Linked In Hollywood: Movie Buzz 4-15

15 Apr

By Open Book

It seems Hollywood found the answer? For a second weekend in a row, Hop managed to take the number one spot at the box-office.[1] Perhaps,originality is the solution? Consumers deprived over the selection of kid films, allowed Hop to beat out newly released films opening in theaters last weekend. How well did the (Top 20 new release) films do in spite of this surprise?

Hanna: PG-13- What’s the buzz? It’s rare to see both film critics and consumers agree on a film review. However, when it happens one has to take notice. Film critics thought this action film was well paced and the lead actor Saorise Ronan was captivating. Many consumers concurred and added how electrifying this film is from beginning to end.[2] Also, what critics and consumers repeatedly mentioned was how impressed they were with the film score for this film.  So if your up for a little action this weekend Hanna might be worth checking out.

  • Box office rank: #2
  • Film Critics Say: Metacritic- 65 Positive, rottentomatoes: 70% (fresh)
  • Consumers Say: Metacritic- 7.6 Positive, rottentomatoes: 82%

Arthur (2011): PG-13- What’s the buzz? Film critics were not impressed with this remake of the 1981 romantic comedy classic. Many critics thought this film was lifeless and Russell Brand made Dudley Moore performance in the original look like pure genius. However, consumers were not as harsh. Many thought it was fairly amusing, not great but it was not a horrible film.

  • Box office rank: #3
  • Film Critics Say: Metacritic- 37 Negative, rottentomatoes: 25% (rotten)
  • Consumers Say: Metacritic- 5.5 Mixed, rottentomatoes: 64%

Soul Surfer: PG- What’s the buzz? There’s a pretty big gap between film critics and consumers regarding this film. Film critics gave it mixed reviews claiming it felt like it was made for TV, instead of the big screen. Consumers thought it was a great inspirational film for kids.  So this might be worth checking out.

  • Box office rank: #4
  • Film Critics Say: Metacritic- 53 Mixed, rottentomatoes: 53% (rotten)
  • Consumers Say: Metacritic- 8.3 Positive, rottentomatoes: 87%

Your Highness: R-What’s the buzz? Not too much of a gap between critics and consumers on this film. Critics thought the film was pointless and stupid. Some called it crude and crass in order to appeal to teenage boys.[3] Both critics and consumers questioned why Natalie Portman agreed to this film after choosing a great film that won her an Oscar?  Many believe this film give stoner comedies a bad reputation. Go figure?

  • Box office rank: #6
  • Film Critics Say: Metacritic- 31 Negative, rottentomatoes: 27% (rotten)
  • Consumers Say: Metacritic- 5.7 Mixed, rottentomatoes: 54%

Born to be Wild: G- What’s the buzz? It’s rare to see both film critics and consumers agree on a film review twice in one week. However, when it happens one has to take notice. Why not see for yourself why critics and consumers are praising this film? You may recall we discussed Elephant Sanctuaries previously and one particularly is shown in this movie. Please watch video below.

  • Box office rank: #18
  • Film Critics Say: Metacritic- 66 Positive, rottentomatoes: 97% (fresh)
  • Consumers Say: Metacritic- TBD, rottentomatoes: 81%

So there you have it. What are you planning to see this weekend?

Next week we will review: Scream 4, Rio and The Conspirator

Here’s a little movie trivia for you. What movie is this quote from?

“I think positive emotion trumps negative emotion every time.”

Have a nice weekend!

Advertisements

26 Responses to “Linked In Hollywood: Movie Buzz 4-15”

  1. 4string April 15, 2011 at 8:37 AM #

    Does Franco only do stoner movies? It’s like Seth Rogen who’s movies are 90% stoner movies/characters. I already know to skip Rogen movies because (other than ‘Funny People’ which I really liked him in) I already know he will play the sloppy, slacker stoned guy. It’s also why I know to avoid Judd Apatow movies–same old, same old (the only exception is Funny People). Stoners annoy me in general. I’m also not a fan of movies where the laughs are attempted to be gotten by lame potty humor. American Pie is one of the few that did it well. JA’s movies are usually stinkfests. Is that where James Franco is headed? Sigh. Sorry for my rant.

