comment #1

Eloi Manning says ...

ROGEN POWER! Instead of competing in a tawdry Awards-season circle-jerk, he now gets to own the entire month of January and set the standard for 2011. Winner all round. Plus with all the 3D tentpoles around in late-2010, it makes total sense.

Jeff, who are your sources? Why is everything in the movie business so cloak-and-dagger? If I thought a movie was shit I'd simply say so.

In other news, Michael Pena has signed up for Season 2 of Eastbound & Down, which will be set in Mexico after Kenny Powers' escape in the last episode.

comment #2

CitizenKanedforChewingGum says ...

Yeah, this is a perfectly fine move. This thing likely would have gotten lost in the holiday shuffle anyway, esp. with December already being jam-packed with event tent-poles and art-house Oscar-bait. I never understood the rationale behind rushing movies like this into theaters before the year's end. It certainly worked last year for Sherlock Holmes, although I have to confess I have absolutely no idea how.

Whatever the reason, re-shooting, re-writes, more 3-D screens...more time is definitely a good idea. Even if worst comes to worst on the delays, a move back two months still won't kill it on its own. Generally, if a movie like this is well-made and comes out in the first three months of the year, word-of-mouth gets around. There's often not a lot else out worth seeing -- or quickly pushing other films out of theaters -- so it can almost end up doing well by default.

comment #3

Mr. Sheldrake says ...

Can't believe that Gondry, with his fondness for practical effects, is going for 3D.

comment #4

LexG says ...

Who's the chick? (Someone spare me the IMDB trek, plus it'll give me something to look forward to when I clock back into this thread in a couple hours.)

Also, that MID-JANUARY SPOT ain't that bad. I know all the David Polands in the world write off January entirely and have their pie chart of what release dates are solid and which are DUMPING GROUNDS...

But neither CLOVERFIELD nor BOOK OF ELI was remotely a "dump"-- both smartly set that date and stuck to it and did pretty well. Whether you ultimately liked the movies or not (you should have or you're a douche), they seemed like first-run, big-deal movies that didn't shy away from an arbitrary date on a calendar, and didn't feel like a second-tier romcom or chintzy B horror that had been pushed around for six months.

If you take that date, stick to it, and make it an event, it's not shameful. It's no longer 1987 where CHARLES BRONSON IN ASSASSINATION was the only kind of thing you'd get in that month.

And, really, some rivet worker in Albany doesn't look at the newspaper listings and say, "Wait a minute now! Green Hornet in January? Must be a problem picture, or they would've gone with a prime June 12th opening date! If today was May 9th I'd TOTALLY go see it, but since it's not, no fucking way!"

comment #5

DeeZee says ...

Jeff: I sort of agree. There's no reason the thing has to take eight more months to be ready.

Eloi: Rogen can't sell shit, and dumping it in January's never a good sign. And I can't believe he had more pull than Stephen Chow, when Stephen's movies at least have a fan-base. Methinks this is gonna be his Uma Thurman Avengers.

As for why no one's willing to admit it's shit, it's probably because it cost way more than it had to. [See DB:E.]

Lex: Cloverfield and Eli were always intended to come out in January, though, while this thing's been in development hell for over a decade.

Anyway, blue people are this year's shiny vampires-at least on home video.
More Monsters,">http://www.hollywoodreporter.com/hr/content_display/film/news/e3icc341acc4f9c061e852311c6eafd2dca">Monsters, Inc..
Is this thing really going to make money...?
Happyness writer tackles Mitty.
Airbender will now have three times the dreck.
Looks like Roman's goin' back to Cali.

comment #6

DeeZee says ...

Lemme fix that Monsters, Inc. thing.

comment #7

Savage Brit says ...

I think Dee Zee hit upon the perfect analogy with THE AVENGERS debacle, a movie that could have worked but went off the rails. It didn't seem as misguided as GREEN HORNET which should have starred George Clooney or Jon Hamm, but this doesn't feel like a Michael Keaton BATMAN career changer. Movies like TRON could still be going strong when this opens which will have the virtue of proper 3-D as opposed to another Kraken makeover.

comment #8

Steven Kar says ...

Not everything has to be in 3D, and not everything can be in 3D.

I can understand why they now want to convert THE LAST AIRBENDER to 3D; it's a big-budget summer movie for kids that has lots of CGI and apparently a bunch of effects that would look cool in 3D, but GREEN HORNET?!

comment #9

DeeZee says ...

