Read the reviews and news
But first a news hit about Harry Potter and the Prisoner of Azkaban.
Taken from msn.com
Aug. 4 issue - Between takes at the shrieking shack-a ghoulish, precariously quaking house on the fringes of the wizard village Hogsmeade-actor Daniel Radcliffe fiddles with his magic wand. Today’s scene is a doozy: Harry Potter finally confronts the sinister (for now) Sirius Black. OVER THE SCREECHING din of the shack, Radcliffe repeatedly shouts, “You betrayed my parents! You’re the reason they’re dead!” During a break in the action, though, he twirls his wand genially like a baton. Wait, sorry, it’s not a baton-that’d be so 12 years old. Radcliffe, who turned 14 last week, is bashing the air feverishly. He’s doing a drum solo.
To prepare for the older, bolder “Harry Potter and the Prisoner of Azkaban,” Radcliffe has been listening to the Sex Pistols-which broke up 11 years before he was born-as well as edgy new acts like the Strokes and the Dandy Warhols. He’s also watching Francois Truffaut (“The 400 Blows”) and Vittorio De Sica (“The Bicycle Thief”) to get a handle on Harry’s “feelings of hopelessness.” Yes, “Azkaban” is the puberty movie in the Potter franchise-the one, says Emma Watson, who plays Hermione, in which “all those lovely, lovely hormones start coming out.” How will the movie reflect the changes afoot? “Lots of sex,” says Alfonso Cuaron, the Mexican director who’s taken over the reins of the series from Chris Columbus. “Lots of nudity. And lots of sex.” Relax, he’s joking. But Cuaron notes that his teenage cast is coming of age just as the characters are, and that there’s, uh, pollen in the air. “You just have to let it flow,” he says. “You don’t need to encourage it. You allow it to be. And believe me, they have a lot of it.” Watson, who’s 13, has a sign on her dressing-room door that reads BEWARE: BABE INSIDE.
SHOWING SOME CHUTZPAH
The first two Harry Potter films, “The Sorcerer’s Stone” and “The Chamber of Secrets,” both directed by the family-friendly Columbus, were earnestly mainstream affairs. Some critics shrugged, but each film grossed nearly $1 billion worldwide. Now, with the series’ two lightest chapters out of the way, the stage is set for an adventurer like Cuaron, who got an Oscar nomination last year for the teen-sex romp “Y Tu Mama Tambien.” By now, every fan of the franchise has torn through the thunderous new book, “The Order of the Phoenix,” at least once, meaning the onus of keeping the insatiable Potter machine humming is about to shift back to Hollywood. Chronicling the erotic adventures of two Mexican teens might not seem like a job qualification for a Harry Potter movie, but hey, give Warner Brothers credit for showing some chutzpah. “Alfonso has a keen understanding of the nuances of teenage life,” says producer David Heyman. ” ‘Y Tu Mama’ is about the last moments of adolescence, and ‘Azkaban’ is about the first.” Cuaron also directed the 1995 adaptation of the children’s classic “A Little Princess,” a film that had a great many fans, including a particularly vociferous one named J. K. Rowling.
Online Mail Call: Our Readers Discuss Potter’s Politics
Presiding over the “Azkaban” set in England’s Hertfordshire countryside, the bearded, rumply-haired Cuaron cuts a entirely different figure than the all-American Columbus-and it’s not just the mariachi music blasting during a midshoot celebration. “Alfonso is much more gritty than Chris ever was,” says Watson. “He’s really into the idea that [shooting] should be fluid and natural. People can be eating an apple during a take.”
IMAGINING HOGSMEADE
“Azkaban” is a spookier story than the first two-the soul-sucking dementors, who guard Azkaban Prison, make their first appearance-and Cuaron’s design team promises that the movie’s palette will reflect the gathering darkness. For Hogsmeade, set designer Stuart Craig labored to avoid a “pretty, chocolate-box” village, creating a main street that swerves zanily. Honeydukes, the candy store, is floor-to-ceiling psychedelia, with tangles of licorice and-a Cuaron touch-Mexican skulls made of sugar. (To prevent candy jars from magically emptying between takes, the cast has been told that the goodies are lacquer-coated. They’re not.) Cuaron also reimagined the role of Professor Dumbledore after Richard Harris’s death. British actor Michael Gambon now plays the Hogwarts headmaster as an elegant old hippie.
