Futures Market 2013

Another summer is almost upon us, which means another set of summer movies is on the way. It's become tradition around here to have a look at what's on the horizon and what it'll take for me to see them. As always, I could care less about anything that isn't geeky in nature, so we'll just be filtering those out.

Here's what's coming:


May 3

Iron Man 3
Projected Tomatometer: 87%
What it'll take to get me in the theater: NA - I'm seeing this movie

The first of Marvel's post-Avengers flicks is coming right up, and there's a lot to be encouraged by: the writer/director, Shane Black, might be the world's foremost authority on snappy dialogue, the footage we've seen looks fantastic, and we're finally getting the Mandarin in a movie. If there's one area of concern, it's that Black is largely inexperienced as a director - he's actually only made one previous movie, and it certainly wasn't a big budget feature. Granted, that movie was Kiss Kiss Bang Bang, a fantastic noir picture.

All signs point to this being great, but I'm trying to keep my expectations properly managed. Regardless of what critics say, I can't imagine I'll be anywhere else on opening weekend. I'm really looking forward to this one.


May 10

The Great Gatsby
Projected Tomatometer: 75%
What it'll take to get me in the theater: Good word of mouth, bad weather

The trailer for this certainly piqued my interest. The fact it's directed by the same guy who made Moulin Rouge! doesn't hurt either. While that's hardly my favorite movie of all time, I have to admit to really enjoying the over-the-top style. If this can deliver an experience like that, I might have to check it out. Well, unless the weather's nice: then I might have to spend that time outside.


May 17

Star Trek Into Darkness
Projected Tomatometer: 88%
What it'll take to get me in the theater: NA - I'm seeing this movie

Ultimately, it doesn't matter what the critics - or anyone else, for that matter - says: there's no way my wife would let us skip this. Not that I'd want to. I really enjoyed J.J. Abrams's first installment. Sure, everything except the characters is closer to Star Wars than Star Trek, but who cares? It's a hell of a lot of fun, and the casting was just about perfect.


May 24

EPIC
Projected Tomatometer: 45%
What it'll take to get me in the theater: Tomatometer of 85%, Some Indication this isn't Crap

Some of the early imagery for this movie was incredibly promising, and elements of the premise - while certainly derivative - were pretty intriguing. But then the snails started talking in the trailers, and expectations plummeted. On top of everything else, this is being made by Chris Wedge, the guy who made Robots and Ice Age, so I'm not exactly anticipating greatness. The trailers for Robots also looked pretty, but it wound up one of the most disappointing experiences I've ever had at a theater: I want some guarantee this is better before I consider investing my time and money in what's almost certainly going to be another disappointment.


June 7

After Earth
Projected Tomatometer: 25%
What it'll take to get me in the theater: Tomatometer of 80%, Good Word of Mouth, No Stupid Twist Ending

I'm actually bucking trends in predicting a Tomatometer of 25%: Shyamalan's movies have been following a fairly consistent trend of being 40% lower than his last film, which would give this a score of about 4%. But, at some point, you have to assume that Shyamalan will take steps to correct his downfall, even if it requires something drastic. Like, say, listening to other people's opinions.

The trailers for this look fine, but even The Last Airbender had decent trailers. My guess is that this will be pretentious SF fare that's a little better than his last four movies, but not good enough to matter. Maybe we'll all be pleasantly surprised, though.

Much Ado About Nothing
Projected Tomatometer: 92% (86% current)
What it'll take to get me in the theater: Eh. I'll probably wait for Netflix. But I'll hate myself for it.

I kind of love that Whedon's follow-up to The Avengers - the 3rd biggest movie ever made - was to film a black and white adaptation of a Shakespearean comedy in his backyard with his friends. The thing is, as much as I love Whedon's work, and as much as I love that this exists, movie tickets aren't cheap, and I can't see myself getting my money's worth.

If I hear this is really REALLY good, I might go see it, anyway, but... I don't know. As much as I want to support the guy, this really feels like something I should be watching from the comfort of my home through a streaming digital service I'm already paying for.


June 12

This is the End
Projected Tomatometer: 50%
What it'll take to get me in the theater: Tomatometer 75% and Good Word of Mouth

I'm not sure what to make of this. There are some great sequences in the trailers, but there's also a lot of stuff that just seems stupid. I'm also baffled as to why there are so many comedies about the end of the world coming out this year.