Kar: Insert joke about Rogen's flab being in 3D here.

comment #10

televisiontears says ...

Thanks for fixing that Monsters, Inc. thing, DZ.

comment #11

Noah Cross says ...

Yeah, Del Toro's Wolfman was moved just to fine tune it into a masterpiece as well. Doesn't smell good to me.

comment #12

Jonathan Spuij says ...

I never had much confidence in this film anyhow. No matter how big the talent involved.

comment #13

LexG says ...

HOLY SHIT, ANALEIGH FROM TOP MODEL is in this????

BOWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWW

comment #14

DeeZee says ...

Jonathan: Well, if done right, at least we could've gotten Rush Hour-style fun. Now, we're stuck with Pineapple Express Reloaded.

comment #15

LexG says ...

[Inwardly meditative, non-film-related ruminations -- even from star-level commenters like LexG -- can't be allowed. Sorry but them's the rules. -- HE management]

comment #16

Hip Hop Homey says ...

Christ, I'm already so over this whole 3D thing.

comment #17

LexG says ...

HEY how is SCIENCE OF SLEEP?

I skipped it way back when but Charlotte Gainsbourg can be at least mildly dreamy, and her acting RULES.

comment #18

Hip Hop Homey says ...

She's great in I'M NOT THERE. But, then again, everyone is.

comment #19

DeeZee says ...

Lex: You had high school enemies, too? I thought you were the jock who's only recently been down and out. Christ, I remember hearing Adam Carolla on the radio saying, "Winners in high school, losers in life", but none of the assholes I've known have ever had it as tough as I have making money when they got out.

comment #20

corey3rd says ...

The Green Hornet is a dead character. The only people who remember the Green Hornet are in old age homes. When was the last time I heard someone ask, "How come they don't make a Green Hornet movie with that kid from Knocked Up?" Never.

And great way to celebrate Martin Luther King day than watching a rich white guy who forces his minority houseboy also work a second job fighting crime after dark. Serve me some drinks and then beat these goons off my ass, Kato. Is there any reason Kato has to hold down two jobs to collect his paycheck from the Green Hornet? The Green Hornet at it's core is white imperialism. And now it's going to be in 3-D.

comment #21

DeeZee says ...

corey: Well, originally, it was gonna be Clooney as the Green Hornet. So I really don't know how the fuck it devolved to Rogen.

comment #22

Bob Violence says ...

fucking shut up

comment #23

Gordn27 says ...

Oh god, DZ talking about how he was a loser in high school and is still a loser is even worse than DZ posting links.

comment #24

Sam says ...

lex science of sleep is outstanding.
super cute.
do I sound silly proclamong it's AT LEAST the equal of eternal sun??

comment #25

Circumvrent says ...

This reminds me, in a very superficial way, of Spike Jonze and WILD THINGS. The studio took what could be a smash-hit property, gave it to an out of the box choice, somebody who hasn't made anything even remotely similar, and now they're pissed-off they didn't get some hack piece.

comment #26

MikeSchaeferSF says ...

"Science of Sleep" is painfully -- and I mean PAINFULLY -- whimsical. And is the main reason I avoided "Be Kind Rewind" altogether. So Gondry doing a 3-D tentpole comic book movie holds no interest for me. (And I loves me some Rogen, especially the idea of a buffed-up Rogen. Woof!)

comment #27

Eloi Manning says ...

"And, really, some rivet worker in Albany doesn't look at the newspaper listings and say, "Wait a minute now! Green Hornet in January? Must be a problem picture, or they would've gone with a prime June 12th opening date! If today was May 9th I'd TOTALLY go see it, but since it's not, no fucking way!""

Classic Lex. It's completely true. How many people in the "real world" actually have any idea of a "troubled production"? The only one that anyone would have been aware of is Christian Bale's rant on the Terminator set, and it's not like it was a factor when they actually decided to see the movie or not.

comment #28

captain bligh says ...

3d is deader than...dead. Where's 4d already? I want to watch movies on an abstract quantum level or not at all. I know Big Jim Cameron is currently working with quantum physicists on a 4d camera, but will it be ready for Avatar 2 and 3? Let's hope so.

Just imagine the gaussian scalar fields! Game changer.

comment #29

moviemaniac2002 says ...

If it sucks that badly....then January is probably a smart
move...its only competition might be throwaway rom-coms and PG-13 horror films...all making brief multiplex stopovers before their April DVD dates.

comment #30

TimDG says ...

