New at BOP: Review: Matrix Resurrections Movie Review: Moonfall Movie Reviews: Scream The #1 Movie in America November Forecast The Many Saints of Newark October Forecast New Trivia Question All site updates Share & Save   Tweet Print this column

Matthew Huntley: I think the performance of Furry Vengeance reiterates that studios can't undermine or patronize kids'/families' intelligence. Sure, movies like Alvin and the Chipmunks and Shrek 3 (and probably Shrek 4) gross millions, but those are long-standing franchises built on a foundation of fan loyalty. Furry Vengeance had nothing new or interesting to offer, so what did it really bring to the table? I have yet to see it, but didn't the plot seem all too similar to Open Season?

If Summit wants to establish itself as a leading studio for all types of genres, it must first gain the trust of the audience by actually concentrating on quality. Believe it or not, that's what audiences look for in a movie. Only then can it hope to release a movie like Furry Vengeance and open with decent numbers based on the Summit name alone. I would be interested to know how well the movie would have done had the word "Disney" graced the posters. After all, G-Force was a multi-million dollar hit, and although I haven't seen it, I find it hard to believe it's any more intelligent than the Brendan Fraser flop.

David Mumpower: The one aspect of this that I feel bears mention we haven't covered yet is that there is no difference in perceived quality between Furry Vengeance and a largely forgotten previous release from Brendan Fraser, George of the Jungle. That one also had groin shots in the ads yet it became a $100 million earner due to the power of the Disney marketing machine. I thought about it a lot each time I saw an ad for Furry Vengeance and came to grips with the fact that it was going to bomb huge despite having a winner of a title (sorry to have ruined it for you, Brett). Fraser's career is all over the place with some of his risks paying off while others (well, most) wind up in Monkeybone territory. It's cold and dark there and all of the accountants are angry.

Well, there's always Showgirls…

Kim Hollis: Now that we've run through all of the usual suspects for horror re-imaginings, what do you anticipate the next big trend in the horror industry to be?





Josh Spiegel: Well, there's only a few trends to choose from. I'm sure that the folks at Platinum Dunes will dig up more less-popular horror movies to remake (a recent example, though not from Platinum Dunes, was Prom Night); if Scream 4 opens next year to big enough box office, more excessive sequels could be on the way. The only other trend that will work, I think, is the one that studios think will work for everything: 3-D. I just read this week that Cary Elwes would return for Saw VII, in 3-D. Now, to me, that's a sentence filled with enough elements to never make me want to see that movie, but 3-D could be a boon, as it was for the grosses of movies such as My Bloody Valentine and The Final Destination.

Brett Beach: I think it will be an odd mix of sequels and franchise continuations (Scream 4 and the next Final Destination which I think needs to be called Beyond the Final Destination) and experiments such as Paramount's allotting $1 million dollars for ten micro-budgeted horror films. Blair Witch and Paranormal Activity may always be the exception to the rule but talented directors experimenting with fright over gore and untested ideas may help to get a new generation of filmgoers excited.

Continued:       1       2       3       4