This May follows the familiar formula. There's a major Marvel movie, some comedies which looks promising, a franchise that's liked more worldwide these days than domestically, and some lower-tier franchise films. The limited release market looks pretty weak. All in all, it looks like a typical, decent May.
2017
Jan | Feb | Mar | Apr
2016
Jan | Feb | Mar | Apr | May | June | Jul | Aug | Sep | Oct | Nov | Dec
2015
Jan | Feb | Mar | Apr
2016
Jan | Feb | Mar | Apr | May | June | Jul | Aug | Sep | Oct | Nov | Dec
2015
2014
2013
5/5
Star-Lord and company are back, this time, with a baby Groot.
Working For It: So, take everything you liked about the first movie (Chris Pratt, Zoe Saldana, Dav Bautista, Vin Diesel and Bradley Cooper's voices, Karen Gillan, Michael Rooker) and add Sylvester Stallone, Kurt Russell, and Elizabeth Debicki*. Same writer/director too. There's no reason to expect Marvel's accidental hit's follow-up to be a disappointment.
Working Against It: Other than it being something about Peter Quill's dad, I couldn't tell you a single thing about this movie. Some Marvel movies advertise heavy on the story (Iron Man 3, Civil War). Others are like, "Hey, here's a character or ten that you like. Go see this" (Avengers, Dr. Strange, Guardians vol. 1). There's no clear quality indicator one way or the other.
Verdict: The first movie was too much fun to justify missing this one.
*I've seen virtually all of Debicki's movies without meaning to. Everest, The Man From UNCLE, The Great Gatsby. I guess I'm a fan by accident.
Elle Fanning is a trans-teen, with an supportive mother (Naomi Watts), a lesbian grandmother (Susan Sarandon) who doesn't understand her, and a father who doesn't accept her.
Working For It: I like Elle Fanning, Naomi Watts, and Susan Sarandon. The topic seems interesting.
Working Against It: I don't know the director well. I've noted at least one delay in release and title change (to make it more about the three women than just Fanning). That amount of repositioning is a little worrisome.
Verdict: I get a feeling that this is going to be a case of liking what the movie is doing more than liking the movie itself.
Two couples (two brothers and their wives) have a dinner at a fancy restaurant and try to figure out if they should cover up a crime committed by their sons.
Working For It: That's my best understanding of the plot at least. The trailer is almost annoyingly cryptic. The central quartet (Richard Gere, Laura Linney, Steve Coogan, Rebecca Hall) make up one of those prestige-y casts that aren't as credentialed as you think* but still can get the job done. Writer/director Oren Moverman has made or written several films that I haven't seen but need to (Rampart, The Messenger, I'm Not There).
Working Against It: The trailer is too bombastic with the praise and nothing I'm seeing backs it up. It could be good or it could be raising higher stakes than it can deliver. It's hard to say.
Verdict: I'm very happy to take a wait and see stance on this.
*Gere and Hall have some Golden Globe love but never sniffed an Oscar. Coogan has some non-acting Oscar love. Only Linney has an Oscar nomination for acting (3, in fact) but no wins. Gere is the only one who has ever led a big hit and those days were a long time ago. They are like the Carnage B-Team.
A husband and wife who are both having affairs start to cheat on their lovers on the side when they rekindle the romance in their long-time dispassionate marriage.
Working For It: This was no doubt sold with a pitch like "what if a husband cheated on his mistress with his wife?". It's a clever enough twist on a familiar formula. Debra Winger and Tracy Letts are up to the task as the leads.
Working Against It: I'm sorry to use this so much as "working against", but I am unfamiliar with the writer/director. That's a slight wildcard. It's a shame there's not a way to pitch this movie without giving away so much of the plot. I feel like this movie is going to be a downer by the end, but I'm not sure I'd prefer a happy ending either. I just don't see a way for this story to resolve in a way that would satisfy me.
Verdict: I may get worn down by the number of times I've seen the trailer in theaters. More than likely, I'll wait on this one.
5/12
King Arthur gets the Guy Ritchie treatment.
Working For It: Remember Sherlock Holmes back in 2009? I thought it was a nice attempt by Guy Ritchie to mainstream what he does. Not perfect. Not a failure either. It looks like he's doing it to King Arthur as well. I'm not against the idea. Charlie Hunnam is a good Ritchie-type protagonist. Jude Law should be used as the villain in things more often, because he puts on the right demeanor for it.