The best thing about the Green Hornet tv show was that his garage was bathed in green light, even though he and Kato were the only ones who ever saw it.

comment #31

MilkMan says ...

I went to high school with a bunch of winners and all they have done since high school is continued to win and win some more, so Corolla's theory means nothing. What I'm interested in knowing is who told Adam Corolla that he was smart or funny or that every passing thought in his head needs to come out of his mouth. I'm assuming it was Adam Corolla.

comment #32

Terry McCarty says ...

Thought Rogen and Gondry seemed an odd pairing for a superhero franchise film. Hoping that Mark Steven Johnson isn't directing the reshoot.

comment #33

DeeZee says ...

Circum: Well, first of all, Where the Wild Things Are sucked, because it missed the point of the book. [Nothing new from Warner Bros., given their Kubrick movies and V for Vendetta, but this one just seemed harder to fuck up.] Second of all, if I recall, the studio only got the rights to adapt it after Jonze talked to the author. And unlike Gondry, Jonze isn't (as much of a) hack. [Sorry, but Eternal Sunshine is crap, too, especially since Dunst loves herself some mumblecore.] At least with Jonze, we'd just get another Speed Racer, instead of the Batman and Robin I expect from 'Hornet.

captain high. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LO2aCVlnLow

comment #34

Gordn27 says ...

DZ - just so you understand the English language, a performance can not be "mumblecore". "mumblecore" means, by definition, a movie where the whole cast is doing it. Beyond that, your sole criticism of the movie is that the 8th or 9th listed person in the cast, who has, what, three scenes? if that?, is bad? I can only assume you didn't see that. I know you didn't see 'Where the Wild Things Are', because I remember that much.

comment #35

CitizenKanedforChewingGum says ...

You can say WTWTA sucked all you want, but one thing it certainly did not do was miss the "point" of the book. No, sir. The movie actually got that part right...absolutely nailed it. Arguably even moreso than the book ever did, if that even makes sense (prob. not, but you never make sense, so there).

comment #36

bitplayer says ...

I was really primed to like WTWTA but I found it boring, ponderous and somewhat pointless. I see Hornet more like The Phantom. I'll never understand why these studios, than own television and cable networks. Don't prime the market by putting these old shows, be they radio or tv shows, on cable or radio before these movies are released. Let's say a year run on NIck At Night before the release.

comment #37

Terry McCarty says ...

Circumvrent wrote:
This reminds me, in a very superficial way, of Spike Jonze and WILD THINGS. The studio took what could be a smash-hit property, gave it to an out of the box choice, somebody who hasn't made anything even remotely similar, and now they're pissed-off they didn't get some hack piece.

Rewind thirty years back and you have Robert Altman with POPEYE.

comment #38

DeeZee says ...

Gordon: Dunst has the line which explains the fucking title, though. And I can't hear it, because the damnbackground audio and her mumbling don't mix. As for Wild Things, you're only half-right, as I walked out when I got to the part with the toy ship.

Kane: The point of the book was about the kid looking for a place to get away and be a kid, not go through a therapy session.

comment #39

Gordn27 says ...

Oh, I forgot, the most important part of movies is when character use the title in dialogue. Great point. Especially great that you're complaining that you can't understand the dialogue, even though you already know the title of the movie that is in the dialogue. Again, outstanding.

I love your insightful understanding of the book, though. I'm not sure how "wanting to be a kid" is a story for a movie, though. And there's also the obvious fact that Maurice Sendak loves the movie. But what does he know about 'Where The Wild Things Are' anyway?

comment #40

DeeZee says ...

Gordon: " I'm not sure how "wanting to be a kid" is a story for a movie, though."

It was fine for Neverending Story.

"And there's also the obvious fact that Maurice Sendak loves the movie."

He loved the movie, because he was willing to accept it being unnecessarily padded for time.

comment #41

Gordn27 says ...

"It was fine for Neverending Story. "

So add another movie to the list of things you've never seen? Here's a quick link to remind you of the plot of the movie you've obviously never watched:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Neverending_story#Plot_summary

"because he was willing to accept it being unnecessarily padded for time."

That's pretty funny. It's like you're pretending to think that the book 'Where the Wild Things Are' could carry more than a fifteen minute movie without the padding. And then, best of all, you compare it negatively to a movie that has about ten times the plot and twenty times the padding.