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

Tim Briody: I was unaware of this existence of this until very recently and basically treat it like a reboot, as it's got new Spy Kids (given that the original two are now ages 22 and 19). I was a bit shocked at what Spy Kids 3-D made and while this was almost guaranteed to be profitable, it's not going to be to the level that the previous entries were.

Edwin Davies: This is more than I expected it to take on opening weekend, considering how long the series had lain dormant, but given the success of the first three films (which boasts a combined $310 million domestic take against a combined budget of $111 million) I was fully prepared for it to do better if its name recognition meant anything. Obviously, it didn't. I think that audiences could smell a dud (I didn't intend for that to be a 4-D pun, but it's kind of hard to talk about the film without referring to its fetid odor) from far away, and the kids who enjoyed the first three are much too old for the series, which always unashamedly skewed young anyway, and the film didn't really seem enticing to a new generation. Still, Rodriguez's great skill as a film-maker has been his ability to make films cheaply, so this will probably makes its money back once the worldwide final gross is known, and if not then, certainly once it hits DVD. Not a great result, but not an out and out disaster in the way that some of the openers this week have been.

Samuel Hoelker: Does it hurt, also, that the 4D aspect was done so poorly? I've heard nothing but awful things about the scratch-n-sniff, much like Spy Kids 3's 3D. This was never going to be a huge movie, but why not take care and make the gimmick a gimmick that actually works? I'd want to go see it if the "aromavision" was worthwhile, and while I don't think it would have made it a hit, it would have helped word-of-mouth the most that a movie like Spy Kids 4 can be helped.

Jason Lee: Other than the period between 2001 and 2003 when the three Spy Kids movies were released, kids really haven't taken to RR's adolescent-aimed films (see the $39 million finish for Sharkboy and Lavagirl, and a $20 million finish for Shorts). Given that it's been eight years since the last Spy Kids film, it looks like All the Time in the World will end up more like Lava/Shorts than its franchise brethren. I don't find that surprising at all.

David Mumpower: I am of the opinion that everyone involved with this project fully expected it to be the worst opening of the franchise to date. Spy Kids 2: The Island of Lost Dreams was criticized harshly for being a blatant money grab, thereby explaining why its debut was $10 million less than the original earned. Spy Kids 4 is no different in this regard. It is a way to reintroduce the Spy Kids concept to a new generation of kids while maintaining Rodriguez's mantra of frugal feature films that cater to a specific audience effectively. This particular release reminds me of a William Castle gimmick movie (he's the guy whose daughter founded Dark Castle Entertainment in his honor). The stunt earned about what it deserved with the primary question being whether it demonstrates a portion of the legs we've grown to expect from the franchise. Whether it does will be the determining factor in whether Spy Kids 4 finishes on the happy side of the ledger sheet.

Continued:       1       2       3