Cuaron’s outspokenness is also new to the franchise. Does the evil wizard Voldemort still remind him of George W. Bush, as he said recently? “In combination with Saddam,” he says. “They both have selfish interests and are very much in love with power. Also, a disregard for the environment. A love for manipulating people. I read books four and five, and Fudge”-Rowling’s slippery Minister of Magic-”is similar to Tony Blair. He’s the ultimate politician. He’s in denial about many things. And everything is for the sake of his own persona, his own power. The way the Iraq thing was handled was not unlike the way Fudge handled affairs in book four.” Cuaron’s scrappiness is either refreshing or worrying, depending on your stock portfolio.
Of course, Cuaron doesn’t have full run of the joint. Columbus, who says he was “too physically exhausted” to direct the third movie, is serving as producer-and he makes no bones about the fact that he’s doing it to “protect” the Potter world he adores. Awkward as the arrangement sounds, both men insist it’s working. Mostly, Columbus advises his successor on how to handle a job he describes as running a three-ring circus. Shooting is often interrupted by kids scampering off to do schoolwork. (Under British law, child actors can work only four hours a day.) While they’re gone, Cuaron hops on his bicycle and rides to the editing room, where he readies shots for his visual-effects team. “The biggest pressure on Alfonso is delivering sequences to the effects people early enough,” Columbus says. The effects in “The Sorcerer’s Stone,” Columbus concedes, “weren’t up to snuff” because of time pressures. On the second film, he scheduled eight extra months to get them right. For “Azkaban,” Cuaron’s team has spent six months on the dementors alone.
Potter fans have grown used to a movie every Thanksgiving, but “Azkaban” will arrive in the teeth of the summer movie season on June 4, 2004. By then, the franchise could be in the midst of another creative shake-up. Radcliffe says he’ll be riding the Nimbus 2000 in the fourth movie, “The Goblet of Fire,” and it appears that his young costars, Watson and Rupert Grint, who plays Ron Weasley, will join him. Beyond that, they still have to ask Mom and Dad. “We’re optimistic,” producer Heyman says, “but it’s early.” As for Cuaron, his tour of duty in Harryland will end with “Azkaban.” Whoever inherits the franchise next-Britain’s Mike Newell (“Four Weddings and a Funeral”) is on the shortlist-will get a nice signing bonus: Rowling’s sequels have a knack for getting better.
Written by: By Carla Power and Devin Gordon
And now for some reviews and news
HOLLYWOOD (AP)Taken from msn.com -- If the weekend's top movie - "American Wedding" - glowed like a happy newlywed, then you could say the critically reviled "Gigli" stumbled like an ugly bridesmaid. The Ben Affleck-Jennifer Lopez movie "Gigli" debuted dismally following weeks of toxic buzz and near-unanimous critical revulsion. The comedy about a gangster who falls in love with a lesbian rival during a kidnapping earned $3.8 million.
"This is not a shock," said Tom Sherak, a partner in Revolution Studios, which produced "Gigli" for Sony Pictures Entertainment.
He said constant gossip and tabloid and TV coverage of Affleck and Lopez's real-life romance may have created a backlash against the picture. "I've seen a lot worse movies," Sherak said.
"Hey, is it the best movie ever made? Ehh, I don't think so. ... Other movies have gotten ravaged by critics and have opened up at least OK. It was more than that," he said.
Although Affleck and Lopez already have completed another movie together - writer-director Kevin Smith's "Jersey Girl" - the foul reception of "Gigli" may end the couple's working relationship.
"They'll continue to be big stars, and chances are they will not work together again - and they shouldn't, by the way," Sherak said. "You move on. Look, the picture cost $54 million. So everyone is going to get hurt a bit."
Meanwhile, the horseracing drama "Seabiscuit" expanded its run by 434 theaters, coming in fourth with $17.5 million, for a total of $49 million. It lost only 16 percent of its audience in its second weekend. Most movies lose about 40 percent.
Taken from msn.com
Box Office
Here are the estimated ticket sales for Friday through Sunday at North American theaters, according to Exhibitor Relations Co. Inc. Final figures will be released Monday.
1. "American Wedding," $34.3
2. "Spy Kids 3-D: Game Over," $20.1 million
3. "Pirates of the Caribbean: The Curse of the Black Pearl," $19.1 million. (YAY)
4. "Seabiscuit," $17.5 million.
5. "Bad Boys II," $12.7 million.
6. "Lara Croft: Tomb raider - The Cradle of Life," $11.3 million.
7. (tie) "Finding Nemo," $3.8 million.