If I hear that this is more than a loosely connected string of dirty jokes and self-deprecating humor, if there's actually a story here, then I might check it out. Otherwise, I'll just keep enjoying the trailers and assume I'm getting the best scenes, anyway.


June 14

Man of Steel
Projected Tomatometer: 70%
What it'll take to get me in the theater: Whatever. It's Superman - I'll see it regardless.

The question here is whether Zack Snyder and Christopher Nolan cancel out each other's flaws or magnify them. Snyder's a master of visuals, but he clearly never figured out how to tell a compelling story. Nolan's generally a good storyteller, but his movies lack the style a superhero flick requires. There's some potential for a great collaboration here, but I'm not entirely optimistic. The trailers have been mediocre so far. We've seen some cool moments, but very little suggesting either of these guys has much love for Superman's mythology.

This one's kind of a wildcard. But better or worse, I'll be there. It is Superman, after all.


June 21

World War Z
Projected Tomatometer: 50%
What it'll take to get me in the theater: Good word of mouth.

I never read the book this is based on, but most of people who have seem to be saying the trailers look nothing like it. That's not usually a good sign (though there are exceptions). I think I'd be having flashbacks to I, Robot if there were anything memorable in that movie.

Monsters U
Projected Tomatometer: 90%
What it'll take to get me in the theater: Better than 80% on the Tomatometer

So far, Monsters U looks pretty good. The trailers are funny, and the info they've leaked on the expanded world is cool. But Pixar's time as undisputed king of animation certainly seams to be waning, and it's hard to get excited about another sequel that doesn't rhyme with "The Bincredibles". That said, doing a prequel is a good way to go this time, and everything we've seen is promising. Still, I think everyone - probably even the folks at Pixar who must have greenlit this BEFORE Cars 2 came out - are wishing there was an original concept coming out of that studio this year instead.


July 3

Despicable Me 2
Projected Tomatometer: 72%
What it'll take to get me in the theater: Score of 90% on Rotten Tomatoes, happen to see part one first.

I still haven't seen Despicable Me, despite having heard it's pretty good. Ultimately, neither movie looks great to me, though. If I start hearing this one's fantastic and part one appears on Netflix... well... maybe I'll give the series a chance. No promises, though.

Lone Ranger
Projected Tomatometer: 45%
What it'll take to get me in the theater: 80% or split decision with glowing positives

I'm kind of intrigued by the idea of a new Lone Ranger movie. The character was one of the most influential proto-superheroes, and it's a shame he's fallen out of favor (same goes for Zorro, The Shadow, The Phantom, and Green Hornet). But... there's not a lot of indication this is going to do the character justice. I actually liked the trailer for this when it first aired, but the more I watch it, the less I like it.

While I want the character to make a comeback, I'm just not seeing much indication this is going to be anything more than mediocre, and I'm sick of supporting mediocre movies. I'll be watching the Rotten Tomatoes when this opens, though: maybe it'll turn out better than it looks.


July 12

Pacific Rim
Projected Tomatometer: 88%
What it'll take to get me in the theater: Anything better than 50% or a few good recommendations

A lot of people are in love with the footage that's out there; to be honest, I'm not one of them. I like what I've seen, but none of it really has me geeking out the way I do every time I see a trailer for Iron Man 3 or Star Trek. That said, I have a lot of faith in del Toro, and I am looking forward to seeing this. I love a good giant monster movie, and there aren't a lot out there.


July 19

Red 2
Projected Tomatometer: 64%
What it'll take to get me in the theater: Good word of mouth and a chance to see part 1

Another case where I missed part one and haven't gotten around to it yet. I've heard it was decent, so long as you go in with modest expectations. If I get a chance, I'll try to see part one and decide if it's really worth going to see the second.


July 26

The Wolverine
Projected Tomatometer: 58%
What it'll take to get me in the theater: NA - I'll probably see it regardless. Then quite possibly regret it.

This is another wild card. The first Wolverine movie remains - in my humble opinion - the worst in the X-Men franchise (and, yes, that's counting X-Men 3). I get the impression the studio realized they'd released something abysmal, though, and has set out to correct their mistake. Going with a new director was a good step; getting Singer to produce it was even better. But is it enough? The footage we've seen so far has been pretty mediocre, though the same could be said about the First Class trailers, and that was awesome.

