Was August a disappointment? In the box office,
absolutely. It hit numbers that were the lowest in a decade or two, not
adjusted for inflation. It's the first time in many years that no film grossed
$100 million in the month. It's hard to find anything that could be considered
a box office success released in the last month. But, the movies weren't bad. I
took advantage of the expansion market and found some decent movies. September
is going to be a slight rebound, especially as Oscar hopefuls and a couple
blockbusters try to get in on the early fall market toward the end of the
month. Mostly though, September's going to be busy. There were a tome of movies
the go through this month, especially limited releases. Just getting through
all the trailers set me back a couple days more than normal. It doesn't look
like I'll be struggling to find something any week, which is all I care about.
2017
Jan | Feb | Mar | Apr | May | June | July | Aug
2016
Jan | Feb | Mar | Apr | May | June | Jul | Aug | Sep | Oct | Nov | Dec
2015
Jan | Feb | Mar | Apr | May | June | July | Aug
2016
Jan | Feb | Mar | Apr | May | June | Jul | Aug | Sep | Oct | Nov | Dec
2015
2014
2013
9/1
This again? This is at least the third time I've
thought this movie was going to come out. For the love of god, can they just
release it already? Tom Stoppard movie. Excellent cast. 17th century Amsterdam
setting. I want to see it.
My Position: Please release this movie. I want to
see it.
A home invasion is committed by a bunch of people
wearing jackal masks. They want your baby.
Working For It: This is totally not the same as You'reNext...that is, unless you liked You're Next, in which case, it's
exactly the same. Home invasion movies aren't my favorite kind of scary movie,
but I do like them. It seems like the trailer is hiding something, which could
be fun.
Working Against It: But really, this looks a little
too much like You're Next, which had a much more notable creative team
behind it . This is from the director of some of the later Saw films.
Even though I heard that the Saw films get better toward the end, they
are still Saw films, and I didn't enjoy the first four.
My Position: I'm going to keep an eye on this,
because I'm always looking for good horror with a little production value. This
could fit the bill.
Two women fight over the same guy while on a road
trip.
Working For It: How do you make Alexandra Daddario
look like less than a supermodel? That's easy, right? You cast her next to a
supermodel. In this case, Kate Upton. Except that doesn't work. Now it just
looks like two supermodels were cast for a movie. I like Daddario. I like
Upton. I like that they both want to make it in comedies. I don't have enough
evidence they they can carry this kind of screwball comedy though. They are
surrounded by funny people like Matt Jones, Kal Penn, Molly Shannon, and Rob
Corddry. That's encouraging.
Working Against It: This is directed by William H.
Macy, who has directed before, but not anything like this. This movie is the
kind of broad comedy that sinks or swims based on the leads. Nothing I've seen
these leads in makes me believe they can pull it off.
My Position: I'm curious enough about Macy as a
director, the fact the it's written by a couple It's Always Sunny alums,
and if Upton in particular has picked up any comedic timing, that I'll probably
track this down eventually.
Americans tourists visiting Japan visit a mysterious
temple and bad stuff happens.
Working For It: It's comical how immediately a V/H/S
connection will make me give a horror movie a chance. Simon Barrett in
particular is a name to follow. He wrote segments for the first two V/H/S
movies as well as You're Next, The Guest, and Blair Witch.
He wrote the screenplay for Temple, so I'll track it down eventually.
Working Against It: A lot of horror movies have
casts that are pretty anonymous, so I can't hold that against this. This is a
first time director. Before this he was the director of photography on a lot of
movies not known for their cinematography. Cinematographers have mixed results
as directors.
My Position: I'll definitely see this at some point,
but I rarely race to see horror movies in theaters. Too much quality variance.
9/8
Several people try to rescue people stuck in one of
the elevators in the World Trade Center on 9/11.
Working For It: Charlie Sheen is a Golden
Globe winner and Whoopi Goldberg is an Oscar winner.
Working Against It: When it comes to being "too
soon" for something, there's phases for it. It's not too soon to be making
9/11 movies. There have been several over the years already, like the fantastic
United 93. It's not too soon for harrowing recreations of the events.
It's not too soon for films about the fallout of 9/11, like Extremely Loudand Incredibly Close or Reign Over Me. It might be too soon for an
outright thriller though. Or, if I'm abandoning the "too soon"
argument, I don't like that what looks like a mediocre action movie is trying
to milk unearned emotion out of the 9/11 attacks.
