New at BOP: Review: Matrix Resurrections Movie Review: Moonfall Movie Reviews: Scream The #1 Movie in America November Forecast The Many Saints of Newark October Forecast New Trivia Question All site updates Share & Save   Tweet Print this column

Well, it made more money than Comedian.

Kim Hollis: Jerry Seinfeld's situation is novel in that he was arguably the most famous TV star of the 1990s, but that was his only real acting gig of any sort. He's been out of the public eye for nine years other than his comedy tours and a documentary about his stand-up. How well do you think he transitioned to making a big-budget, mainstream, family film?

Joel Corcoran: I think he made the transition rather well. This movie was a huge project for him, and while it doesn't seem to be any sort of "breakout hit" or revolutionary step in movie animation, it's a solid performer and a crowd-pleaser. I don't think there's anything terribly good or bad to say about the performance of Bee Move, and I'm sure Seinfeld can look forward to a career doing quite well putting out movies that are four or five years behind the curve.

David Mumpower: I suspect that this was the smartest way for him to attempt to make movies. He's never going to be confused as a good actor, so voice work makes sense. The problem is that he is something of a work trick pony, and his acerbic brand of humor is difficult (borderline impossible) to match with the mercurial tastes of children. So, he can't do conventional movies, he would probably be a fish out of water in a pure comedy, and he has problems making a family film that kids would find funny. It's a situation with a limited number of quality options.

Holds up boombox playing In Your Eyes

John Cusack was unable to sustain the momentum of his $70 million summer hit 1408, as his latest movie The Martian Child grossed only $3.6 million and had a miserable per venue average of $1,782. Can you quantify why a project like this one fails and The Game Plan succeeds?

Pete Kilmer: I hate to say it...but John Cusack doesn't carry films anymore. The women who swooned at him in Say Anything are busy doing other things, and the guys who dug him in Grosse Pointe Blank aren't that interested in a heart warming adopt-a-kid flick. And let's face it...1408 was NOT a John Cusack film. It was a Stephen King movie with Cusack in it. The reason The Rock's movie did so much more is because The Rock is willing to play the game with interviews and guest spots on tv shows....Cusack? Not so much. He's a great actor who does interesting work, but his time is passing rapidly as a movie star.

Joel Corcoran: I think Pete has a point, but I won't go so far as to say Cusack's time has passed. I thought he did a spectacular job in 1408 and it was a role well-suited for him. Yes, it was a Stephen King horror flick, but Cusack brought some genuine humanity to the role - the initial swaggering and arrogance that steadily evolved into abject fear and recognition. I think The Martian Child bombed (and let's be honest here, it bombed) because Hugh Grant should've been cast in Cusack's place. It just wasn't the right place for him to be. A "Cusack film" is one where he plays a character that is just not comfortable with himself, is a little unstable, and is struggling to find his place. Not only was it just not the right movie for Cusack, we already saw this film five years ago when Grant did About a Boy.





Kim Hollis: This was a film with absolutely no studio support, either. It's been delayed and pushed a number of times, and it seems fair enough to say that New Line knew they had a bit of a stinker on their hands. Cusack was working with a director he liked on something different for him and it just didn't work out.

Dan Krovich: I think genre also had something to do with the difference in success of the two films. Sappy comedies are okay, sappy dramas, not so much.

It's all about Scott Patterson.

Kim Hollis: Saw IV fell 65.7% to $11 million this weekend, giving it $51.1 million after ten days. Is this more, less, or about what you expected from the project?

Pete Kilmer: That seems about right for this film. It'll make a pile of money once you get foreign box office counted, but I think the "Must See"-ness of this film has passed a bit.

Joel Corcoran: Saw IV seems to be playing to expectations. It had a big opening, it's dropping off quickly in theaters, and it'll rake in huge amounts of cash in DVD sales and in the overseas box office (like Pete mentioned). Lionsgate could continue pumping out iterations of this franchise for at least a few more years, if not another decade.

David Mumpower: These films are the Tony Gwynn of movie box office. They're every bit as reliable as him hitting .300.

Continued:       1       2       3