I'm keeping an open mind about this, but I'm not getting my hopes up yet.


August 2

300: Rise of an Empire
Projected Tomatometer: 18%
What it'll take to get me in the theater: A decent score on Rotten Tomatoes and good word of mouth

God, is that coming out this year? I liked 300 well enough as a ridiculous action movie, but I don't think anyone other than Frank Miller actually wants a sequel. Look, I like Frank Miller's work in the 80's as much as the next comic geek, but I'm pretty much over it now. His era is long gone, and it's been a long, long time since he was associated with anything good.

I know nothing about the director of this, other than the fact there isn't much to know. I suppose he could be some kind of genius, and the movie could be fantastic. If I hear that's the case, I'll be there opening weekend. But I'm certainly not holding my breath.

August 7

Percy Jackson: Sea of Monsters
Projected Tomatometer: 40%
What it'll take to get me in the theater: Tomatometer above 90%

I didn't see the first of the Percy Jackson movies, nor did I have any interest in seeing the second. Then the trailer came out. Turns out, Nathan Fillion is in this one. The thing about Fillion is that he makes anything interesting. I'm pretty sure he's incapable of being filmed without doing something entertaining. Is that enough to make me rush out to the theater? Of course not. But it is enough to make me pay attention to the movie's reviews.


August 9

Planes
Projected Tomatometer: 45%
What it'll take to get me in the theater: Tomatometer around 90%

This is a spin-off of a Pixar movie originally intended for a direct-to-DVD release that was upgraded to theatrical but is being released without the Pixar logo: that's probably not a good sign.

To be fair, Toy Story 2 was originally going to video, but that was done by Pixar. Actually, I'm unclear what "done by Pixar" really means these days. I've heard John Carter was originally going to be released with the Pixar branding before they switched it over to Disney (I wonder if it might have done better business with Pixar's name attached). Regardless, I can't help but suspect if Planes was anywhere near Pixar quality, it would have a Pixar label attached.

Also, the trailers look pretty bad.

Elysium
Projected Tomatometer: 75%
What it'll take to get me in the theater: Good word of mouth

District 9 was cool, but it certainly wasn't as intelligent as I'd hoped. Yeah, it was message-driven science fiction, but the actual story was pretty simplistic. It was also Blomkamp's first big budget movie (well, medium budget is probably more accurate, but he got his money's worth), so there's a good chance he's had some time to refine his writing skills.

I'm expecting this to be good, but I don't want to get my hopes up for anything more yet. Dark science-fiction is an easy genre to do well and a difficult one to do really well. My problem is I'm bored by the former. I give superheroes and adventure flicks more slack, I know, but that's how it is. The thing is, I love great SF: if this can deliver that experience, I'll be thrilled. But, like I said, I don't want to get my hopes up.


August 16

Kick-Ass 2
Projected Tomatometer: 60%
What it'll take to get me in the theater: Good word of mouth from trustworthy sources (i.e.: people who didn't love the first one).

A lot of people loved Kick-Ass; I didn't. In fact, I felt completely underwhelmed and disappointed by the movie. But, to be fair, there were a couple extenuating circumstances. Kick-Ass was preceded by a large-scale online campaign featuring tons of footage. I think I saw at least half of the scenes with Hit Girl and Big Daddy before walking into the theater, so all I had left was the story, characters, and dialogue... none of which were really all that good.

Also, while I'm not overly squeamish, I don't really need to see people blown up in industrial microwaves or churned through car crushers. Just not my cup of tea. All that said, Hit Girl was an awesome character, and I am at least intrigued by the idea of another movie featuring her (Kick-Ass, on the other hand, I could take or leave). I'll see what people say and decide whether I want to see this in the theater or just wait for Netflix. Right now, I'm leaning towards the latter, but that could easily change.


August 23

The World's End
Projected Tomatometer: 91%
What it'll take to get me in the theater: Good word of mouth, good trailers, and/or good reviews. Really, just give me a reason to go, and I'm there.

This was a straightforward projection: both Shaun of the Dead and Hot Fuzz have a Tomatometer score of exactly 91%. While it's statistically unlikely the third collaboration will get the same score, imagine how embarrassing it be if I guessed something different and it got 91% again. I just can't take that chance.