My Position: The movie feels a little icky, kind of
like I'm Not Ashamed.
A single mother invites three 20-something men to
live with her, her kids, and her mother for a while, but, like, not in a
"sex party" kind of way.
Working For It: The single mom is played by Resse
Witherspoon, so that alone is almost enough to convince me to see it. I also
like Lake Bell, Michael Sheen, Candice Bergen, and Reid Scott well enough. This
sounds like a benign enough pleasant comedy.
Working Against It: This looks frighteningly similar
to a Nancy Meyer movie (It's Complicated, The Intern, TheHoliday, Something's Gotta Give) and there's a reason for that. This
is the first film written and directed by Nancy Meyer's daughter. That's going
to be a big selling point for some. I'm not as enamored with those films.
My Position: I don't know what to do with comedies
that aren't going for laughs. I'm sure the movie will be perfectly harmless
which is both a plus and a minus.
You know the drill. Scary clown. Lives under a town.
Terrified town.
Working For It: Scary clown. Jump scares. It's from
the director of Mama, which was an effective enough horror movie from a
major studio a couple years ago.
Working Against It: For one, I'm pretty sure the
idea and memory of It is scarier than it is in execution. I'm not fond
of jump scare horror. I also have no idea what to make of the writing team.
There's three credited writers. One only has a couple shorts to his name.
Another is behind the Conjuring spin-off movies (Annabelle and The
Nun). The third is Cary Fukanaga, who is best known as the director of the
first season of True Detective and Beasts of No Nation. That's an
odd mix.
My Position: Stephen King adaptations are a mixed
bag. The last one that I saw and liked was 1408, which was a decade ago.
I'm interested enough to probably see this, but it's by no means a lock.
J.D. Sallinger biopic about the writing of Catch
in the Rye.
Working For It: I'm surprised there haven't been
more films about Salliger released since his death in 2010. This looks like a
respectable effort though. Nicholas Hoult is playing Sallinger. The cast also
includes Zoey Deutch, Kevin Spacey, Sarah Paulson, and Victor Garber. Danny
Strong is already a prolific screenwriter and this will be his feature film
directorial debut as well. I don't think he'll be bad at it.
Working Against It: I can't tell if the movie is
being made using the "Oscar bait" formula from 1992 or if that's just
how the trailer is cut. All the biopic cliche's are there. And, how many movies
have successfully made a story about writing a book look interesting? It's very
difficult to pull off.
My Position: I guess, before we start getting the
smaller movies about individual chapters of Salliger's life, we have to get a
couple broad biopics out of the way. There's a better than 0 chance I'll track
this down eventually.
A documentary about big game hunters and the
arguments for and against it.
Working For It: The film appears to be tackling both
sides of the issue rather than just going for the easy "killing animals is
bad" argument. I'm not sure it'll convince me that big game hunting is
great, but I appreciate any documentary that's willing to look into the less
popular questions.
Working Against It: There's going to be a lot of
scenes of people posing with dead animals, and that's a little too macabre for
my taste.
My Position: This isn't one that I will ever
consciously track down, but if it ends up on a Netflix list down the road, I'll
hit play, at least for a while.
9/15
A blind woman gets her sight back and adjusts to her
"new life".
Working For It: It's from Marc Forster, who directed
my beloved Stranger Than Fiction. The core cast includes Yvonne
Strahovski, Blake Lively, and Jason Clarke, who I like to varying degrees.
Working Against It: The trailer I've tracked down
for it doesn't say much about what the movie is about, just the inciting event.
I can't even say if this is more of a drama or a thriller. It could be a comedy
for all I know. And, as much as I love Marc Forster for Stranger Than
Fiction (and, I suppose Finding Neverland), I'm not crazy about his
more recent films like Quantum of Solace and World War Z.
My Position: I need to have a much clearer picture
about what this movie even is.
A man trains to become a CIA counterterrorism agent
after his girlfriend is killed in a terrorist attack.
Working For It: For an action movie, it's a solid
cast. Dylan O'Brien (The Maze Runner) is the lead. Michael Keaton is his
mentor. Taylor Kitsch is Keaton's former protege who went rogue and is now a
super villain. Sanaa Lathan some sort of higher up in the CIA as well. It looks
like it will be exactly what it promises to be and nothing more.
Working Against It: Even the name is generic. And
not the generic kind of name that actually makes it kind of interesting, like TheAccountant. No, this is like it came out of a Steven Seagal movie name
generator.
