Trailer Hitch Part III
By BOP Staff
April 9, 2010
BoxOfficeProphets.com
The Expendables – Opens August 13th
David Mumpower: This is either going to rule or suck; in fact, it may do both.
Josh Spiegel: Maybe it's because I never got into the kind of '80s action that this movie is hearkening to, I'm leaning toward suck, but I'm mostly indifferent. The cast is...interesting (though I like Jason Statham and Jet Li, I don't need to see their movies), and the trailer appears cheerfully happy to ruin one of the potential surprises - that Stallone, Schwarzenegger, and Willis share a scene - but I may end up checking this out. Probably on Netflix, though.
Michael Lynderey: The Expendables seems to be positioned to follow in the footsteps of movies like District 9, Inglourious Basterds, and Kick-Ass - titles that may not have had built-in fan appeal off the bat, but developed massive followings on fanboy message boards leading up to their release. The problem is that those three titles ended up being beloved by critics, but I'm not so sure The Expendables will be. And as a big fan of '80s and early '90s action, I don't know if this is really going to be along those lines - it seems a lot more ironic and self-aware. Anyway, Li, Statham, and Stallone have all recently headlined Lionsgate action films, and while this one will obviously outgross most of their solo efforts, I don't think that it will be by that much.
David Mumpower: Bear with me on this. I have a strange theory on why this is going to be a blockbuster. I am of the opinion that one of the underlying keys to the success of the Rush Hour franchise is that it manages to engage divergent target audiences that would otherwise have little in common. I am certain there are some Jackie Chan stunt suicide fans who also love Friday and vice versa, but they are the exception rather than the rule. The genius of The Expendables is that it will appeal to almost every kind of action fan. People who love the 1980s retro movement will join Steve Austin's pro wrestling loyalists, Randy Couture's MMA fans, Jason Statham's Transporter groupies, Jet Li's martial arts hero worshippers, and the Mickey Rourke crowd whose ranks will grow with the release of Iron Man 2. That is a potent cocktail of merging demographics.
In terms of this trailer, it does exactly what is needed by showing the primary appeal of the film. It's a ton of faces you know in a story whose title explicitly indicates that a lot of them will *not* be making it back for the sequel. An entire franchise can be built around this strategy wherein various new characters can be introduced depending on who is a rising action star of the moment (let's say Sharlto Copley after The A-Team) or someone whose star has faded a bit (let's say Wesley Snipes). This can be a new take on the Ocean's 11 idea of throwing a bunch of famous people together with the key difference being that some of them *will* die (please, no Bernie Mac jokes). I see a tremendous amount of upside in this movie.
PS: That Shinedown song, Diamond Eyes, rocks and I'm annoyed that I cannot download it yet.
Max Braden: Sweet! I mean, sure it's going to be a letdown, but this is the Dirty Dozen of the '80s generation. I just wish they could have squeezed in Seagal, Van Damme, Mel Gibson... maybe a little Action Jackson. I think this trailer is an improvement over the first, which just showed a lot of action shots with not much relation to each other. This one manages to imply there's a story arc, and the pumping music helps. But I'd be concerned about the younger audiences who were never invested in these stars. By comparison, The Losers is going to be much more appealing.
Michael Lynderey: I'm not sure that there's really such a large mass of a diverse crowd out there to merge. The Steve Austin bunch apparently added up to $7 million for The Condemned, Jet Li and Jason Statham teamed up for just $22 million in War (Statham's Transporter movies go just a bit higher, while Li is usually around the $20 millions), and, to Stallone's credit, he did beat 'em all with $42 million for Rambo (IV) - I guess that would be the '80s people, but a lot of them are already into Statham as is. I guess my point is that, yes, The Expendables could merge a couple of different blocks, but what's the number generated by this particular equation? Especially since such an "inside" movie could potentially turn off everyone else?
In many ways, this movie really needed Bruce Willis as a lead.
Pete Kilmer: Totally looking forward to this movie. It's on my must see list for this year. Sure, Stallone basically ripped off the Tarantino idea he had for the original Inglourious Basterds - of having all the big action stars in one movie together for a war movie. Action junkies have wanted something likes this for years. YEARS! Granted, it would have been cool to have the others (Van Damme, Seagal, Norris and some others) in it. But if there is a sequel, they can easily do it if they want. There are plenty of guys in their 40s, 50s and 60s not really doing anything huge outside of straight-to-video/USA projects that this could really help.