There's not a lot of information out there about this yet. It's a buddy comedy occurring at the end of the world, which is a bizarrely common premise this year. I consider Shaun of the Dead absolutely brilliant and Hot Fuzz quite a bit of fun, so I'm certainly intrigued.

Honestly, I'm tempted to keep going: September opens with Riddick, the follow-up to the single greatest bad movie ever made. But there are a lot of geeky movies this fall. So, with that in mind, let's summarize May through August:

Movies I'm Going to See No Matter What:
Iron Man 3
Star Trek Into Darkness
Man of Steel

Movies I'll Almost Certainly See:
Pacific Rim
Monsters U
The Wolverine
The World's End

Could Go Either Way:
Elysium
Kick-Ass 2
The Great Gatsby

Long Shots:
Everything else

2012: The Top (and Bottom) 19 Movies

By my count, I saw 19 new movies this year which had theatrical openings. Note that I didn't say I saw 19 movies in the theater: I caught three of these at home. But I saw one movie three times, so it all balances out. As usual, I'm not counting older movies or anything that went direct-to-DVD.

What follows is a list from least favorite to most favorite. Note that's not the same thing as best to worst: that's a can of worms I'm not opening. A few of these are movies I never reviewed, but those are in the minority.

It probably goes without saying, but there are quite a few movies I should see but haven't gotten around to. I've heard fantastic things about Beasts of the Southern Wild, Lincoln, Wreck-It Ralph, Moonrise Kingdom, Cloud Atlas, and others, but I just haven't had the time yet.

Without further ado, let's begin:

19. Snow White and the Huntsmen
Dark Knight Rises pissed me off more, but this was by far the most boring experience I had in a theater. I'd been looking forward to this, too: I thought the trailers looked amazing. Unfortunately, they showcased every decent second in the film: the rest was bland and pointless.

18. The Dark Knight Rises
I considered putting this in last place, but that would have been disingenuous. The truth is, aspects of this movie were pretty cool. Okay, Catwoman was cool, and the rest kind of sucked. I appreciate that many people disagree, but... look. I've read a lot of Batman comics. I've seen a hell of a lot of animated series and direct to DVD movies. And, in my opinion - and I'm not alone here, by the way - the character is capable of much, much more. This felt like a Batman movie for people who don't really like Batman as a concept, who are satisfied with dismissing Bruce Wayne as a crazy rich guy who dresses like a bat. It's a movie that ultimately mocks the concept it's based on rather than taking it seriously. At least the Adam West series was upfront about it.

17. Prometheus
I know people who think this should be dead last, but I liked it better than Dark Knight Rises and certainly more than Snow White. It was a bad movie with good scenes. It's the kind of movie that kept oscillating between intriguing me and boring me. It really wasn't until the last act that I was certain I was watching something pointless. Numbers 18 and 19 never had me fooled.

16. Underworld: Awakening
I caught this on Amazon Instant Video a while ago. Hell, I'd forgotten it came out in theaters this year, but apparently it did. It wasn't awful, but it certainly wasn't remotely good. It's schlocky pulp, but that's all we have any right to expect from this ridiculous franchise.

15. Rise of the Guardians
There's a long story here. If you want to know said story, click that link. The short version is that I've got some very strong feelings about some of these characters, and I didn't think this movie did them justice. However, there was a good 'Jack Frost' story embedded in this thing, along with some solid visuals. It's kind of a mixed bag. That's not enough to make it a good movie, but it's sufficient to keep this from appearing any sooner.

14. Casa de Mi Padre
On some level, this is sort of the Will Ferrell equivalent of an art house flick. Ultimately, it was more a joke than an actual movie. And, yes, if you've seen the trailer, you already "get it." And, sure - technically - they could have just made the trailer without actually making the full movie. But the reason the joke is funny is that they made it anyway. I don't think this one's for everyone, but I had fun watching it.

13. The Pirates! Band of Misfits
Pirates was a solid little flick. It felt small, easygoing. Almost quaint. I never really got into it, but I don't think I was supposed to. If you missed this one in the theaters, it's a good film to check out on video. Actually, I think it'll play better on video, where there aren't so many expectations.

