In the Heart of the Box Office
Sunday, December 13, 2015 at 4:00PM Ron Howard's new adventure on the high seas (based on the story that inspired Moby Dick) In the Heart of the Sea didn't manage to beat The Hunger Games, due mostly to the latter's much higher screen count. But regardless it's the final week of Katniss's reign. Next weekend the jedis, generals, droids, and wookies arrive surely stealing all the screens in our multiplex world.
In Oscar-seeking land, Spotlight was off only 10% after a final expansion to 1089 screens so word of mouth is strong and the run will surely be leggy as it nabs more prizes at award ceremonies. The Big Short, inexplicably on only 8 screens despite multiplex-appeal (this is not a highbrow movie!) and tons of stars, packed its houses. Carol and The Danish Girl with tiny expansions are also doing solid if unspectacular business. If you've been dragging your feet on Bridge of Spies, Suffragette, Sicario, The Asssassin (and maybe even Room, Brooklyn, and Trumbo) get there this week -- they're likely to lose screens soon and unless Oscar curiousity catches on with the general public most of them won't be around much longer.
BOX OFFICE WIDE
(Dec 11th-13th)
01 Hunger Games 4 $11.3 (cum. $244.4) Hunger Games & Oscar
02 In the Heart of the Sea $11 *new*
03 The Good Dinosaur $10.4 (cum. $89.6) Review
04 Creed $10.1 (cum $79.3) Review & Oscar Chances
05 Krampus $8 (cum. $28.1)
06 Spectre $4 (cum. $190.7) Review
07 The Night Before $3.9 (cum. $38.2)
08 The Peanuts Movie $2.6 (cum. $124.9) Peanuts Films
09 Spotlight $2.5 (cum. $20.3) Podcast, From TIFF, SAG Ensemble
10 Brooklyn $1.9 (cum. $14.3) Review, Ensemble, Podcast, Saoirse & Oscar
BOX OFFICE LIMITED
Excluding previously wides (Dec 11th-13th)
01 Trumbo $.8 554 screens (cum. $5.4) SAG Ensemble
02 The Big Short $.7 8 screens *NEW* Review & SAG Ensemble
03 Chi-Raq $.5 285 screens (cum. $2.1) Podcast
04 Carol $.3 16 screens (cum $1.2) Reviewish, Podcast, Its Genius, Sketches
05 Legend $.3 107 screens (cum. $1.3)
06 The Danish Girl $.2 24 screens (cum. $.6) Interview
07 Macbeth $.2 108 screens (cum. $.3) Review, Podcast
08 Room $.2 198 screens (cum. $4.1) Premiere, Podcast, FYC Jacob Tremblay
09 Youth $.1 17 screens (cum. $.2) Review, Podcast
10 Suffragette $.09 166 screens (cum. $4.5) Review, Carey Campaign
What did you see this weekend?
I finally caught up with Trumbo. I have no idea why it took me so long to see it since I do love my Hollywood history movies and celebrity impersonations (New Zealander Dean O'Gorman does a terrific Kirk Douglas for what it's worth! He was stupidly left out of the SAG Ensemble nomination). More on Trumbo soon since it's popping with SAG & Globe nominations.
Reader Comments (36)
Saw "The Danish Girl." As someone who pretty much unequivocally loves Hooper's "Les Misérables," I am surprised and dismayed to say hardly anything about his new movie works, although the sets and costumes are pretty.
It also pains me to say that Redmayne's performance makes me seethe over his Oscar win last year even more. He is technically proficient and utterly soulless.
I saw Spotlight. It was fine, but I think it's an odd choice for a Best Picture winner (if it does indeed win). It doesn't have much, if any, visual appeal at all, and contrary to popular opinion, I do not think the cast is uniformly great.
Keaton is outstanding and Tucci and Schreiber are very good, and Slattery does well playing a Slattery character without the wisecracks. McAdams, however, brings nothing extra to the role (I kept imagining Sarah Paulson or Elisabeth Moss in that part). It pains me to say this, but Ruffalo is flat-out bad, to the point of distraction. McCarthy should have reigned that performance in.
In addition, the screenplay never lets us know who the characters are or what their motivations are - for instance [MILD SPOILERS] Slattery's character keeps pushing back on the story, but we never know why - is it because he's a Bradlee and part of institutionalized power (never explored in the film), because his friend represents the Church (only briefly explored in the film), or because he doesn't like to rock the boat (pure speculation on my part?)[/END SPOILERS]
People keep comparing this movie to All the President's Men, but that's such a lazy comparison. President's Men was a visually stunning movie, shot by Gordon Willis, and written by possibly the best screenwriter of his era, William Goldman, so that you actually understood the characters. Think of the conversations among Bradlee, Woodward and Bernstein in the newsroom in that film - there's nothing really like that here, only scene after scene of reporters following leads. If there are analogues to All the President's Men among recent films, I would say they are Zodiac and Zero Dark Thirty, not Spotlight.