7. (tie) "Gigli," $3.8 million.
9. "The League of Extraordinary Gentlemen," $3.2 million.
10. "Terminator 3: Rise of the Machines," $2.9 million.
Gigli review from movies.yahoo.com
This misbegotten mess is less a movie than a string of over-the-top audition monologues, those random set-pieces designed to show off an actor's facility with language and attitude. Those can be entertaining in their own way, but they do not have anything to do with creating a character or telling a story, just two of the many movie-making essentials that are missing in "Gigli." Ben Affleck plays Larry Gigli (pronounced to rhyme with "really"), a small-time enforcer for a small-time hood named Louis. Larry's latest assignment is to kidnap a retarded young man named Brian (Justin Bartha) to help Louis and his colleagues apply some pressure to Brian's brother. So Larry picks up Brian and brings him back to his apartment.
A beautiful woman (Jennifer Lopez) who says her name is Ricki tells Larry that she has also been hired by Louis to make sure he does not mess up the job. Larry's macho ego is affronted, but he is attracted to Ricki, even after she tells him she is gay.
A lot of bickering and bantering later, much of it involving mind-numbing debates over who is the boss and straight vs. gay sex, plus encounters with the mother of one and the ex-lover of the other, Larry and Ricki have to decide whether they are willing to hurt or kill Brian and that leads them to think differently about themselves and each other.
The movie has the traditional odd couple structure -- friction, the chance to prove themselves to one another, mutual epiphinies, and finally, respect and affection. But it never finds any tone or direction or believable connection between the characters.
Larry is a one-dimensional dim but macho guy. Ricki is a one-dimensional fantasy figure. Their bickering has no spark, and the evolution of their relationship is not grounded in any way because they are not really characters, just attributes and attitude, with no internal consistency. Larry is devoted to his mother in one scene, but seems to have no thought about abandoning her in another.
The narrative is choppy. It was probably recut following test screenings, but the effect is to make the events unconnected to each other, without any direction or momentum. Let me also point out that in addition to the overdone odd couple plot device, the movie includes several elements from the "should never be in another movie" list, including a vocabulary-building hood and a noble disabled person whose disability shifts according to the requirements of each scene and who transforms the lives of the supposedly normal people around him.
Meanwhile, somewhere in there Christopher Walken (as a cop) and Al Pacino (as a crime boss) drop by for the showy audition-monologue-style scenes that have some verve but add nothing to the plot, tone, or themes of the movie. So does Lainie Kazan, in yet another ethnic earth-mother role, (we really did not need to see her thong underwear -- another thing that should be on the "never in another movie list"). Indeed, there really is nothing that could be called plot, tone, or theme in this movie. For a brief, mad, moment I had a flicker of a thought that the mundane inanity of the sordid and petty imperatives imposed on Larry and Ricki might be some Samuel Beckett-style commentary on the existential void. Then I realized that watching the movie put me closer to the existential void than they ever were, and that Godot would arrive long before this movie went anywhere.
It's not the worst movie ever. It's not even the worst movie of the year. And it's not as bad as the Jen/Ben backlash want it to be. But it is not a good movie, and it is a terrible waste of talent.
Parents should know that this movie has graphic violence, non-stop profanity, and extremely explicit sexual references and situations. A character attempts suicide and then disappears from the story. In a better movie, the fact that the most capable and intelligent character is a bi-sexual Hispanic woman would be more worthwhile. Bartha's portrayal of Brian is probably the most natural and authentic of the movie, but the character of the retarded man is the stereotypical noble disabled person and really no more than a prop for the other characters to react to.
Families who see this movie should talk about why Brian made Larry and Ricki feel differently about their choice of careers. What did it mean when Ricki finally told Larry her real name? What do you think of Sun Tzu's view that in a a conflict, "angry is a statistically stupid move?" Have you ever used anger to mask sadness? What do you think about the advice to do the thing you're most afraid of?
Families who like this movie will like director Martin Brest's much better odd couple movie Midnight Run, starring Robert de Niro and Charles Grodin as a bounty hunter and his bail-jumping captive. They might also enjoy Prizzi's Honor, about another odd-couple romance of two professional hitmen (I guess a hit-man and a hit-woman) and the quirky Welcome to Collinwood, about a ragtag group of small-time crooks with the dream of just one big-time heist. Rain Man, referred to in this movie, is an Oscar-winning story about a man who meets up with his autistic brother. And in Chasing Amy (for the most mature audiences only), Ben Affleck again plays a heterosexual man in love with a gay woman.
