Okay, I went to IRON MAN last night because of all the hype and the need to be part of the conversation about it. And the hope (somewhat dashed) of actually seeing a good superhero movie. (My two cents are in the Iron Man thread on the Sci-fi board.) There were trailers for THE DARK KNIGHT, THE INCREDIBLE HULK, INDIANA JONES AND THE KINGDOM OF THE CRYSTAL SKULL and THE HAPPENING. And SPEED RACER’s opening soon. There must be some other looming blockbusters that haven’t been endlessly hyped yet that aren’t on my radar. That’s a lot of event movies in a short amount of time.

Granted, I skipped theatrical trips to a couple of the last waves of event movies: SUPERMAN RETURNS, X-MEN: THE LAST STAND, FANTASTIC FOUR: RISE OF THE SILVER SURFER, SPIDERMAN 3, PIRATES OF THE CARIBBEAN 3, various Pixar movies, etc., although I have been taping them off cable.

This new batch has me interested, though. I actually want to see them on the big screen. But there are just too many spaced too close together. SPEED RACER has priority because it’s the first live-action Hollywood film to be based on Japanese animation, soon to be followed by others. I’m curious about INDIANA JONES because of its plot elements involving phenomena I’m already interested in--the famous crystal skull itself and Roswell, NM. THE DARK KNIGHT? Well, the new, expanded trailer doesn’t look promising at all (Aaron Eckhart's Harvey Dent seems to be the main character, and not a terribly interesting one at that), but I figure I still ought to see it.

I think I’ll skip THE INCREDIBLE HULK because it looks like it has the exact same plot as IRON MAN. Why does Marvel release two such similar comic book movies so close to each other? I predict the Hulk one will flop.

And I think I’ll skip THE HAPPENING. All those loud pounding notes in the trailer played hell with my nervous system. I don’t want to reward them for that.

Even so, it still means I’ll miss quite a few smaller movies of interest--I just can't go to the movies that often. I’d be perfectly happy if there were more movies like THE BANK JOB, the best genre movie I’ve seen in a long time. Movie fans do not live by blockbusters alone.

When I was a kid we were lucky to get one James Bond movie every one or two years. Or one Ray Harryhausen movie every couple of years. Or a World War II spectacle like THE LONGEST DAY or PATTON. There were plenty of mid-range genre movies like comedies, westerns, Hammer horror, and lower-budgeted sci-fi to keep us happy between event movies. We weren't greedy.

When there are so many event movies crowded into one space, they're no longer events, just business as usual.

Some are bound to be non-events, the fate I predict for the overlong and overdone SPEED RACER, which should have been an over-and-out 90 minutes, but drags on for 135, with a candy-colored, untouched-by-human-hands look that quickly grates and dull speechifying about the evils of all-controlling corporations. Genuine excitement is minimal. It only sparks, frankly, with the closing-credits version of the theme song.

SPEED RACER is 135 min.? Oy. Yeah, that just sounds way too long. SPEED RACER was never anything more then simple kids fare,imo. The design of the film looks pretty trippy, but other then race car loving small boys, who seem really interested, every other age group that I've heard comment on the advertising just hasn't seemed to connect to it at all.


As for all of these event movies... Oh, this has has been going on for years, now. I remember some years when two or three blockbuster films were released during the same weekend. It doesn't seem to be quite that insane, anymore.

I think THE INCREDIBLE HULK is going to surprise people. They really seem to have fixed what went wrong with the first film, which I enjoyed but found to have issues in th

“This new batch has me interested, though. I actually want to see them on the big screen. But there are just too many spaced too close together.”

I remember that even when I was a kid in the 80s. I even had the time to seen them and it would still be too much. I remember 1989 being the year was partially crowded. That was the year of BATMAN, GHOSTBUSTERS II, LICENSED TO DRIVE and INDIANA JONES AND THE LAST CRUSADE. Now that I look back, all of those movies are lousy. Actually I knew that back then as well. The surprise that year was LETHAL WEAPON II. However the two that I really wanted to see was LICENSED TO KILL and THE RETURN OF THE MUSKETEERS. The Bond opus got lost in shuffle that year and MUSKETEERS was withdrawn before it was released.



“When there are so many event movies crowded into one space, they're no longer events, just business as usual.”