I actually did like the movie more than this post suggests, I just was expecting a lot more from the BP frontrunner.
So glad Creed continues to be a box office success story.
* Wild Tales - a truly rewarding experience, loved the Bomb and Wedding stories.
*In the Heart of the Sea - I want my money back; saw it on Tuesday, should've waited for the reviews.
I think Carol's doing a little more than unexceptional box office business? If it weren't for The Big Short it would have had the highest per-theater average for the fourth week in a row, but now it's 20k PTA is second to Short's 90k. I trust Harvey's slow and steady distribution. It looks like it could make a pretty penny.
I guess THE BIG SHORT went limited do gain the air of prestige. God, I did not care one iota about anything in that movie. I admired it's choice to ramp up the style of its editing and structural choices, but another movie with a mostly male ensemble (naturally, the one woman Adepero Oduye was left off the SAG nominations list for a calm and soothing Marisa Tomei, completely and utterly wasted - i know she needs an income as much as the rest of us, but I was offended on her behalf for how little she had to do). Hollywood can be such a shit sometimes.
Actually, the visual aspect of "Spotlight" is one of its stealthiest and strongest ingredients, and I'm amazed so many people are neglecting to mention it. Like the rest of the film, the aesthetic calls no attention to itself, refusing to be showy or glamorous. But also like the rest of the film, it is utterly assured, methodical, and brilliantly thought out. Notice the use of line and repetition, the gridded patterns that repeat whether in offices, boardrooms, city streets or on computers and spreadsheets. There is a constant geometry and an order to every shot that reflects not only the meticulous work of the journalists but also of the organized systems they're interrogating. The film is shot by Masanobu Takayanagi, one of the great contemporary cinematographers. It's an object lesson in self-effacing visual mastery.
I saw Brooklyn. I had read the book, which I thought was just okay. I really loved the movie - I spent the first hour or so in and out of tears for whatever reason. It's a pitch perfect movie, really. It's small but lovely.
This is my first Emory Cohen performance and I really liked him, but I really liked how this had both a really strong star turn from Ronan (I get the critics prizes and reviews) and a delightful ensemble movie overall (every single role was really well acted and lived in). I do hope that it sticks around in the best picture race.
I rewatched Love & Mercy. I have sedimented my opinion that Dano and Cusack are both leads and Banks is borderline, leaning supporting. It is a good movie with elements of greatness, Dano being MVP and Banks in top form too. Cusack is divisive, but I liked him a lot better on second viewing.
I also sat down for Woman in Gold, on the heels of Mirren's SAG nom. The movie is bland and predictable, the acting is not particularly worthy of notice, but it is not the abismal disaster (neither movie nor Mirren's performance) that peeps are making them out to be. Even still, that SAG nom.was undeserved in such a strong year for female lead movies.
Finally, I got around to watching Mission Impossible: Rogue Nation and it was great fun. This is a rare case of a big blockbuster franchise that keep getting better as time progresses. I considered MI4 their best output the time it came out and now MI5 topped it. Great fun (except for Jeremy Renner, whose character is a bit of a wet blanket).
I watche The Visit,why the love,it's awful.
I concur with Jonathan regarding The Danish Girl. It's flat and twee, and often tedious. Thank God for Alicia Vikander; she gives a very good performance. I even did not mind Amber Heard in a very small role. But the movie was a disappointment.
* Youth, which was pretty good, a lot of it was oddly moving and compelling. But the Jane Fonda stuff really didn't work for me and soured me a bit on the movie as a whole, the acting and writing was too over the top. But Caine, Keitel, Dano, and Weisz were all great.
i saw Spotlight. the editing was very well done. The cast is pretty consistently good. Ruffalo overacts a little. However, it is really easy to put so much focus on McAdams partly because she is the only woman and because her character spends the most time with the victims (and SPOILER ALERT- one scene with a perpetrator.) She is good, better than I thought she would be, but I feel that in what should be the big scenes, she is holding back. I don't know if that is more on her or the director. Maybe it looks that way because Ruffalo over does it in the big scene with her.
I saw "The Big Short", and feel mixed about it. It is entertaining and galvanizing, which is no small feat considering how dry the subject matter could have been. But it's overlong, & the editing choices often come across as unmotivated and baffling. I'm still trying to sort through the overall tone and mode of address, but I think it felt surprisingly safe. The subject matter was inevitably (I assume?) kind of a boys club, but the film embraces that macho bravado and runs with it, to mixed effect. Very much a "men and their ideas" film, and even if that's just who the key players actually were, the film seems a little too delighted in this vibe until it decides to selectively condemn it.
I watched TANGERINE on DVD with my partner and we both loved it. We cracked up laughing in places and both loved the look of it, the energy and performances. I also appreciated the poignant turn it took towards the end.
I saw 99 HOMES in the cinema. I was enjoying the story and performances but got so absorbed in the showdown at the end, I forgot I was watching a movie. Rarely happens, so I was impressed. Worth a look. Michael Shannon is credited above the title and arguably a co-lead but let's not go there; he's a character actor about to get his second Oscar nomination and I definitely wouldn't begrudge him that.