12. Looper
A lot of people love this movie; I just liked it. I had an enjoyable time in the theater. The telekinetic sequences were cool (and unexpected), and the movie was well put together. But... it just seemed so generic. Yeah, things like this don't get made; live-action, big-budget movies that mix several SF concepts in a single piece. Sure, we get telekinesis. We get time travel. But the two together in a single movie? But, despite that, none of it really clicked together. Nothing added up to more than the individual pieces. The time-travel conceits were poorly thought out. The telekinesis was ultimately just a mcguffin. And underneath the makeup, the premise was just Terminator meets 12 Monkeys. The fact it got made was impressive, but the movie itself... was just kind of good. With a little more work, I'm convinced it could have been as great as everyone seems to think it was.

11. The Hunger Games
I like this movie, but I like it's success more. It was the year's first real home run, and it challenged a lot of old (and stupid) assumptions about movies. For example, that action flicks can't star a female lead unless she's there for sex appeal. Or that people won't flock to the theaters until May. It also cleaned up some of the book's issues with the setting. That said, there were questionable choices and sequences that just didn't translate. It didn't have the budget it wanted, and it wasn't one of the year's best movies. But it was definitely solid.

10. ParaNorman
Not enough people went to see ParaNorman. It's a cool little movie with a great opening, a disappointing second act, and a phenomenal showdown. It's uneven, but definitely worth watching.

9. Skyfall
I had a hell of a time deciding where this belongs. My initial reaction was extremely positive and for good reason: this movie pulls off something fantastic. But I held off reviewing it for a reason: absolutely everything I liked - nay, loved - about the movie is a spoiler. That said, enough time has passed. So, if you missed Skyfall, you might want to skip to the next movie on the list. Alright. As a story, Skyfall kind of fails. Miserably. The villain's generic, the plot's incoherent, and characters make idiotic choices at every turn. But none of that really matters, because this wasn't a story so much as a retrospective. It puts Bond back together, effectively rebuilding MI-6 into a near-perfect facsimile of the organization as it appeared at the beginning of Dr. No. Yes, that means 'M' dies and gets replaced by a man, but the actor is shockingly convincing as the character who appeared fifty years earlier. Likewise, Moneypenny (complete with a new origin) is amazingly similar. They cast a 'Q' who was reminiscent of Major Boothroyd before he was recast for From Russia With Love. Even Craig's bond evolved into one shockingly similar to Connery's as the movie went on. I really enjoyed watching that transformation play out; so much so that, had I assembled this list right after leaving the theater, it would have held the #3 spot. But as time passes, the missteps bug me more and more. The plot holes, the bad decisions, and a fairly disturbing seduction sequence that felt extremely out of character and a little misogynistic have become harder and harder to overlook. Ultimately, it's a movie I enjoyed, but I don't think it's holding up in the long term.

8. Chronicle
I missed this in the theater, and I'm actually glad I did. I'm sure I'd have enjoyed it there, but it felt like one of those movies that plays better on a small screen. I didn't get around to reviewing this, because there didn't seem much point: the critics got this one right. It was a great little film, driven by fantastic writing and some great performances. The format - found footage - did feel out of place, but it kept the budget manageable and was incorporated as well as could be expected. I highly recommend you check this one out if you haven't already. It's pretty cool.

7. John Carter
If they'd replaced Kitsch with someone who belonged in the title role, this would probably have made #3. As it is, I still really liked this movie. Dafoe really knocked it out of the park as Tars Tarkas, as did the army of computer nerds who brought him (and the other denizens of the red planet) to life. It was pulp at its purest if not quite its best. Here's hoping this builds a fan base on DVD.

6. The Cabin in the Woods
This is a complex little picture: essentially a dark science fiction comedy about horror movies. Critics loved it; audiences - particularly horror fans - did not. I enjoyed it quite a bit, which is why it's as high on this list as it is. I think if the last scene had been more memorable, it would be a few spots higher.

5. The Amazing Spider-Man
I keep going back on forth on this and #4. In the end, I asked myself which movie I'm more interested in re-watching, and I honestly think that's Brave. This version of Spider-Man was boosted by the shocking revelation that it was, in fact, a good movie. The idea they were retelling the origin story was a major strike against the movie, but they did a fantastic job rebuilding Peter Parker from scratch. This is a new Peter, too, completely different from Raimi's or any version I've seen in the comics. Normally, I prefer these things to stick with the source material, but the director clearly knew what he was doing. This isn't the Peter I know, but I was really fascinated by his story. As for Spider-Man... not so much. The superheroics were disappointing. The fights with the Lizard weren't bad, but I expect better.

