Trailer Hitch Part II
By BOP Staff
April 8, 2010
BoxOfficeProphets.com
Salt – Opens July 23rd
David Mumpower: Angelina Jolie looks more like Stana Katic in the poster on the front page.
Michael Lynderey: This movie reminds me of The Manchurian Candidate, The Interpreter, and all those other middle-of-the-road thrillers that took in something like $70 million. Looks okay, I guess. Will depend on the reviews. Now, I know Angelina Jolie gives it star power in theory, but two things are key here:
A. Most of her really big hits co-starred another name actor, or Lara Croft
B. All of her $100 million movies were released in June, except for Shark Tale (but c'mon)
So, technically speaking, Salt has an incorrect release date. And maybe if Denzel Washington had played the Liev Schreiber part...
By the way, isn't it interesting that after July 16th, the summer just dies? Look at the movies coming out after Inception. A few of them will probably make $100 million, just barely, but none of them are even vaguely tentpolish. Some strange scheduling decisions went on here, and if I had a potential blockbuster on my hands with nowhere to put it, I'd be looking at some of those late July/early August slots, especially considering those late summer '09 surprises.
David Mumpower: One of the aspects of a group version of Trailer Hitch that I have been looking forward to is that there will be the occasional project where nobody lines up at all on their opinion and expectation of the project. Salt is the first title to qualify. I am not with you guys at all on this one. What I had heard about the project prior to the trailer in no way, shape or form lines up with what this clip hints at the story evolving to be. Michael mentions The Interpreter meets The Manchurian Candidate, which is what I had expected the feature to be based upon its production notes.
As I'm watching the clip, the first 90 seconds goes roughly as I had anticipated. Then, she jacks a guy on a motorcycle and then all bets are off. Suddenly, Mrs. Smith has come out to play and I'm grasping the notion that this is The Bourne Identity with a sex change more than a stodgy political drama. At least, that's what the ad would indicate. It's entirely possible that they're highlighting the action elements to boost the bottom line box office, but when I see Angelina Jolie climbing a wall in order to deliver a more solid punch, I'm thinking Milla Jovovich in Resident Evil rather than another Beyond Borders role. In fact, the most direct parallel is giving The Fox from Wanted her own movie. This seems like a lot of parts to pull off at once, so I'm still skeptical about the overall movie. I am night and day more interested in this film than I was before seeing the trailer, however, which means the people who cut the spot deserve a raise and a commendation.
Josh Spiegel: I cannot emphasize how completely uninterested I am for this movie. First, terrible marketing; "Who is Salt?" I have no idea, and I don't care. The title also just sucks. It's just such a boring title. What's more, maybe it's me, but I find Angelina Jolie's acting to leave me wanting more of anything, such as emotion. My guess (knowing only what I've seen in the trailers) is that her character isn't a Russian spy, but wouldn't it be far more fascinating if she was? Jolie's certainly playing it like she's a bad guy, when I doubt she is. The movie might do respectably, but Jolie is like George Clooney, in that she's famous, but her movies aren't wildly successful.
Michael Lynderey: I'm kinda thinking the trailer may sell the film as more of an action movie than it actually is. I remember The Interpreter had a suicide bombing scene and some shootouts, and the trailers played those up, too.
Max Braden: Female Jason Bourne. That's all you have to say. "Female Jason Bourne starring Angelina Jolie" gets me in the theater. They almost blew it, though, with the title and poster. Audiences might start off thinking, "Oh no, it's another political message drama from Jolie" or, "Is this related to Milk?" And they may even tune out for the first part of the trailer. But put them into the action and I think audiences will be hooked. It does toe the line dangerously close to Wanted, though, with the unrealistic jump from the bridge and the wall-push-punch. That may be an issue of the movie's offerings, but the trailer is pretty good bait.
David Mumpower: Josh, going back to what you said about having no interest in the project, I presume you know the pedigree of this film. Just in case you don't, does it change your opinion any to know that Phillip Noyce, director of The Quiet American, is helming Salt and that it has a script written by Kurt Wimmer (Equilibrium) and Brian Helgeland (Mystic River and Man on Fire)? Do their respective presences in any way counteract what you deem to be a lousy trailer?