My Position: Short of a John Wick-ian critical
response, I see no reason to ever track this down.
A couple's peaceful like is disrupted when
mysterious visitors arrive.
Working For It: I don't know much about the actual
plot. The selling point is Jennifer Lawrence, Javier Bardem, Ed Harris,
Michelle Pfeiffer, Domhnall Gleeson, and Kristen Wiig and that it's directed
by Darren Aronofsky. Apparently it's
getting Rosemary's Baby comparisons, and if you are talking about a
horror movie by an auteur director, that's a good movie to be getting compared
to.
Working Against It: I guess while I generally like
Aronofsky's movies, I haven't been blown away by any of them. I guess that caps
my excitement some.
My Position: This looks like a safe bet as a can't
miss movie, especially when you look around at how desolate early September is
looking.
Ben Stiller takes his son on college visits and
reflects on if his life has been a failure.
Working For It: Jenna Fischer plays stiller's wife,
and it's nice to see her, even if it doesn't look like a big role. This is a
Mike White film, which means this will have a solid mix of poignancy and
squirm-inducing awkwardness. That's been a hallmark of nearly all of his work
from Freaks & Geeks to The Good Girl to Enlightened.
Working Against It: My biggest concern is that this
might feel too real. Also, it's worth noting that, while I liked what White did
in something like Enlightened, I also had a hard time finishing the show
(I'm still not finished with the first season after starting it a couple years
ago, which is a rarity for me).
My Position: I'm probably going to skip this just
because I like to avoid awkward situations.
Glenn Close is a movie star preparing to marry
husband number four, supposing one of her previous husbands doesn't get in the
way.
Working For It: Look, this is a film with Glenn
Close, John Malkovich, and Patrick Stewart at the top of the call sheet. While
none of them are bringing their A-game, I expect that they will still be
enjoyably watchable.
Working Against It: This is what I call a
"might as well" movie. I assume everyone in it was given the script,
had a little free time in their schedule, and said, "Sure. I might as
well". The director, Damian Harris, works very infrequently, and hasn't
done anything with this light of a tone in several decades if ever.
My Position: I will not be tracking this down.
9/22
A cool high school girl de-friends a social reject
who later commits suicide and stalks the cool girl digitally.
Working For It: This is kind of like The Ring
meets Final Destination meets Unfriended. OK, it's mostly just Unfriended
without the interesting storytelling device.
Working Against It: While not quite in the release
purgatory of Tulip Fever, this has jumped around the release schedule a
lot. It doesn't seem like anyone wants to release this.
My Position: Nope. There are just too many holes in
the digital logic that I'll be picking at the whole time.
Eggsy and the Kingsmen call in the aid of their
American counterparts after their base is destroyed.
Working For It: Here's what you need to know. All
the heroes you loved from the first movie are back. Swap out Samuel L. Jackson
for Julianne Moore as the villain. Add the likes of Channing Tatum and Jeff
Bridges playing cowboy super spies. The world established in the first film left
a lot unexplored, making sequels a natural conclusion.
Working Against It: This looks like a classic case
of a sequel employing the "more is more" principle to filmmaking.
Also, as much as I loved Colin Firth in the first movie, it feels like a cheat
to bring him back.
My Position: I'm
expecting this to be another Pitch Perfect 2. The first movie was
plenty funny, had a lot of heart, and had a story that worked. The second went
harder for laughs and had a story that didn't work nearly as well. I still
enjoyed it, but it didn't stick with me as much. There's no chance I will miss The
Golden Circle, but I'm already prepared for what I should expect from it.
A LEGO movie set in the world a Ninjago, about a son
defending his world from his evil father.
Working For It: As always, this has a great voice
cast that's too diverse to even starting listing, a nice amount of
self-referential humor, and a good deal of imagination. I'm still baffled by
the existence of this LEGO movie franchise and that looks to successfully
continue with this film.
Working Against It: Well, other than the trailer
having far too much exposition, almost working like a mini-movie, I'm not sure
I care enough about the world of Ninjago.
My Position: This is the big test of the LEGO
franchise, right? The LEGO Movie succeeded with the mix of a clever
idea, an inventive animation style, an unsuspecting audience, and clever
directors in Phil Lord and Chris Miller who were perfect for the sensibility of
the film. The LEGO Batman Movie had a tie-in back to the first movie and
leaned on enough known properties for the anarchy that worked so well the first
time to work again. Ninjago is when we find out how elastic this all is.