4. Brave

Brave was one of 2012's under-appreciated movies: sadly, there were quite a few this year. But the critical dismissal of this was as baffling as it was unfair. Brave was a really good movie. Its world was beautifully rendered, its characters were fun, and its themes complex (don't dare dismiss this as a simplistic story about fate: this movie's about the maternal instinct and female empowerment). Granted, it's not the movie most of us wanted. It's a comedy, not an action-adventure. But it's a really good comedy.

3. Men in Black III
I realize I'm in the minority here, but I really, really liked this movie. I suspect the producers are kicking themselves for not releasing this in the spring instead of summer. It couldn't compete with The Avengers, and as a result was largely ignored. But it was pure sci-fi. The old fashioned aliens were a lot of fun, and the time-travel was executed far better than in Looper. This also carried some real heart and whimsy. Between Griffin and the movie's resolution, this resonated a lot better than I'd expected it to. It provided a great standalone story, while adding depth to the entire series.

2. The Hobbit: An Unexpected Journey
This was a great movie and an even better adaptation. It was a hell of a lot of fun, and I thought the characters were fantastically realized. The movie was funny, touching, and exciting. Sure, it was only the first third of the story, but that just means there's a lot more left to experience.

1. The Avengers
I'd hoped Joss Whedon would make this work, but I really had no idea if he'd pull it off. He's created some fantastic television in the past, but his one attempt at doing a motion picture was a little disappointing. In addition, his track record hasn't been spotless as of late (looking at you, Dollhouse). I went into this hoping for the best and got something better. Avengers was game-changing: it threw out decades of conventional wisdom on how superhero movies had to be made, opting instead to fully embrace the genre. It toned nothing down: this was comic-book mayhem on the big screen. This was a Hulk I'd never dreamed we'd see in live-action. This was Black Widow and Hawkeye at a level where they could stand beside a storm god without seeming irrelevant. In short, this was the superhero movie that showed the world why we love superheroes. And damn if it didn't work: this thing set almost every record there is. Even better, it's expanding the Marvel Cinematic Universe and even convinced Warner Bros. to move ahead with Justice League. The old rules are gone: this has raised the bar. Oh, and it was also the most fun I've had at the movies in years.

An Open Letter to Peter Jackson

Dear Peter Jackson,

How are you? I hope you and Fran are doing well, and that you're planning on doing something fun for the holidays. So then. I've got something I need to get off of my chest.

Where to begin? First of all, I'm a big fan. Love the Lord of the Rings trilogy. I even like King Kong, though I do think it would have benefited from a little editing. When I heard there was a Hobbit movie in production a few years ago, I was extremely excited. When I heard that Guillermo del Toro was dropping out and you were taking over... honestly, I was a little worried.

Sure, The Lord of the Rings films are some of my all-time favorites. And, sure, I love your work. But, the thing is, I've seen this before: a big genre director decides they know how to call the shots. Suddenly, they're their own producer, and no one's nixing their bad ideas.

The truth is, I got a little worried. Sure, I was still excited to be returning to Middle Earth, but deep down, I was concerned. Jump ahead to a week or two ago when the early reviews started to appear. While the Lord of the Rings had glowing reviews, these were far more mixed. Sure, it's still on the "Fresh" side of things over on Rotten Tomatoes, but it's close: 66% Fresh, as of this moment.

That was when I got really worried. I started to think that maybe you'd gotten full of yourself, that you'd lost perspective. I started to think you'd gone the way of Lucas, Cameron, Raimi, and others.

Well, I just saw The Hobbit: an Unexpected Journey, and I think you know where this is going.

Mr. Jackson, I am so, so sorry I doubted you: that movie was fucking awesome.

Where to start? How about the opening 45 minutes that critics are whining about. As a lifelong Tolkien fan and geek, every second was an absolute joy. After a fantastic nod to your first trilogy, you transitioned right into The Hobbit. And that sequence was a pitch-perfect adaptation of the book, at least to my memory. My favorite part of the movie, in fact. The singing, the jokes, and the fun of the book were all there.