American Wedding review taken again from movies.yahoo.com Okay, I admit it -- I laughed. A lot. Even more surprising, I smiled.
I was even a little sorry that this is the last of the American Pie trilogy.
For anyone who has not been to a movie in a few years, let me remind you that the humor of this movie as raunchy as it gets, and then some. There is not a bodily function or a sexual practice that is not made fun of in some excruciatingly humiliating way in these movies. But while that is part of their appeal to young audiences, for whom it is a reassuring release to laugh at these uncomfortable topics, that is not the reason for their success. Many, many other films made the mistake of thinking that gross-out humor was enough. What makes these movies different is that at their heart is, well, heart. Once again, as in the first two movies, there is a lot of talk about sex and a lot of attempts to have sex, but the sex that actually occurs is almost entirely respectful, monogamous, and really quite sweet. And once again the best part is Eugene Levy as the least hip (but most loving) father in the world.
In the original movie, Jim (Jason Biggs) and his friends make a commitment to have sex by graduation. He tries to get together with a beautiful exchange student named Nadia (Shannon Elizabeth), he ends up with band camp nerd Michelle (Alyson Hannigan), who turns out to be surprisingly ardent and adventuresome. In the second, they take a beach house for the summer with plans to have a lot of sex in it. Jim again tries to get together with Nadia, but again ends up with Michelle, originally so that he can learn how to be a better lover, but ultimately because he realizes that he loves her.
In this installment, they have graduated from college and Jim, who continues to be a magnet for humiliation, proposes to Michelle. All of the preparations for the wedding, from finding the perfect dress to meeting the new in-laws, to the bachelor party to the big day, provide opportunities for wild adventures that include more conventional set-ups for humor like a dance-off in a gay bar and a personality switch as the irrepressible id Stifler pretends to be a sweet, polite, preppy and philosopher Finch pretends to be an obnoxious bad boy. But mostly it is just a series of humiliating escapades as the straight-laced in-laws walk in on what appears to be Jim having sex with another man and some dogs, a bachelor party that involves strippers, a guy in bondage, and some very revealing leather pants, a character unexpectedly ends up having sex with an elderly lady, and yet another dessert is destroyed by Jim. As in all classic sex farces, the outrageous situations are really a morality tale -- the good are rewarded and the naughty are punished.
Parents should know that this is an exuberantly outrageous movie with humor that is good-hearted but extremely explicit. There are jokes about every body part and function and about every kind of sexual practice, heterosexual and homosexual, including oral sex, mild S&M, and the use of sex toys. The language is extremely strong, with non-stop swearwords and exceptionally explicit sexual references. A character moons the others. A character has sex with someone thinking it is someone else. Stifler once again ingests a substance for gross-out effect, this time not even human. There is social drinking. The issue of religious intermarriage is raised when one family member objects, but everyone else is completely supportive. As in the previous movies, the female characters are exceptionally honest, open, and in charge of their sexuality for movies directed at this age group (or any age group).
Families who see this movie should talk about which gender or generation in this movie understands the other one best. And they should talk about Jim's supportive father, and possible ways he might improve the way he shows his support. Families might also want to talk about the importance of selecting sexual partners with whom they can share truly intimate moments.
Families who enjoy this movie will also enjoy American Pie and American Pie 2
(elvenlegolas's note: I think this reviewer is family oriented seeing as her title is "Mom's Movie Review". Sorry about that folks)
Preview: The World of Tomorrow
Stats
Release date: May 14th, 2004 (wide)
Cast: Jude Law (Captani Joseph Sullivan, AKA Sky Captain), Gwyneth Paltrow (Polly Perkins), Angelina Jolie, Casey Affleck (Dex), Bai Ling; other cast not announced yet.
Director: Kerry Conran (feature film debut)
What's it about?:This science fiction adventure set in the 1930s starts as New York City reporter Polly Perkins (Paltrow) starts to investigate why so many famous scientists are starting to be reported missing. Soon, she starts to get clues, as strange flying machines and giant robots threaten the city. Luckily, her old flame, aviator Captain Joseph Sullivan (Law), AKA Sky Captain, is there to battle the bad guys with his friends, the Flying Legion, in his Warhawk P-40. Soon, Polly is flying away with Sky Captain to Nepal to find a crazy scientist, Dr. Totenkopf, who apparently wants to destroy the world...
