Film, Box Office, and Stuff

I was again walking around my local shopping mall, Raffles City, and this time they are promoting Jumanji: Welcome to the Jungle , two weeks ahead of its 12th January release date.  Columbia Tristar Marketing clearly sees a big hit to start marketing this so early (and why not? It's doing gangbusters in the US).  It would not surprise me if it out-grosses Spider-Man: Homecoming 's $116m to become Sony's second biggest hit in the market in the last 12 months (I seriously doubt it tops Resident Evil: The Final Chapter 's $160m). Anyway, so this marketing stand is pretty cool.  It has prop plants and other fixtures that I assume are part of the film.  The idea is to go into the booth, and your face can appear on the screen atop the body of one of the characters.  I went it to test it and got Dwayne Johnson.  I took my son in and he got Karen Gillan.  To be honest, this experience was lame.  Kind of clever, but the result was cheap.  I assum...

This is the latest Jackie Chan adventure-comedy, and unlike his other 2017 films, The Foreigner and Kung Fu Yoga , it is an entirely Chinese production (that should be your first cause for worry -- remember the failures  CZ12 and Dragon Blade ?).  This time Chan is directed by the inexperienced egotist, Leo Zhang, and it is the weirdest Chan action film yet.  Firstly, it is trash.  It is again silly comedy coupled with Chan's brand of slapstick action, but this time it is infused with a futuristic, science-fiction plot.  It is a shame, because the first action sequence (which is oddly sandwiched between the title of the film and the opening credits) is decent, and it showed promise with its choreography and gore.  I would have been up for more of that.  However, it capitulates into stupidity soon after as it focuses on Nancy (Ouyang Nana), who is Chan's daughter that has regenerative powers, though they've never met (he must keep his distance for a...

Yep, good film. Didn't blow me away, but it is by far the best tennis movie ever made. That's interesting, though. Why is it so hard to make a great tennis film? I mean, it is miles better than this year's other tennis flick, Borg vs McEnroe , but that's not saying much. Emma Stone is good. I like her in anything but she irked me a bit as Billie Jean King, as she does not fully transform into her. I just see Emma Stone. I actually think Steve Carell gave a much better performance, even if he was essentially just Austin Powers-lite. But neither give Oscar worthy performances. Good performances, but there are many better this year. So it is an enjoyable film and I loved learning about this "Battle of the Sexes" match and the origin of the WTA, but I also think it was a little shallow. I suppose I should have known that going in. It is, after all, called Battle of the Sexes ! It's hardly subtle. But I would have liked more flesh on the bones. They tried ...

Awesome, awesome, awesome film. Every scene and every line is a home run. The screenplay is gold. It is hilarious and heartfelt and empowering. Each facet of the film's fabric holds strong. The humour does not spoil the serious, and vice-versa. And everyone is on top form. Frances McDormand is sensational and bad ass. So many scenes of greatness. My favourite has to be the altar boy monologue. Priceless. And Sam Rockwell, well, I do not think I have seen him better. I do not think I have found a character as funny as Dixon but also pitiful and distasteful, but Rockwell manages it. Burwell's score is also just repeat-worthy brilliant. A+

Solid film. The endings are the best parts. a) where it should have ended, and b) where it actually ended. Those are the only times in the film where I felt something. And I did not think the actual ending could top Stuhlbarg's heartwarming father-son monologue, but it so did. The music and Chalamet's face wonderfully translate that teenage feeling of loss and happiness and pity and reminiscence. Powerful ending. I totally bought their lust for one another too. But not so much from Hammer. It was all Timothée Chalamet. The chaser. Tremendous performance. He looks like a young Damien Chazelle and sounds like Shia LaBeouf, but what a great actor! And he is far more invested in every encounter than Hammer. The film starts off just ok. Not bad. Bit relaxed in parts. Interesting in others. But as it goes on. Vignette after vignette. You become invested. The scenery is lovely and the score is good. Just as Winterbottom's The Trip to Italy did, this makes me want to holiday ...