Josh: David, I did know that Noyce is the director (though the trailer could've been the product of half the action directors in Hollywood); the cast, Jolie aside, is respectable at the very least. Kurt Wimmer is also the guy who brought us Ultraviolet and The Recruit, so his name does nothing for me. Helgeland is also a mixed bag; yes, he did Man On Fire (which I love), but he also did The Postman, The Order, The Taking of Pelham 1 2 3, and Cirque Du Freak.
So....Phillip Noyce! His involvement intrigues me, but neither trailer has excited me in any way.
The Last Airbender = M. Night's Ultimate Redemption or Final Damnation?
The Last Airbender – Opens July 2nd
David Mumpower: I am sooooo disappointed that the advertising for this doesn't include "from the man who brought you The Happening".
Josh Spiegel: Yes, but give them credit; the trailer doesn't even try to shy away from Shyamalan's involvement, which I don't think is a very good idea. Granted, this movie will probably not have a twist ending, and probably is going to feel like the least Shymanalan-esque film he's made, but still. Not being familiar with the show the film's based on, I can say that the trailer didn't do much for me, aside from proving that Dev Patel may be many things, but a menacing antagonist doesn't appear to be one of them. The special effects look impressive, but I don't really have much excitement for this one. That said, the film could easily be huge, but not for me.
Michael Lynderey: What a strange, strange, strange project. It's based on an apparently popular animated TV show, it stars no name actors, it's directed by a man who's been ruthlessly reviled by critics for my entire adult life, it has dibs on the Fourth of July slot, and it used to have "Avatar" in its name, but for obvious reasons, it doesn't anymore.
This is a bizarre bunch of elements on their own, but to string them together into one movie? You'd think that, with the release date, this is going to be one of the biggest movies of the year. But how can it be? Is the Avatar series really that big? Won't it turn off non-fans? Why pick Shyamalan, who's just coming off a film that included the line "there appears to be an event happening", to direct such an apparently valuable project?
Guys, I'm at a loss. I'm not being snarky or sarcastic when I ask: what am I missing here? Everybody seems to think it will be huge, but why? Somebody tell me.
Jim Van Nest: It's no secret that I'm a Shyamalan honk. I've still never seen The Happening, but I've enjoyed everything else he's done. (Don't try to talk me out of it, it just is. Roll with it). I'm also quite familiar with the animated series Avatar: The Last Airbender. In an ocean of Pokemon, Yuh-Gi-Oh and Bakugan crap...Avatar (and yes, despite James Cameron, I will always call this series Avatar) is fantastic.
This is EASILY my most anticipated film of the summer. It's also a film that, if it sucks, will see me finally turn on the director. This is one he just can't screw up. For people who watch the show and are pumped for this film, the trailer gives you everything you want to see, without giving away too much. You see all the characters you're looking for, as well as several of the effects you want to see, and it seals the deal with Ang's arrow lighting up toward the end.
I can't wait for this movie and the trailer has only made me want to see it even more.
For those of you who've never seen the show...if you like animation and you like a good story, rent some of the Avatar seasons. REALLY good stuff.
David Mumpower: To answer Michael's question, I fully appreciate that Shyamalan's last two movies have been critically reviled and the ending of the one before them, The Village, was a heatedly divisive subject. Up until 2004, however, he was almost always described as the next Hitchcock and is a two-time Academy Award nominee. What he has never done to date is a pure action film. Unbreakable teased to be that style of film with some breathtaking sequences, particularly Willis' pursuit of a bad guy performing a home invasion. Like Jim, I had loved everything Shyamalan had done up until Lady in the Water, the movie where he lost his damn mind and let his ego drive the plot. I am curious to see how much he has learned from the mistakes of his last two films. Is this someone who can adapt and make the requisite adjustments to make The Happening and Lady in the Water anecdotes over a storied career or will we look back and say it was all downhill after the sublime ending of Signs? I get the vibe that The Last Airbender will be the movie that tells the tale, at least for the next eight to tenyears.