Genre: Action, Eye Candy, Historical, Science Fiction, Superhero, Thriller
Taken from movies.yahoo.com
Taken from msn.com
Aug. 4 issue - Between takes at the shrieking shack-a ghoulish, precariously quaking house on the fringes of the wizard village Hogsmeade-actor Daniel Radcliffe fiddles with his magic wand. Today’s scene is a doozy: Harry Potter finally confronts the sinister (for now) Sirius Black. OVER THE SCREECHING din of the shack, Radcliffe repeatedly shouts, “You betrayed my parents! You’re the reason they’re dead!” During a break in the action, though, he twirls his wand genially like a baton. Wait, sorry, it’s not a baton-that’d be so 12 years old. Radcliffe, who turned 14 last week, is bashing the air feverishly. He’s doing a drum solo.
To prepare for the older, bolder “Harry Potter and the Prisoner of Azkaban,” Radcliffe has been listening to the Sex Pistols-which broke up 11 years before he was born-as well as edgy new acts like the Strokes and the Dandy Warhols. He’s also watching Francois Truffaut (“The 400 Blows”) and Vittorio De Sica (“The Bicycle Thief”) to get a handle on Harry’s “feelings of hopelessness.” Yes, “Azkaban” is the puberty movie in the Potter franchise-the one, says Emma Watson, who plays Hermione, in which “all those lovely, lovely hormones start coming out.” How will the movie reflect the changes afoot? “Lots of sex,” says Alfonso Cuaron, the Mexican director who’s taken over the reins of the series from Chris Columbus. “Lots of nudity. And lots of sex.” Relax, he’s joking. But Cuaron notes that his teenage cast is coming of age just as the characters are, and that there’s, uh, pollen in the air. “You just have to let it flow,” he says. “You don’t need to encourage it. You allow it to be. And believe me, they have a lot of it.” Watson, who’s 13, has a sign on her dressing-room door that reads BEWARE: BABE INSIDE.
SHOWING SOME CHUTZPAH
The first two Harry Potter films, “The Sorcerer’s Stone” and “The Chamber of Secrets,” both directed by the family-friendly Columbus, were earnestly mainstream affairs. Some critics shrugged, but each film grossed nearly $1 billion worldwide. Now, with the series’ two lightest chapters out of the way, the stage is set for an adventurer like Cuaron, who got an Oscar nomination last year for the teen-sex romp “Y Tu Mama Tambien.” By now, every fan of the franchise has torn through the thunderous new book, “The Order of the Phoenix,” at least once, meaning the onus of keeping the insatiable Potter machine humming is about to shift back to Hollywood. Chronicling the erotic adventures of two Mexican teens might not seem like a job qualification for a Harry Potter movie, but hey, give Warner Brothers credit for showing some chutzpah. “Alfonso has a keen understanding of the nuances of teenage life,” says producer David Heyman. ” ‘Y Tu Mama’ is about the last moments of adolescence, and ‘Azkaban’ is about the first.” Cuaron also directed the 1995 adaptation of the children’s classic “A Little Princess,” a film that had a great many fans, including a particularly vociferous one named J. K. Rowling.
Online Mail Call: Our Readers Discuss Potter’s Politics
Presiding over the “Azkaban” set in England’s Hertfordshire countryside, the bearded, rumply-haired Cuaron cuts a entirely different figure than the all-American Columbus-and it’s not just the mariachi music blasting during a midshoot celebration. “Alfonso is much more gritty than Chris ever was,” says Watson. “He’s really into the idea that [shooting] should be fluid and natural. People can be eating an apple during a take.”
IMAGINING HOGSMEADE
“Azkaban” is a spookier story than the first two-the soul-sucking dementors, who guard Azkaban Prison, make their first appearance-and Cuaron’s design team promises that the movie’s palette will reflect the gathering darkness. For Hogsmeade, set designer Stuart Craig labored to avoid a “pretty, chocolate-box” village, creating a main street that swerves zanily. Honeydukes, the candy store, is floor-to-ceiling psychedelia, with tangles of licorice and-a Cuaron touch-Mexican skulls made of sugar. (To prevent candy jars from magically emptying between takes, the cast has been told that the goodies are lacquer-coated. They’re not.) Cuaron also reimagined the role of Professor Dumbledore after Richard Harris’s death. British actor Michael Gambon now plays the Hogwarts headmaster as an elegant old hippie.
