impressed with Jeff Daniels. You know, he's a relatively low-profile actor, but he always seems to give each performance his best, and that was particularly true here.
I also saw Labyrinth of Lies, which was good but very standard, as if someone decided to do a paint-by-numbers film on the subject. I really don't think it will make the Foreign-language Oscar shortlist, though I could be wrong. (Of the few candidates I've seen, the best by far are Court, the Indian film, and the Belgian candidate The Brand New Testament.) (And, Nat...TBNT isn't ALL about Catherine Deneuve; she's really just one of the six disciples God's 10-year old daughter happens to choose for the Brand New Testament. The film is much more about Éa, the daughter.)
Finally, I saw Freeheld, and while I was OK with it, it wasn't really exciting. After thinking about it, I figure that Julianne Moore is a lousy dyke. She was not so hot until her cancer got really advanced, and then she really started acting. Michael Shannon was quite goood; Steve Carrell was tiresomely silly.
Why is it that Mat Damon's is the only character in " The Martian" who doesn't seem to have any family connections?