It has a more limited brand appeal and doesn't appear to be getting the
priority that the other two films did. Are we looking forward to a world of one
or two LEGO movies a year, with that animation style creating it's own
sub genre, or will there just be the occasional movie when ever someone has an
idea that's good enough? In other words, is LEGO going to be Dreamworks
Animation or Shrek?
A comedy about the infamous 70s tennis match between
Billie Jean King and Bobby Riggins.
Working For It: I love Emma Stone and Steve Carrell.
The Battle of the Sexes is a really interesting event in the 70s that is
perfect for a film adaptation. The film reunites Carrell with his Little
Miss Sunshine directors too.
Working Against It: Is there any chance that the
film about the Battle of the Sexes could be as entertaining as the real thing?
My Position: I like Stone and Carrell too much to
miss this. Carrell as Riggins is an especially entertaining casting choice.
Jake Gyllenhaal plays Jeff Bauman, a man who lost
his legs during the Boston Marathon bombing
Working For It: Gyllenhaal is one of my very
favorite working actors. Tatiana Maslany plays his girlfriend, or
ex-girlfriend, or future girlfriend (I guess that's the suspense of the movie)
and Tatiana Maslany is wonderful. Those two nearly secure it for me. And
director David Gordon Green has a mixed filmography that includes Pineapple
Express, Prince Avalanche, and Our Brand Is Crisis. I don't
know if I should call that a plus.
Working Against It: Well, I already saw oneBoston Marathon bombing movie this year and it was pretty good. I don't
know if I need another.
My Position: If you can't tell, this September is
one that's going to be full options, and I suspect October will be even more
crowded. While I like Gyllenhaal a lot, I could easily see this getting edge
out.
9/29
Tom Cruise is a drug runner under the employment of
the CIA in the 1980s.
Working For It: Here's what I know. I'm a fan of
"Movie Star Tom Cruise". He's surrounded by the likes of Domhnall
Gleeson, Jess Plemons, Lola Kirke, Jayma Mays, and Sarah Wright (who I keep
thinking is Brooklyn Decker). Cruise is reuiniting with his Edge of Tomorrow
director*. It looks like a fun, vaguely true story.
*They've changed the title to Live Die and Repeat,
but I refuse to accept it.
Working Against It: This is cut from the same
"based on a true story" cloth as Gold and War Dogs. No
one saw Gold (for a reason). I did see War Dogs and hated it. I'm
not sure how much wiggle room this movie has to be good...
My Position: ...that doesn't matter much, because
I'm seeing it. It promises to be watchable even if it isn't good.
Medical students experiment with triggering-near
death experiences but aren't prepared for the horrors that come back with them
from the other side.
Working For It: This is a remake of the pop-horror
movie from 1990 that's more notable for its cast than the content of the movie.
Again, with a cast that includes Nina Dobrev, Ellen Page, Diego Luna, and
Kiersey Clemons, this 2017 version looks like its most notable for its cast.
This appears to be a remake, not a sequel though, because at least Keifer
Sutherland is reprising his role from the original film.
Working Against It: Didn't we just do this movie? I
don't mean the 1990 film. That was 27 years ago. We've have 5 Batmans since
then. It's been long enough. No, I mean, didn't we just have The LazarusEffect 2 years ago? That movie wasn't very good (but had a better cast).
The original Flatliners wasn't very good. I have low expectations for
this one.
My Position: I'll probably see this at some point
because of the cast, but I assume I won't like it and I'm in no hurry.
A 90 year old man in a quirky town contemplates life
and his atheism in his waning days.
Working For It: It seems like giving character
actors showcase films is becoming popular lately. Sam Elliot got one earlier
this year with Hero. Now Harry Dean Stanton has one. I wasn't even going
to bother mentioning this movie until I saw that it has David Lynch in what
looks like a significant supporting role. I'm not sure what to make of that. I
just think it's interesting when a director decides to act in someone else's
project.
Working Against It: I mean, I'm not planning on
seeing this. I don't think I can give you a good reason why. It just doesn't
look very interesting to me, even with a fun cast and the fact that it's John
Carroll Lynch's directorial debut...wait, are those two Lynch's related? David
isn't old enough to be his dad.
My Position: No. Probably not, unless there's a ton
of great buzz.