Cuaron’s outspokenness is also new to the franchise. Does the evil wizard Voldemort still remind him of George W. Bush, as he said recently? “In combination with Saddam,” he says. “They both have selfish interests and are very much in love with power. Also, a disregard for the environment. A love for manipulating people. I read books four and five, and Fudge”-Rowling’s slippery Minister of Magic-”is similar to Tony Blair. He’s the ultimate politician. He’s in denial about many things. And everything is for the sake of his own persona, his own power. The way the Iraq thing was handled was not unlike the way Fudge handled affairs in book four.” Cuaron’s scrappiness is either refreshing or worrying, depending on your stock portfolio.
Of course, Cuaron doesn’t have full run of the joint. Columbus, who says he was “too physically exhausted” to direct the third movie, is serving as producer-and he makes no bones about the fact that he’s doing it to “protect” the Potter world he adores. Awkward as the arrangement sounds, both men insist it’s working. Mostly, Columbus advises his successor on how to handle a job he describes as running a three-ring circus. Shooting is often interrupted by kids scampering off to do schoolwork. (Under British law, child actors can work only four hours a day.) While they’re gone, Cuaron hops on his bicycle and rides to the editing room, where he readies shots for his visual-effects team. “The biggest pressure on Alfonso is delivering sequences to the effects people early enough,” Columbus says. The effects in “The Sorcerer’s Stone,” Columbus concedes, “weren’t up to snuff” because of time pressures. On the second film, he scheduled eight extra months to get them right. For “Azkaban,” Cuaron’s team has spent six months on the dementors alone.
Potter fans have grown used to a movie every Thanksgiving, but “Azkaban” will arrive in the teeth of the summer movie season on June 4, 2004. By then, the franchise could be in the midst of another creative shake-up. Radcliffe says he’ll be riding the Nimbus 2000 in the fourth movie, “The Goblet of Fire,” and it appears that his young costars, Watson and Rupert Grint, who plays Ron Weasley, will join him. Beyond that, they still have to ask Mom and Dad. “We’re optimistic,” producer Heyman says, “but it’s early.” As for Cuaron, his tour of duty in Harryland will end with “Azkaban.” Whoever inherits the franchise next-Britain’s Mike Newell (“Four Weddings and a Funeral”) is on the shortlist-will get a nice signing bonus: Rowling’s sequels have a knack for getting better.
Written by: By Carla Power and Devin Gordon
And now for some reviews and news
HOLLYWOOD (AP)Taken from msn.com -- If the weekend's top movie - "American Wedding" - glowed like a happy newlywed, then you could say the critically reviled "Gigli" stumbled like an ugly bridesmaid. The Ben Affleck-Jennifer Lopez movie "Gigli" debuted dismally following weeks of toxic buzz and near-unanimous critical revulsion. The comedy about a gangster who falls in love with a lesbian rival during a kidnapping earned $3.8 million.
"This is not a shock," said Tom Sherak, a partner in Revolution Studios, which produced "Gigli" for Sony Pictures Entertainment.
He said constant gossip and tabloid and TV coverage of Affleck and Lopez's real-life romance may have created a backlash against the picture. "I've seen a lot worse movies," Sherak said.
"Hey, is it the best movie ever made? Ehh, I don't think so. ... Other movies have gotten ravaged by critics and have opened up at least OK. It was more than that," he said.
Although Affleck and Lopez already have completed another movie together - writer-director Kevin Smith's "Jersey Girl" - the foul reception of "Gigli" may end the couple's working relationship.
"They'll continue to be big stars, and chances are they will not work together again - and they shouldn't, by the way," Sherak said. "You move on. Look, the picture cost $54 million. So everyone is going to get hurt a bit."
Meanwhile, the horseracing drama "Seabiscuit" expanded its run by 434 theaters, coming in fourth with $17.5 million, for a total of $49 million. It lost only 16 percent of its audience in its second weekend. Most movies lose about 40 percent.
Taken from msn.com
Box Office
Here are the estimated ticket sales for Friday through Sunday at North American theaters, according to Exhibitor Relations Co. Inc. Final figures will be released Monday.
1. "American Wedding," $34.3
2. "Spy Kids 3-D: Game Over," $20.1 million
3. "Pirates of the Caribbean: The Curse of the Black Pearl," $19.1 million. (YAY)
4. "Seabiscuit," $17.5 million.
5. "Bad Boys II," $12.7 million.
6. "Lara Croft: Tomb raider - The Cradle of Life," $11.3 million.
7. (tie) "Finding Nemo," $3.8 million.
7. (tie) "Gigli," $3.8 million.