Yeah that seems right. Movies are released according to the season, time of year, or a specific calendar date. It’s been that way for sometime now. Surprises are more likely to be found in mid spring to get a jump on the summer wave. There is also late summer and early autumn to contend for the post summer blues and pre Oscar paganism. The later part being a time of year when a good movie might thrive from word of mouth. For example you’re more likely to find a western (3:10 TO YUMA or OPEN RANGE) playing in Movie Theater in late August than any other time of year. What reeks about that is that even the “surprises” are scheduled. It kind of takes the surprise out of it. Now if we had some real showmanship that it would be more akin to a tradition. Alas there is no showmanship. Being herded like cattle after a blockbuster is not my idea of an “event movie”. Some of these ushers act as if they are policeman the way they direct human traffic.

The absolute worst time of the year for the movies must be Christmas. It is vulgar how movies are pimped out for a statue. It’s just awful.

The guys handling the SPEED RACER screening kept saying, "It's two hours, and 15 minutes more only if you stay through the credits." It didn't soften the blow. :) (Taking it down a notch, it's 125, if you leave after the theme song rendition. And you can--no final surprises with this one.)

For me, the only filmic "events" in recent years have been the RINGS pictures and the KING KONG remake. And GLADIATIOR, and some of the historic pictures that followed in its wake, like MASTER AND COMMANDER. The rest have just been movies, turned out on schedules that haven't changed much since the 80s--superhero movies are the prime sausage these days.

You mean they're using the Supremes theme again? :P

THANK YOU, PATRICK!

No one else I saw the trailer with knew about the Supremes song and couldn't understand why it would be so funny if they'd scored it to the film's imagery for the trailer! It looks like such a dour film and marrying it to that catchy, upbeat "the ha-ppe-ning!" refrain would be pretty damn hilarious. Some YouTuber ought to make this a project.

LORD OF THE RINGS and STAR WARS were definitely event movies, complete with turning out in costume and other wonderful fan events. A lot of fun, and why I love going to these films.



THE HAPPENING holds very little interest for me, as I think Shyamalan's 15 minutes are up, based on his last two films. Hey, I'm willing to be surprised, but I'm not seeing it here.

Ha - I've always really liked that Supremes tune, too, maybe because it hasn't been played to death like most of their other hits. I just heard it again last week and I said to myself, "This song has dated really well". I've never seen the 1967 film of the same name featuring the song as it's never been released on homevideo. Maybe this "remake' :D will inspire Columbia or whoever owns it to finally put it out.

I hadn't even heard of this new Shyamalan-Wahlberg "THE HAPPENING" until you guys mentioned it here. I just watched the trailer and those audio zinger sounds are pretty annoying.

Race, don't walk, to see Speed Racer.

Don't let SPEED RACER pass you by?

"Speeding in and out of theaters this May"

Re. Bob's Variety link: These numbers astound me more and more all the time. IRON MAN is at $177 million domestic gross already. That's insanity. No movie is that good. How do the PR departments at these studios manage to hypnotize so many people like this?

They put is in a big room and gave us some sweet, sugary drink. The seat was comfortable. Then they projected flickering light patterns onto a screen. These lights were colorful and had sounds and dialogue attached that were engaging, funny and exciting.

That's how it went down.

Now I gotta go see SPEED RACER and assasinate a presidential candidate after the experience.....

Wait, are you talking about those big, dark rooms with all the seats and the huge whiteboard at the front? Holy crap. I thought they were for business conventions and such.

But, seriously, that doesn't explain it. You're talking about what happens after they get to the theater and buy their ticket, and I have no doubt, from what I've heard, that it was a pleasant experience for most who did so. I'm just amazed that so many people across the country can all be convinced to go out and buy a ticket to this one movie during this one particular brief stretch of time. I still like to quote something I read back in '93 that said 1 out of every 25 Americans bought a ticket to JURASSIC PARK during its first three days in theaters.

I sometimes feel that, with the theoretical choices we have in media and entertainment rapidly increasing by orders of magnitude, most people are becoming ever more dependent on corporate PR departments to cut through the noise and just choose for them. Hardly original, and maybe just me talking out of my patootie. But that's what we're here for, ain't it?

Patootie Talk - with Todd Harbour was the original name of this site. Little-known fact.

I knew that.

I just came across a (spoilerish) early review for The Happening, and, unfortunately, it's pretty much a "zero stars" review. I actually thought that this might be something of a comeback film for Shyamalan, but if this review is even halfway accurate, it seems doubtful. The reviewer even compares it to Neil LaBute's Wicker Man remake.

http://www.collider.com/entertainment/revi...aid/7903/tcid/1