And I screened INFINITELY POLAR BEAR for that unexpected Mark Ruffalo Golden Globe nomination. I'm a fan of Ruffalo but I missed this in cinemas. There were a lot of things I liked: the 1970s context, the focus on the kids as much as Ruffalo, not making Zoe Saldana's mother character the villain (she leaves Ruffalo to look after the kids while she pursues her MBA in New York). It took a while to settle but overall I enjoyed it without finding it exceptional.
It's funny this is the only film site I've visited in awhile and from everything people were saying about the big short I figured it had a disappointing critical response. So I was surprised to see it with score of 81 on metacritic. So it does have fans just not really here.
I liked it, Mike.
a lot of people do!
Suzanne: I agree that the comparisons of Spotlight to All the President's Men are lazy. The better comparison to trot out? It's like a film version of The Wire Season 5's newsroom subplot.
I also decided to check out "Woman in Gold" after SAG made it required viewing. I think the movie was far from a masterpiece, with the biggest issues stemming from an occasionally insipid screenplay and mostly serviceable acting (i.e. Ryan Reynolds). But Mirren was actually quite good in this, and in my estimation, good enough to deserve nominations. Yes, it's a competitive year and this early-in-the-year film was on no one's radar, but the performance is there if you can isolate it from the rest of the film. Not always easy to do. She will be a minor threat for an Oscar nom for this role.
I saw "Greed" which is crowd pleasing formula sports movie. It is very well done specially the editing- Stallone gives it his all and looks his age as Rocky and probably will get a best supporting acting role. Michael B Jordan look more like a super hero than a boxer.
Jaragon: That's a hilarious misspelling. Because the movie called Greed is a 4 hour silent masterpiece being laid against a good, though not masterful, boxing movie.
I saw "Trumbo" too. I was curious to see what all the fuss was about.
Trumbo is actually a very entertaining movie. Bryan Cranston is really good, and omg, that supporting cast! Seems like every minute, a favorite actor pops up. John Goodman has a killer scene. For supporting actress, I'd go for Diane Lane over Helen Mirren, but Mirren is wonderfully poisonous.
It's a good film for discussion, too, because you can go as deep or as shallow as you like, from how principles play out in everyday life, to how cool was Fili the Dwarf as Kirk Douglas (loved him).
I unfortunately saw "In The Heart of The Sea". What a major disappointment and the CGI was downright embarrassing. Mr. Hemsworth is very pretty but he cannot carry a film unless he's got a hammer in his hand.
I finally (FINALLY) saw Room. Wow. Even having read the book, I was in tears and on the edge of my seat at points. Amazing work from Brie Larson, great work from everyone behind the scenes, and very good work from Joan Allen (I MISSED YOU!!). I'm not sure I get the love for Jacob Tremblay's performance, though. He's not bad, but the work seemed alternately heavily directed (most of the good stuff) and overly stilted/stiff (most of the bad stuff). That performance is not nomination-worthy work, to me. But the film itself is easily best of the year so far for me.
I just saw Joy. A tonal mess, and I kept getting the feeling Russell was going for a Wes Anderson vibe in a lot of the scenes (as weird as that sounds). Lawrence is fine, not Oscar-worthy (less Oscar-worthy than in American Hustlle but more so than in SLP).
Have also been hearing Joy is a dud, and some people I like have said flat out that they did not care at all for Carol.
JL is not getting nominated.
The love for Michael Shannon in 99 HOMES really should have been foreseeable. He has multiple big monologues. The Emmys would give him four statues in a row if they could.
I saw The Assassin. Well, if just real purty pictures is an end in itself, it's a great movie. I don't and I think it's the most overrated movie of the year.
Volvagia - I actually haven't seen The Wire! Terrible, I know, but it's on my list (I couldn't afford cable when it was on).
I am delighted at the perceived failure of Joy, because I have a selfish reason for JL not getting an Oscar nom. I do not want her to break Jennifer Jones’ record.
I believe Lawrence will make the Oscar lineup. I know for certain she won't win but she'll get her inevitable fourth nomination for Joy.
They'll lined up at the multiplex to see the story about the miracle mop.
"Creed" = "Greed" well you know that's the bottom line when you keep making unnecessary sequels...
Arkaan - that's exactly how I think of Brooklyn, which I saw this weekend, too: small but lovely.
Yes, there is the nagging feeling that nothing much happens and her life is pretty good, all things and one major loss considered. I keep thinking of that hilarious tweet from a previous post here about what would happen if Ronan met Marion Cotillard's character from "The Immigrant."
But still, small and lovely. Sometimes a visual feast, too. When she was outside that teal diner, with her green coat and purple umbrella, I was in heaven. And those shots of her in the sun, either walking or leaning against a wall, often in summery yellow dresses. It was all just so charming in its way.