9. "The League of Extraordinary Gentlemen," $3.2 million.
10. "Terminator 3: Rise of the Machines," $2.9 million.
Gigli review from movies.yahoo.com
This misbegotten mess is less a movie than a string of over-the-top audition monologues, those random set-pieces designed to show off an actor's facility with language and attitude. Those can be entertaining in their own way, but they do not have anything to do with creating a character or telling a story, just two of the many movie-making essentials that are missing in "Gigli." Ben Affleck plays Larry Gigli (pronounced to rhyme with "really"), a small-time enforcer for a small-time hood named Louis. Larry's latest assignment is to kidnap a retarded young man named Brian (Justin Bartha) to help Louis and his colleagues apply some pressure to Brian's brother. So Larry picks up Brian and brings him back to his apartment.
A beautiful woman (Jennifer Lopez) who says her name is Ricki tells Larry that she has also been hired by Louis to make sure he does not mess up the job. Larry's macho ego is affronted, but he is attracted to Ricki, even after she tells him she is gay.
A lot of bickering and bantering later, much of it involving mind-numbing debates over who is the boss and straight vs. gay sex, plus encounters with the mother of one and the ex-lover of the other, Larry and Ricki have to decide whether they are willing to hurt or kill Brian and that leads them to think differently about themselves and each other.
The movie has the traditional odd couple structure -- friction, the chance to prove themselves to one another, mutual epiphinies, and finally, respect and affection. But it never finds any tone or direction or believable connection between the characters.
Larry is a one-dimensional dim but macho guy. Ricki is a one-dimensional fantasy figure. Their bickering has no spark, and the evolution of their relationship is not grounded in any way because they are not really characters, just attributes and attitude, with no internal consistency. Larry is devoted to his mother in one scene, but seems to have no thought about abandoning her in another.
The narrative is choppy. It was probably recut following test screenings, but the effect is to make the events unconnected to each other, without any direction or momentum. Let me also point out that in addition to the overdone odd couple plot device, the movie includes several elements from the "should never be in another movie" list, including a vocabulary-building hood and a noble disabled person whose disability shifts according to the requirements of each scene and who transforms the lives of the supposedly normal people around him.
Meanwhile, somewhere in there Christopher Walken (as a cop) and Al Pacino (as a crime boss) drop by for the showy audition-monologue-style scenes that have some verve but add nothing to the plot, tone, or themes of the movie. So does Lainie Kazan, in yet another ethnic earth-mother role, (we really did not need to see her thong underwear -- another thing that should be on the "never in another movie list"). Indeed, there really is nothing that could be called plot, tone, or theme in this movie. For a brief, mad, moment I had a flicker of a thought that the mundane inanity of the sordid and petty imperatives imposed on Larry and Ricki might be some Samuel Beckett-style commentary on the existential void. Then I realized that watching the movie put me closer to the existential void than they ever were, and that Godot would arrive long before this movie went anywhere.
It's not the worst movie ever. It's not even the worst movie of the year. And it's not as bad as the Jen/Ben backlash want it to be. But it is not a good movie, and it is a terrible waste of talent.
Parents should know that this movie has graphic violence, non-stop profanity, and extremely explicit sexual references and situations. A character attempts suicide and then disappears from the story. In a better movie, the fact that the most capable and intelligent character is a bi-sexual Hispanic woman would be more worthwhile. Bartha's portrayal of Brian is probably the most natural and authentic of the movie, but the character of the retarded man is the stereotypical noble disabled person and really no more than a prop for the other characters to react to.
Families who see this movie should talk about why Brian made Larry and Ricki feel differently about their choice of careers. What did it mean when Ricki finally told Larry her real name? What do you think of Sun Tzu's view that in a a conflict, "angry is a statistically stupid move?" Have you ever used anger to mask sadness? What do you think about the advice to do the thing you're most afraid of?
Families who like this movie will like director Martin Brest's much better odd couple movie Midnight Run, starring Robert de Niro and Charles Grodin as a bounty hunter and his bail-jumping captive. They might also enjoy Prizzi's Honor, about another odd-couple romance of two professional hitmen (I guess a hit-man and a hit-woman) and the quirky Welcome to Collinwood, about a ragtag group of small-time crooks with the dream of just one big-time heist. Rain Man, referred to in this movie, is an Oscar-winning story about a man who meets up with his autistic brother. And in Chasing Amy (for the most mature audiences only), Ben Affleck again plays a heterosexual man in love with a gay woman.