Working Against It: King Arthur is a tough nut to crack. It exists in this weird space between truth and fiction, legend and cannon. The many texts collected of Arthurian legend don't match up with each other, although some stories are known better than others. The setting is magical and mystical but also based in the real world. Filmmakers have always struggled with deciding which way to go. I'm not convinced that Ritchie has cracked the code either.
Verdict: Despite my proclivity toward big action movies, like Warcraft this looks like it will be underwhelming enough in the box office to justify skipping it.
A graffiti artist is caught between his lowrider-loving father and ex-felon brother's feud.
Working For It: As much as I like the standard L.A. stories, it's nice whenever a filmmaker explores one of the lesser covered sides of the city. It's an eclectic cast, featuring Demian Bichir, Melissa Benoist, Eva Longoria, Tony Revolori, and several people I don't know as well.
Working Against It: Since I doubt I'm ever going to see this movie, I'm going to go on a small rant now. In the trailer, there's a part where the lead character almost gets himself and his girlfriend arrested because he has the urge to graffiti a wall with. The girlfriend pleads that an arrest could really negatively impact her future. He's willing to risk it because the art is calling to him or something. That's the kind of thing that can turn me off from a movie fast. I've never understood the whole "risking yourself and others for your art by breaking the law because it's more convenient in that situation". I guess I don't get graffiti. It looks cool when done well. Is it worth getting arrested for? I don't know. I guess I'm just boring.
Verdict: I don't get graffiti. I don't get lowriders (or the love of cars in general). The appeal of this film isn't high.
Goldie Hawn and Amy Schumer are a mother-daughter duo kidnapped while on a tropic vacation.
Working For It: Hawn hasn't been used in a proper comedy in years, so people forget how much of a pro she is. Schumer knows her schtick and does it well. Writer Kate Dippold's most recent credits are Ghostbusters, The Heat, and Parks & Rec, so no concerns there. I really like or at least am fond of director Jonathan Levine's last few movies (The Night Before, Warm Bodies, 50/50). The plot seems loose enough to offer a ton a jokes. There's not much working against it, really.
Working Against It: But, why have a Working Against It section if I'm not going to use it? There's some key questions to those pluses listed above. Does Goldie Hawn still have it? Does Amy Schumer work as well delivering material she didn't write? Should I be worried that the only project of Dippold's that I listed in which she received sole credit was worst one: The Heat? These probably aren't real concerns, but that's the counter-narrative available.
Verdict: I'm not as excited for this as I feel like I should be. I assume I'll see it. I may not and I won't have a good reason.
Diane Lane is the wife of a Hollywood producer who drives through Paris with one of his business associates as a guide.
Working For It: In other words, it's Before Sunrise in a car and older people and probably not about those two falling in love. So, it's basically not Before Sunrise except for France. Diane Lane is generally charming and I'm sure the French landscape will be pretty.
Working Against It: This is in that I'll See You in My Dreams/Eat, Pray, Love/Under the Tuscan Sun ilk of movies that I have nothing against but am also not drawn to. This is the debut feature for director Eleanor Coppola, the 81 year old wife of Francis Ford Coppola. I don't know what to do with that information.
Verdict: I already cannot tell this apart from Under the Tuscan Sun and Nights in Rodanthe.
Two American soldiers in a remote desert region are pinned down by an enemy sniper.
Working For It: The two soldiers are Aaron Taylor Johnson and John Cena, which is an interesting combination, especially because Cena's role doesn't appear to rely on his physicality at all. I'm a sucker for movie with a "bottle-episode" premise like this. It's from the director of Edge of Tomorrow, The Bourne Identity, and The O.C. pilot, which is a decent set of credentials for a project like this.
Working Against It: However, the writer also works for Iron Fist, which is less encouraging. It's unfortunate that this is showing up around the same time as Mine, which looks much better than The Wall. Mine is about limited resources. The Wall is more like Saw, trying to beat a villain who has masterminded the situation. Both can be very good, but The Wall appears to have a lot more mustache twirling, which I don't care for as much.
Verdict: Let's seek out Mine first, then make a judgment on seeing this.
5/19
A new spaceship crew discovers the aliens.
Working For It: I'm not sure how this differs all that much from previous Alien movies, for better or worse. I like Katherine Waterston in the lead role. I'm going to convince myself that James Franco and Danny McBride doesn't make this a Pineapple Express reunion. I didn't dislike Prometheus the way other people did, so Ridley Scott being back as the director or seeing people like Michael Fassbender or Noomi Rapace in this case doesn't alarm me.