mother! is fucking nuts. But also just brilliant. I almost had a panic attack. Jesus Christ. Poor girl. Lawrence gives the performance of the year. And Pfeiffer gives the second best performan...just kidding. But she does give a highly effective performance. Aronofsky has finally made his magnum opus. I won't be getting that shot of the baby out of my head any day soon. What Aronofsky does with this film is nothing short of brilliance. I haven't completely figured it all out yet. I know it's symbolic of God and Mother Nature but beyond that my biblical knowledge needs topping up. Anyway, it is completely thrilling stuff. I want to rewatch it but will have to wait a few weeks for my shell shock to lessen and palette to clear. A

It is a fairly easy winner this year. There were a few contenders ... Hugh Jackman for the ultimate bad ass Wolverine performance in Logan , Charlize Theron for the double bill of Atomic Blonde and Fast & Furious 8 , and even Jamie Foxx for his efforts in Sleepless and Baby Driver . There were some other honorable mentions this year, such as Wu Jing in Wolf Warriors 2 , a potential action star of the future, Dylan O'Brien, for American Assassin , and finally Frank Grillo for his appearances in Beyond Skyline and Wolf Warriors 2 (if it wasn't such a shit film it would have carried more weight) and his Netflix-produced auto-actioner, Wheelman (which is brilliant, by the way). While three action roles is impressive, it also shows the quality of the productions. Grillo needs to get in better action films to truly contend for this title. Anyway, none of them can hold a candle to Keanu Reeves in John Wick: Chapter Two . Such a bad ass action hero, and this award goes some way...

47 Meters Down  could not replicate its US success in China.  It grossed just $6m and was out of the top ten after 7 days.  This was actually enough to become its second largest market, though.  It was one of the usual pack of last-minute, half-hearted December releases hoping to hit big in the world's second biggest market, and this year it arrived along with Schwarzenegger's Aftermath, Berg's latest Wahlberg-er,  Patriots Day , and firefighter melodrama,  Only the Brave . Anyway, I saw this statue/standee at Coastal City Cinema in Nanshan, Shenzhen.  Thought it was worthy of sharing just because of how bad it is.  It reminds me of a shoddily made fairground sculpture from North China rebranded with a 47 Meters Down plaque and presented as a legitimate cinema foyer attraction. I did not see it in Chinese cinemas.  Thankfully, because it's not worth seeing at the cinema.  Here is my review: It wasn't bad, but I am not sure ...

While the third Thor movie wipes the floor with the big DC team-up movie at the North American box office ($300m over $230m), it is a different picture in China.  As of this posting, Justice has amassed $104.2m in box office receipts in China, to Ragnarok 's $112m.  Justice holding its own against the much larger, much more popular Marvel outing, but it came at a cost.  I did not see any marketing for Thor: Ragnarok in China, but quite a bit for Justice League .  Is there a link between marketing coverage and box office receipts?  I guess it depends.  Marvel already has such a foundation of fans from Iron Man, Spider-Man, Captain America, and Hulk, so when they release a new MCU film it does well by default.  DC had to work harder to get people interested.  But even with the exposure, the gross could not match that of Thor.  Anyway, I just thought it was interesting. Here is some of the marketing that I saw for Justice League : ...

A riveting wartime drama to mirror Nolan's masterpiece. Seeing it from the political side feels like a director's cut or television spin-off of Dunkirk . It's a great performance by Oldman, of course. The little mannerisms and patterns of speech stand out beyond just the prosthetic perfection to create a blinding realisation of Britain's greatest ever leader. Wright does an extraordinary job of maintaining engagement. It is not the most eye-catching of stories, and Darkest Hour could have done with more war/evacuation scenes, but the way it maneuvers through the key dates and decisions keeps the pulse and sentiment of the film alive, ending in that iconic motivational speech. B+