The other thing to keep in mind is that this movie will do huge internationally with this cast. For whatever this cost to make, it's been in the vein of Stallone's Rambo and Rocky last pictures and it will make a pile of cash outside of the US. Can't wait.
Remember way back when people liked Tom Cruise?
Knight and Day – Opens June 25th
David Mumpower: God help me, I think this is a hit.
Josh Spiegel: I completely agree. I'm not the biggest fan of Cameron Diaz (who apparently is doing a mix of being a huge ditz and, weirdly, knowing how to straddle Tom Cruise on a motorcycle and fire weapons - that change is the only thing that concerns me about the script of the film), but Tom Cruise looks like he's having a ball here. Whatever his personal life is about is for others to speculate, but the guy is a fascinating actor who chooses eclectic projects. With James Mangold directing and Cruise at the lead, I'm ready to watch this one.
Michael Lynderey: Wow... that's the exact same plot as Killers, the Heigl-Kutcher movie opening just three weekends before. That's a film that I don't think looks all that good, and while this is an improvement, I'm not completely sold on it, either. Still, it's summertime, so it'll probably be Cruise's first starring role since 2006 to make $100 million. As for Cameron Diaz, I've been a... major fan... since I saw her in The Mask when I was about eight, and that's probably not an opinion I'm willing to change anytime soon.
Jim Van Nest: I'm not a fan of Cruise or Diaz. The latter peaked with her first film, if you ask me. Yet, I REALLY want to see this movie. I think the trailer and the TV spots have been right on. They highlight the action, comedy and chemistry between the leads.
It may completely suck, but for me, it looks like a lot of fun.
David Mumpower: I'm not sure if mainstream America still has Tom Cruise ensconced in Time-Out over the Great Couch Jumping Incident of 2005. His madness is what sunk one of the best action films of the decade, Mission: Impossible III, a movie that deserved a much better fate. Keeping this in mind and acknowledging that whatever I may think of Tom Cruise as a person, I've generally liked his movie choices, this looks phenomenal. In fact, this may sound blasphemous but his performance in the trailer reminds me a lot of Cary Grant in Charade. It's that theme of ordinary woman meeting a man she doesn't know whether she can trust, but it's clearly being done as an over-the-top action film. I think that is a potent cocktail of cinema.
Yes, I have the same question some of you have expressed about how/why Cameron Diaz goes from innocent to dual gun-wielding maniac on a motorcycle in 90 seconds. I'm sure the movie will spell this out; however, that quick escalation/progression in the trailer is a bit startling. That's the only concern I have in what is quite simply a masterpiece of a trailer. I'm totally buying what they are selling here.
Max Braden: I think it's a hit, too. They've taken Mr. & Mrs. Smith and added a lot more fun into the mix. I don't exactly like Diaz's delivery of the goofy, naive girl, but I'm not sure who I would have cast instead. (Twenty or twenty-five years ago it would have been Melanie Griffith or Meg Ryan). I think Cruise's wild eyed behavior actually helps him a lot here and I almost get the feeling he's playing up his reputation. They're basically asking the audience "What would happen if you actually met Tom Cruise? What would he be like? He would be like this!" That's bound to pull in the female audience, and the guys are going to go happily to see the action. That's a winning trailer.
Shalimar Sahota: There seems to be a likeable Bollywood stupidity to this in regards to Cruise's character (especially when he's describing the life expectancy with him and without him). Like Max says about Cruise playing up his reputation, it's like watching Ethan Hunt having a breakdown. Also it still doesn't give away the whole plot. Muse's Uprising playing during the latter half strangely works!
Pete Kilmer: It looks like it's going to be quite fun, and when's the last time you've thought that about a Cameron Diaz film, let alone a Tom Cruise film? Tom is still in career repair mode a bit, he's showing in this trailer that he's got a bit a humorous edge to him AND still can do the action stuff. Cameron is back in wacky comedy/action role ala The Mask or the first Charlies Angel's movie. All positives around for me on this trailer.