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

David Mumpower: The vibe I get from Zach Galifianakis is that he's a jerk, which means he'll only get harder to work with as he gets more and more famous. Call him the Jamie Foxx in the group. Bradley Cooper's high profile failure in The A-Team prevents me from saying he'll get a huge boost from this. What causes me to be unsteady on this point is that Steve Carell overcame a bomb in Evan Almighty...and I'm inclined to think Bradley Cooper is a more natural leading man than Carell.

When I originally saw this question posed, I thought I would be the only one to answer Ed Helms, so I am pleasantly surprised by the comments thus far. In looking over the landscape here, my thought is this. Steve Carell has been the clear star of The 40-Year-Old Virgin, Date Night, Dinner for Schmucks, Evan Almighty, Dan in Real Life, and Get Smart (not counting animated work). Those six titles have combined box office of $558.3 million. Ed Helms will have the same amount just from The Hangover and The Hangover II. Do I believe Helms is the primary draw in these films? Of course not. I do, however, see the similarity between his career and that of Carell and I recognize the fact that Helms has made the same connections within the industry. He is positioned to become a frequently working actor in the vein/range of Paul Rudd to Steve Carell. Helms works constantly for the next ten years because of this.

I also think Ken Jeong gets thrown money from time to time to play this role. He's leveraged it into a gig on Community and he will keep mining it indefinitely. He's the comic relief who has a cheap enough cost to merit a lot of work. He is the next David Spade/Rob Schneider type of performer. He can do it.

Oh, no, Po!

Kim Hollis: Kung Fu Panda 2 opened to $66.8 million over five days, with $47.7 million of it coming over the Friday-Sunday period. While a solid opening weekend, it falls short of the first Kung Fu Panda's $60.2 million during its opening weekend. What do you believe lessened demand for the sequel?

Matthew Huntley: It's hard to say, especially since the first movie was so beloved and still holds up well (I watched it last weekend and laughed just as hard the second time). If I had to theorize, though, it would be that too much time has passed since the original (I know, it's only been three years, but that's a long time to wait for a sequel) and because the Disney/Pixar powerhouse has made other computer-animated movies, even from high-profile studios like DreamWorks, seem less significant. Like many, I was expecting Kung Fu Panda 2 to put up more of a fight over the weekend, especially with its genre and 3D surcharges, but I expect it will have strong legs between now and Cars 2. Its strong reviews and family-friendly nature can only help it and I wouldn't rule out the possibility of it out-grossing its predecessor.

Edwin Davies: We've talked in previous MMQBs about the deluge of animated films that have been released this year, and even just a few weeks ago, when we discussed Rio's opening weekend, the idea that people might eventually be overwhelmed by the sheer number of animated talking animal/gnome movies came up as part of the conversation. Whilst I don't think the likes of Rio, Rango and Hop (which sounds like the name of a really wacky law firm) have caused people to decide to pass on Kung Fu Panda 2, the seemingly endless run of kids films must have been pretty tiring, so some families might have decided not to see it right away. I think that Matthew's right, and that the film will have decent legs over the coming weeks as people get around to seeing it.

Continued:       1       2       3