As the movie progressed, you walked a tightrope between Tolkien's book and your other trilogy, and you did so masterfully. Navigating the tonal differences must have been frightening, but I thought you pretty much nailed it. Can I find moments to nitpick? Sure. But nothing all that major.

I hesitate to judge the critics too harshly yet. You see, I sidestepped the largest issue: the 48 fps, which just about everyone despised. I saw this in 2D on a "normal" screen, so it's certainly possible my enjoyment was tied to that choice.

I'll know better after I see The Hobbit in a different format. Even if everyone's right about it detracting from the film, I'll always have the option of shutting my eyes and enjoying the music.

Oh, one more thing. The movie felt a little short to me. Can't wait for the extended cut.

Sincerely,
Erin Snyder

Wait. What the Hell Just Happened?

George Lucas just sold the rights to Star Wars. I know what you're thinking: I wish he'd done this fifteen years ago, too, but let's move on.

In the interest of accuracy, I should probably say that George Lucas sold the rights to Lucasfilm. Actually, you know what? No one gives a damn about those details. Okay, maybe there are a handful of Willow fans with bulbs lighting up over their heads, but let's keep our eye on the prize here. And that prize is Star Wars in the hands of someone who might just possibly understand it. Oh, I guess Indiana Jones is falling into new hands, too. But Ford can't keep making those forever, and no one cares about that character if another actor has the part.

So then. Who's the lucky buyer? Who else has four billion dollars in pocket change? Disney.

Yeah, yeah. Before you start whining about how the mouse is going to ruin your childhood, there are a few things you should maybe keep in mind:

1. Your childhood's already ruined: there's nothing Disney can do to this franchise that Lucas hasn't already done.
2. The company which produced Avengers just got its hands on Star Wars.

I've got no clue whether this is going to be amazing or garbage. Disney's track record has certainly been mixed. On one hand, they made Avengers and John Carter. On the other, there's Haunted Mansion, Prince of Persia, and... well... most of their other live-action movies.

But there's also a generation of filmmakers who have dreamed of the chance to work on a Star Wars movie. They could basically call any director on the planet and get them on board. Or they could head over to the Pixar offices and see what Andrew Stanton's up to.

Movie Review: Looper

For those of you keeping track, Looper is the second big-budget science fiction movie released this year which uses time-travel as an excuse to have a younger actor play the same character as an older actor. I enjoyed both, but between the two, I preferred Men In Black 3.

Looper is a good movie, but it's a tad overrated in my opinion. It reminds me of Inception in several respects: it's a good genre film for those without much interest in the genre, but those of us familiar with the tropes will recognize the terrain. Looper wears its genre proudly: this movie is absolutely science-fiction through and through. The trailers undersell this, in fact: time-travel may be the most import element here, but it's far from the only one. They took some impressive risks with the setting and should be commended for doing so.

But this movie isn't driven by its setting: it's driven by its plot twists and ideas. And, in that respect, it feels a little flat. Like Inception, it delivers enough complexity and attention to detail to engage its audience. But, like Inception, it winds up feeling by-the-numbers to those who have seen it before. It takes a while for the movie's premise to unfold, but once it does, it becomes clear that it's basically a mash-up of two very iconic properties.

This doesn't mean the movie's stupid: it's actually quite clever. But, despite this, it never shakes the sense that it's ultimately generic. We've seen these ideas, we've seen this setting, we've seen this premise and variations of this plot: hell, we've even seen Bruce Willis playing a mentally unbalanced time-traveler. Mixing and matching those elements isn't enough, especially when the movie lacks a distinct tone.

There's also a sense in which Looper is a Hollywood production trying to pretend it's an independent film. To its credit, this does mean the filmmakers are able to sidestep several missteps common to big-budget science fiction... but not all. There aren't a lot of action-movie cliches in the movie, but that does make the ones that got in feel all the more egregious.

Looper is absolutely worth seeing, but personally I wish I'd waited for the DVD. Not because I don't think it was worth the money; for its faults, it was still a satisfying experience. But this is exactly the kind of movie that I've found I enjoy more on a smaller screen, where expectations are less encompassing. At the end of the year, I'm pretty sure I'll be ranking this below Chronicle, and I'm honestly not sure whether that's just because I saw this in the big screen and that on the small.