In terms of the story itself, Jim and Pete Kilmer have been saying for years now that we should be watching this cartoon. It always looked too weird for me, but I thought my wife might love it since she is a huge Naruto fan. The movie should function as the introductory point for us and we'll go back and watch the series if we like it. What I can say from the clip is this. Dev Patel looks ridiculous. And I'm talking about someone who is famous for a Bollywood dance performance of Jai Ho. Somehow, he looks worse here. That troubles me quite a bit. Once I get past this, what I note is that the trailer has several gripping shots, particularly the one Jim references with: "it seals the deal with Ang's arrow lighting up toward the end". I have no end with the relevance of this is to the character. I am, however, stunned that the people cutting the trailer didn't highlight that more. It's a money shot and an epic one at that. They should hammer that image home as much as possible and maybe they will. There is still a lot of marketing yet to be done here.
My suspicion in watching this trailer is that the visuals are going to be killer, particularly all of the elemental attacks on display in this clip. The dialogue, on the other hand...well, I have concerns. The "I don't deserve their praise" line is cringe-inducing. So, while I am not immediately writing this one off, no small feat given how much I despised the last two Shyamalan features, I do have mixed emotions about it. The Happening also had a trailer that built a mystery that engaged me yet the end result was Mark Wahlberg and Zooey Deschanel getting outperformed by plants. I really, really hope that there is more substance than style to this movie, but I've been burned before. Twice.
Jim Van Nest: One thing to add about the dialogue...the Avatar and his friends are all kids. Ang is only 12, if I remember correctly. So the dialogue comes off as childish, it's because they're...well...children.
Michael Lynderey: I know Shyamalan used to be incredibly well respected, and I was a big fan until about halfway through Signs. The fact that his first few movies were so good is probably the reason we're all mostly disappointed with his last few.
But I still don't get why this is supposed to be such a huge movie. That is really the gist of my puzzlement. Does the show have a Transformers-esque fanbase?
David Mumpower: The difference between the two is that Transformers had over 20 years of awareness. Avatar: The Last Airbender didn't even debut until 2005. During its run on Nickelodeon, it was quite popular. The numbers I've seen had it in the three million range for weekly viewers; the series finale was a huge hit for cable with around 5.6 million. I think that Transformers is analogous in that both experienced the same general level of popularity with viewers during their initial runs. The difference is that we didn't get a Transformers movie (a live action one anyway) for a full generation. The kids who were 12 when The Last Airbender ended its theatrical run are only 15 now, so it's much fresher for them. That does, however, limit the audience since it is not a situation where fathers take their sons to share the thing they loved as kids. This is supposed to be a trilogy and the toy sales for the franchise have been quite good. If you're asking me if this is a movie that makes $100 million domestically, I see it as a coin flip. Then again, I constantly underrated G.I. Joe prior to its release; this could be a case of me repeating a prior mistake.
Michael Lynderey: It looks like we're actually on the same page here. If I had to tap my brain's usual resources, I, too, would not even necessarily peg this as a $100 million earner.
I was under the impression, though, for whatever reason, that a lot of people thought this movie will be huge - you know, $250 million - $300 million huge. The 4th of July date helped fuel this impression.
But if it's just something like $130 million that most people see it earning, that makes perfect sense to me.
Max Braden: I have no awareness of the cartoon. This is for kids, right? Because I don't see a lot of appeal for college age and up. The effects look nifty, but I'm not going to feel moved to shell out money to see just that. And since this looks so unlike Shyamalan's other movies, his name attached to this is largely irrelevant to someone like me.
Pete Kilmer: Avatar The Last Airbender *had* a huge following a couple of years ago, but I have zero clue how it did internationally or on DVD. All I know is that it was one of the strongest cartoons for kids in years. It was a true quest show that kids, at the time, could relate to a bit, but really played well for adults as well. I hope this is good, but I'm really concerned about it. Having Shyamalan do it has me really worried as he's been off his game since The Village.
Jerry Simpson: While I don't disagree that Night has been off his game for a while, he's been the creator of those films. My hope is that by taking over a property with such a strong mythology, he will get it on track. There really isn't much for him to screw up with an origin story that's well known and liked.