Working Against It: I do wonder what the point of this movie is. Just because you can make another Alien movie doesn't been you have to.
Verdict: I mean, sure. Why not?
The wimpy kid family goes on a road trip and PG-rated hijinks ensue.
Working For It: It's a maleable franchise that doesn't need to do much to reach its goals.
Working Against It: I know that Clueless was 22 years ago and Alicia Silverstone is 40. I'm not ready to see her in the mom role in a movie, not like this.
Verdict: You know, there's just so many movies in the series that I'd have to get caught up on.
Everything, Everything
A sick teenage girl who can't leave the house falls in love with the boy across the street.
Working For It: It's a straightforward story. It's based on a novel that was probably a New York Times Best seller. I'm pretty sure I know where the story is going. There's worse templates out there it could be following.
Working Against It: The young cast is pretty green. This is unfortunately a lower-concept version of The Space Between Us, which came out earlier in the year. With fewer genre contrivances to deal with, Everything, Everything will probably be more effective. I'm not sure I believe it's climbing to the heights of "decent" or "good" though.
Verdict: I don't think this was designed with me in mind and I'm OK with that.
5/26
The overzealous lifeguards of the Baywatch crew try to stop a local crime plot while training the hotshot new recruit.
Working For It: You already know if you want to see this. In case you somehow don't, let me help. This is 21 Jump Street on a beach with Dwayne Johnson and Zac Efron. Both have been putting in overtime to hone their comedic chops (Central Intelligence, Mike and Dave Need Wedding Dates, Neighbors) and they give the roles everything they've got. I'm hoping this will be a chance for Alexandra Daddario to actually get to do something in a movie. Priyanka Chopra looks like she's having fun as the villain. The director has made several mediocre to good movies (Identity Thief, Horrible Bosses, Four Christmases) and worked on a lot of great TV shows (Community, Parks & Rec, The Office, The Jim Gaffigan Show, etc.). Most screenplays goes through numerous people's pens whether its listed in the credits or not, so I won't look at the six names attached to this script as a warning sign.
Working Against It: As much as I respect Johnson and Efron's effort, I'm not convinced either of them can work without a more natural comedian (Kevin Hart, Adam Devine, Seth Rogen in the examples I previously listed) paired with him. In almost every way, this looks like off-brand 21 Jump Street, so it becomes a question of how much is lost in translation.
Verdict: This is probably plenty enjoyable enough to see.
Jack Sparrow is being hunted by Spanish pirate hunter who wants revenge.
Working For It: The Pirates franchise has been about chasing that first high for 14 years now. That's because that first high was so damn good. I keep waiting to see if Johnny Depp can "turn it on" again like he did in Curse of the Black Pearl. They seem to be on the right track, using Brenton Thwaites (Oculus, The Giver) and Kaya Scodelario (The Maze Runner) as Will and Elizabeth stand-ins*. Bringing in Javier Bardem as the villain could be a lot of fun. Since the films are box office platinum worldwide, Disney is putting in full effort on this, so it's sure to be a big production worth seeing on the big screen.
Working Against It: Depp hasn't put a full effort into anything in a while. An underappreciated fact about Curse of the Black Pearl is that Depp took over the movie from what could've been a supporting role. There was conceivably a story in place without him and he made it much better. Since then, the movies have been written around him and haven't worked as well. It's been six years since the last movie, which might be enough time to reinvigorate the franchise. Time away can build up excitement on both sides (audience and production). More than likely, this will be another On Stranger Tides: pretty decent yet unneeded.
Verdict: What better way is there to spend a Memorial day weekend?
*Orlando Bloom and Kiera Knightley are in the credits on IMDB. Their absence in the marketing suggests to me that it will be only a cameo or minor role.
Sean Bean is a drone pilot who is gets held hostage in his home by the victim of one of his air strikes.
Working For It: It's vaguely topical. I like the fact that it's in a fairly confined space. This could be a very taut thriller.
Working Against It: I feel like any points the movie gets for commentary on the problem with drones are negated by making this yet another movie about an Arab terrorist. Besides, there's already a great movie about a drone strike that no one saw called Eye in the Sky.
Verdict: Eh, no.
No comments:
Post a Comment