    I do like comedies, but wish writers didn’t resort to lame tactics to get a laugh–those tactics usually don’t work & pander to the lowest common denominator. I recently saw Wayne’s World on TV and, sigh, I miss funny movies like that. When I saw it for the 1st time in the theater, I was constantly laughing and whenever it’s been awhile since I’ve seen it & it pops on TV, I’m still rolling with laughter.

    • 4string April 15, 2011 at 8:45 AM #

      PS: I know Apatow didn’t work on Your Highness (but he has worked with this director in the past), but it’s more a rant on his genre in general.

      • Open Book April 15, 2011 at 4:53 PM #

        No need to apologize rant anytime.

    • Open Book April 15, 2011 at 1:21 PM #

      Hi 4strings,

      I really get what your saying. I think it’s really bad when artists sell themselves out for money. I think it’s an attempt at trying to brand themselves to appeal to a certain market. But branding is a tricky thing, if it’s not done right it can end their career, limit them and make them into a joke.

      Many artist fall into this trap in HW of trying to brand themselves because it appears audiences are somewhat predictable. Yet, some get a false sense of security, get lazy and begin to believe their own hype. But audiences are demanding and can sense when artist are not trying to expand their repertoire, try new things or out of gas. That’s when audiences become antagonistic and irate. When that happens it’s time to come up with a new strategy. Unfortunately, many don’t and play themselves out.

  2. Lurker April 15, 2011 at 8:41 AM #

    Thanks for the article this week! I didn’t know about the movie Born to be Wild and I will be trekking to an IMAX theater to see it!

    Also, I”ll be heading to The Conspirator this weekend as well!

    • 4string April 15, 2011 at 8:46 AM #

      I may have to take my daughter to see Born to Be Wild. 🙂

      • Open Book April 15, 2011 at 1:23 PM #

        4strings,

        Born to be Wild would be perfect to take your daughter to see.

    • Open Book April 15, 2011 at 1:35 PM #

      Lurker,

      U are welcome. I’m definitely going to check out Born to be Wild and The Conspirator as well.

      When u saw the Elephant sanctuary u featured in your article, were u elated to see it’s getting so much coverage and attention?

      • Lurker April 15, 2011 at 5:27 PM #

        Yes! When I saw her name mentioned in the trailer I was very excited. Mainly because I can see what it is they are doing with the baby elephants in the movie. It sounded quite incredible just reading about it. To see it captured on film should be truly heartwarming!

  3. Littlebells April 15, 2011 at 11:20 AM #

    4string: hahahahahahaha! I love your rant! And I completely agree!

    I saw Arthur and I did enjoy it. I wasn’t too sure, but I did end up really liking it and even got teary eyed at one point. I will give my review in a different post.

    I would love to see Born to Be Wild! I love all those nature/animal films! 🙂

    What is Hanna about? Haven’t seen any trailers.

    • Open Book April 15, 2011 at 12:42 PM #

      I’ve seen Hanna and it’s pretty good. It’s kinda of like Borne Identity. Cate Blanchett is in it and she makes quite a great and unpredictable villain. This was done by the director of Atonement Joe Wright. Also, the young girl from Atonement Ronan, is a wonderful actress. Oh! The film score is AWESOME!! Check out the trailer.

      • ozzie20 April 15, 2011 at 7:25 PM #

        I’ve read the script and thought it was very good so I’m interested in how it turned out. I think there have been a few small changes but it still looks very good!

        • Littlebells April 15, 2011 at 9:11 PM #

          Where the heck do you ladies find these scripts?!?! 🙂

  4. Littlebells April 15, 2011 at 11:20 AM #

    Hey 4string, where’s your snazzy avatar?

    • 4string April 15, 2011 at 1:01 PM #

      I don’t have one. 😦 I guess I’d need to make a wordpress account.