American Wedding review taken again from movies.yahoo.com Okay, I admit it -- I laughed. A lot. Even more surprising, I smiled.
I was even a little sorry that this is the last of the American Pie trilogy.
For anyone who has not been to a movie in a few years, let me remind you that the humor of this movie as raunchy as it gets, and then some. There is not a bodily function or a sexual practice that is not made fun of in some excruciatingly humiliating way in these movies. But while that is part of their appeal to young audiences, for whom it is a reassuring release to laugh at these uncomfortable topics, that is not the reason for their success. Many, many other films made the mistake of thinking that gross-out humor was enough. What makes these movies different is that at their heart is, well, heart. Once again, as in the first two movies, there is a lot of talk about sex and a lot of attempts to have sex, but the sex that actually occurs is almost entirely respectful, monogamous, and really quite sweet. And once again the best part is Eugene Levy as the least hip (but most loving) father in the world.
In the original movie, Jim (Jason Biggs) and his friends make a commitment to have sex by graduation. He tries to get together with a beautiful exchange student named Nadia (Shannon Elizabeth), he ends up with band camp nerd Michelle (Alyson Hannigan), who turns out to be surprisingly ardent and adventuresome. In the second, they take a beach house for the summer with plans to have a lot of sex in it. Jim again tries to get together with Nadia, but again ends up with Michelle, originally so that he can learn how to be a better lover, but ultimately because he realizes that he loves her.
In this installment, they have graduated from college and Jim, who continues to be a magnet for humiliation, proposes to Michelle. All of the preparations for the wedding, from finding the perfect dress to meeting the new in-laws, to the bachelor party to the big day, provide opportunities for wild adventures that include more conventional set-ups for humor like a dance-off in a gay bar and a personality switch as the irrepressible id Stifler pretends to be a sweet, polite, preppy and philosopher Finch pretends to be an obnoxious bad boy. But mostly it is just a series of humiliating escapades as the straight-laced in-laws walk in on what appears to be Jim having sex with another man and some dogs, a bachelor party that involves strippers, a guy in bondage, and some very revealing leather pants, a character unexpectedly ends up having sex with an elderly lady, and yet another dessert is destroyed by Jim. As in all classic sex farces, the outrageous situations are really a morality tale -- the good are rewarded and the naughty are punished.
Parents should know that this is an exuberantly outrageous movie with humor that is good-hearted but extremely explicit. There are jokes about every body part and function and about every kind of sexual practice, heterosexual and homosexual, including oral sex, mild S&M, and the use of sex toys. The language is extremely strong, with non-stop swearwords and exceptionally explicit sexual references. A character moons the others. A character has sex with someone thinking it is someone else. Stifler once again ingests a substance for gross-out effect, this time not even human. There is social drinking. The issue of religious intermarriage is raised when one family member objects, but everyone else is completely supportive. As in the previous movies, the female characters are exceptionally honest, open, and in charge of their sexuality for movies directed at this age group (or any age group).
Families who see this movie should talk about which gender or generation in this movie understands the other one best. And they should talk about Jim's supportive father, and possible ways he might improve the way he shows his support. Families might also want to talk about the importance of selecting sexual partners with whom they can share truly intimate moments.
Families who enjoy this movie will also enjoy American Pie and American Pie 2
(elvenlegolas's note: I think this reviewer is family oriented seeing as her title is "Mom's Movie Review". Sorry about that folks)
Preview: The World of Tomorrow
Stats
Release date: May 14th, 2004 (wide)
Cast: Jude Law (Captani Joseph Sullivan, AKA Sky Captain), Gwyneth Paltrow (Polly Perkins), Angelina Jolie, Casey Affleck (Dex), Bai Ling; other cast not announced yet.
Director: Kerry Conran (feature film debut)
What's it about?:This science fiction adventure set in the 1930s starts as New York City reporter Polly Perkins (Paltrow) starts to investigate why so many famous scientists are starting to be reported missing. Soon, she starts to get clues, as strange flying machines and giant robots threaten the city. Luckily, her old flame, aviator Captain Joseph Sullivan (Law), AKA Sky Captain, is there to battle the bad guys with his friends, the Flying Legion, in his Warhawk P-40. Soon, Polly is flying away with Sky Captain to Nepal to find a crazy scientist, Dr. Totenkopf, who apparently wants to destroy the world...
Genre: Action, Eye Candy, Historical, Science Fiction, Superhero, Thriller
Taken from movies.yahoo.com