As a science-fiction movie, it's really quite good. As a time-travel flick, it's a lot of fun. But don't expect it be one of the best, because - contrary to what some reviewers are claiming - it isn't. Yeah, Looper has some great effects, but it's not Avengers: my advice is to wait for this to show up on video.

Give Us Your Worst, Part 18: Punisher (1989)

Last weekend I came across a copy of The Punisher - the 1989 one starring Dolph Lundgren - at a yard sale for $2. While that seemed a tad high given the film's reputation, I decided it was worth to finally see the one Punisher movie that had so far escaped me.

I'm glad I did, because - and I honestly wasn't expecting this - I kind of liked this thing.

Sure, it had most of the problems you'd expect from a bad 80's action flick. There are slow bits, the acting is mixed at best, and the script is at least 60% cliche. And, yeah, the skull's missing from The Punisher's shirt for absolutely no discernable reason: that's damn annoying.

But, not only is this more entertaining than either of the recent reboots, it's both a far better take on the Punisher and a vastly better comic book movie. This is a cold, murderous version of Frank Castle, but he has a larger-than-life quality that was missing from the Jane flick (they tried in War Zone, but it came off feeling like bad camp). Lundgren's Castle feels like a bona fide superhero, even if he murders someone in every other shot.

Better still, unlike almost every superhero movie that's been made since, this isn't an origin story. If you didn't already know Castle's backstory, it provides you with a flashback, but it's certainly not the focus of the story.

In fact, the movie's focus isn't really on Castle, at all. The main crime lord gets nearly equal screen time, and actually comes close to competing for the role of the protagonist, as does Frank's old partner. The whole thing winds up feeling like an ensemble piece about The Punisher's corner of the Marvel Universe, which is exactly what it should be.

This movie has plenty of issues (did I mention the annoying kids?), but it takes its premise seriously and delivers a solid comic-book action flick, something the newer attempts didn't come close to accomplishing. I'm as surprised as anyone to be typing this, but I honestly think this one is severely underrated. Don't go expecting fine film, but if you manage your expectations, you might find yourself pleasantly surprised.

Movie Review: ParaNorman

ParaNorman is a great little stop-motion flick, a quasi-companion piece to Coraline, though it comes up a little short when measured against that film. Like "Cabin in the Woods," ParaNorman is a comedy/meta-horror movie, though it's aimed at pulp-monster movies rather than slashers (probably best, considering this is intended for all ages). Also like Cabin, ParaNorman really should have been released closer to Halloween, when it was clearly intended to be viewed and could have had a bigger impact.

The movie shifts tones a few times during its run-time. The first section of the movie is surprisingly grounded and measured, built around the sense of alienation and melancholy so many of us remember from grade school. We're introduced fairly quickly to the lead character's "power", to see and speak with the dead. For the record, this feels more reminiscent of Frighteners than Sixth Sense, which is probably best. The movie also does a admirable job of selling this as a curse rather than a blessing: not being able to turn off his visions makes them difficult to ignore and impossible to hide.

The movie's tone changes abruptly when the dead literally start rising. This section feels something like a deconstructed zombie movie and is mostly played for laughs. I enjoyed these sequences well enough, but I will admit to feeling a tad let down by the quick pacing and "no one's going to get hurt" vibe. In addition, it bothers me that the constant parade of ghosts who were always around in the first section just seemed to vanish halfway through. I understand they were trying to keep the movie focused, but it felt like an awfully large omission.

Fortunately, just when I was getting ready to write the movie off as merely "pretty good", the tone abruptly shifted again, leading to a finale that was almost impossibly beautiful, while simultaneously delivering some genuine horror. Not too much, mind you, but the final confrontation wasn't strictly kids' stuff.

ParaNorman's a great movie in a surprisingly large sub-genre of family-friendly horror/comedies. This, Coraline, and Monster House all play together nicely and build off a larger tradition of all-ages dark movies that include classics like The Secret of Nimh, Gremlins, Ghostbusters, and most of Tim Burton's early work. ParaNorman could have skewed a little darker and risen to stand with the best of the pack, but as it is it was still a great picture with fantastic animation, good writing and characters, and  it was a lot of fun.