      • Littlebells April 15, 2011 at 1:22 PM #

        I only did it for Will and the cowbell. 🙂

      • Open Book April 15, 2011 at 1:26 PM #

        4strings-

        Here’s where to get a avatar.

        http://gravatar.com/

  5. Littlebells April 15, 2011 at 1:40 PM #

    Lurker! I am so jealous! I saw a trailer for The Conspirator while I was at the gym. I love Robert Redford and know that whatever he puts out in theaters is something he truly believes in. He gives it 200% and I appreciate that. I was supposed to be in Vegas this weekend up, but due to my son getting an earache and pink eye, boo to the hoo. If he wasn’t sick I would have a sitter come to my house so I could see the flick. Please tell us what you think! 🙂

    As for Arthur, I was 4 when the original came out so the only moments I actually saw any part of it was when it was on TV for Saturday movies. I had never seen it all the way through until the other day. I wanted to compare.

    For the sake of not getting confused I’m going to call the original Arthur, OA, and the new one, NA. yeah, that’s how creative I am.

    In the NA, I thought it was going to bomb based on the first 10 minutes alone. I felt the actors were going for the laughs and um, I was not laughing. However, I did find that once that passed, it actually got pretty good.

    I liked how the love story developed in the NA. As I watched the OA, Arthur and Linda never really hung out or went out so when he tells Hobson he loves her, I thought, “When?” The NA had some really good dialogue between the characters as they got to know each other. In the NA they have an official date night that I thought was very sweet and what is that I hear? ARthur’s theme song from the 80s? “When you got lost between the moon and New York ciiiiiiiitay……the best that you can do, the best that you an do, is fall in loooooooooooooove!” haha! I loved that tribute. Full on win!

    I didn’t realize Hobson was a man in the original. I actually liked him more than Mirren’s only because I felt his sarcastic remarks were more tongue in cheek and I felt she was just being more rude. I did like her though. I just liked original Hobson more.

    Brand’s and Moore’s interpretations are completely different. Brand is more of a kid and Moore is a grown up who likes to have fun. I like his drunken stupor better as well.

    I don’t know why they didn’t keep the name Linda for his love interest. Her name in the NA is Naomi. I think the actress who played her did a good job, but her brow was always furrowed. I loved Liza because she gave her character chutzpah! And because she’s Liza. Liza with a Z!!!!!! 🙂

    Susan’s character was interesting. In the OA she’s like a backdrop. In the NA she’s like a pink neon sign. Total contrast and I wasn’t totally believing Garner.

    They did keep the story line relatively close and did many similar scenes. All in all, the NA was just fine and I did get teary eyed when Hobson *SPOILER* dies. Brand did a beautiful job in that scene and the scene before to be quite honest. I felt the NA gave more character development to the OA. Both are great in their own right.

    I’m sure I forgot a lot, but I’ve been wordy enough. Thanks for letting me share.

    • Open Book April 15, 2011 at 1:55 PM #

      LB!

      AWESOME review of Arthur. Excellent!

  6. Lurker April 15, 2011 at 10:02 PM #

    Everyone,
    Saw the Conspirator!
    Please note that it was filmed in Savannah GA, yes those are real homes that exist. AND, that is Fort Pulaski that is also key in the film.

    Not to give anything away, I thought the acting was great.
    Just adults in my showing, not surprised.
    A thoughtful film, I think there are a few facts that might have be dramatized for film, but otherwise a great film.

    James McAvoy and Tom Wilkinson, love them!

    • Littlebells April 15, 2011 at 10:04 PM #

      THanks, Lurker!

      • Lurker April 15, 2011 at 10:17 PM #

        Next week we can all talk about it!
        There are some interesting historical parallels.

        • Open Book April 15, 2011 at 11:32 PM #

          Thanks for the preview Lurker! Can’t wait to hear your full review next week.

          In the meantime: Has anyone figured out what movie the above quote is from? Littlebells got it last week. Paris got it the week before that. So now Lurker, Ozzie, Comic Relief and 4strings it’s your turn. LOL!!!

          • Littlebells April 16, 2011 at 12:13 AM #

            I’m retarded. I didn’t even see the quote. haha!

  7. Parisienne April 17, 2011 at 9:39 AM #

    Hi All!

    LB great review of Arthur. 🙂 Am going to see The Conspirator this Tuesday. Can’t wait. 🙂

    OB, the quote is from Inception. 🙂

    • Open Book April 17, 2011 at 1:56 PM #

      U are correct Paris.

      The movie quote is from Inception and it is said by Leonardo Dicaprio’s character Cobb.

Comments are closed.

%d bloggers like this: