The director is named Timur Bekmambetov. (I recommend the cutting and pasting of this name, when bandying it about, to save aggravation.)

I liked his earlier movies "Wanted" and
"Abraham Lincoln Vampire Hunter", but to be fair to "Ben-Hur", those were TRUE stories.

Maybe they should've freshened it up with an all-female cast and called it "Ben-Her".
(For that, I will present myself in the Town Square at noon, tomorrow, so that anyone who wishes to may punch me once in the stomach.)

Well mid-August is not a good time for a biblical epic, so of course it's been turned into an action movie. Same thing happened with Exodus: Gods and Kings. Turn Batman into Moses and have the best of both worlds, except that the movie stunk up the place.

I can't see any reason why anyone would think we needed another Ben-Hur, but since some studio made it, I can envision another epic remake.

Just picture a new Samson and Delilah. Instead of Victor Mature and Hedy Lamarr, it could star Dwayne "The Rock" Johnson and Scarlet Johansson. The climatic ending with the destruction of the pagan temple in glorious CGI would be enough to sell it. And what a classic "I love you, I hate you, I love you" story.

Of course Johnson would have to wear a wig, so maybe that would be too weird.

If anybody steals my idea, I want royalties.

Ben-Hur cost 100 M to make and grossed about 11 M so you can add that to the list of flops

"Jason Bourne" has somewhat quietly become a hit. I saw that it cost $60M to make and has already cleared $200M even making another $8M this past weekend. I liked the movie overall but also thought it was the weakest of the series - "Bourne Legacy" was better.

SPOILER ALERT to anyone who hasn't seen "Jason Bourne" yet - don't look at the next paragraph (assuming spoiler alerts are expected for a movie that has been out for a month)...

I can understand that JB takes place nine years later and there might not be a connection made to "Bourne Legacy" because those two main characters were still hiding out, but I thought this story might involve a team-up, or just Bourne, helping out Pamela Lande (Joan Allen) who was getting railroaded. The filmmakers tried to connect this movie to the others with flashbacks but it still felt like a separate entity (almost like different people were making it) even with Nicky (Julia Stiles) reappearing. It was believable that she would be smart enough to adapt to living "underground" even though she didn't have that kind of training. However, it was too much of a leap that she would be able to find Bourne who was completely off-the-grid.

quote:

Originally posted by Tommy C:
I am updating my list. Instead of saying hits or misses, how about the following:


BIGGEST FILMS OF THE SUMMER

Finding Dory
Captain America 3
Secret Life of Pets


FILMS THAT GROSSED LESS THAN THEIR BUDGET AT THE U.S. BOX OFFICE

X-Men Apocalypse
Star Trek 3
Ghostbusters
Tarzan
Independence Day 2


FILMS THAT MADE BACK LESS THAN HALF OF THEIR BUDGET AT THE U.S. BOX OFFICE

Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles 2
Alice Through the Looking Glass
The BFG
Ice Age 5

[QUOTE]Originally posted by catskilleagle:
SPOILER ALERT to anyone who hasn't seen "Jason Bourne" yet - don't look at the next paragraph (assuming spoiler alerts are expected for a movie that has been out for a month)...

I can understand that JB takes place nine years later and there might not be a connection made to "Bourne Legacy" because those two main characters were still hiding out, but I thought this story might involve a team-up, or just Bourne, helping out Pamela Lande (Joan Allen) who was getting railroaded.[QUOTE]

I thought that the two movies that had the Pamela character were the best ones in the series.

The films starring Damon have all been well made action movies, but without adding another teabag, the tea is getting weak.

The CIA finds him again, his girl of the moment gets killed, he discovers there was another Chief of the covert operations, he kills a lot of people including the one big assassin/asset, the bad organization is exposed for the fourth or fifth time and Bourne disappears again.

That could be the highlights of every movie so far. They keep the action moving and there are some good actors involved, so why shouldn't it keep making money. It's just that it's deja vu all over again.

I know that the summer is long over, but 3 recent films, Bridget Jones' Baby, Storks, and Miss Peregrine, have all not done very well at the U.S. box office, especially Bridget Jones

However, they've done better internationally. Even then, the latter two have not been huge hits worldwide, so far

quote:

Originally posted by catskilleagle:
"Bourne Legacy" was better

That's just mean.

I think Bridget Jones just got tired. Least face it, those actors are way too old to try to convincingly play a "whose the daddy" story. More like "who cares", but the studio just wanted to cash in on the title one more time.

quote:

Originally posted by chesspieceface:
The Marvel movies have been significantly better...I'm looking forward to Doctor Strange later this year.

I watched 'Doctor Strange' today and thought it was great, Marvel have hit on a consistent tone and quality with all their recent films I have seen.

That Miss Peregrine has grossed almost 250 M worldwide, but most of it is outside of the U.S.

The new Tom Cruise flick, Jack Reacher 2, has only grossed 39 M in the U.S., a far cry from Tom Cruise's blockbuster days

And the new Tom Hanks "Inferno" grossed a mere 15 M in its opening weekend, very dismal

Miss Peregrine seemed to be barely marketed in the US. Not exactly sure why, but even though Burton makes American movies, they all look foreign over here. Matter of style I guess, but I could understand why it might have appealed more to audiences in other parts of the world.

Tom Cruise still has MI and the Reacher series is going on the side. It's supposed to be a fairly decent film as action movies go. Maybe it wasn't released at the right time, but it was made cheaper, so I would not expect it to lose money in the end.

As for Inferno, I'm not surprised it tanked. It is the third Dan Brown novel turned movie with Tom Hanks playing the same know-it-all character who figures out clues all over the globe that are impossible for anyone to follow. The Da Vinci Code had the religious aspect going for it. Angels and Demons made even less sense and was more boring. Inferno is the same formula with plague added. Plus Tom Hanks has been in about 4 movies this year alone. It is no wonder that Inferno is a big zzzz . . .even among his fans.

I think you are going to have to start a new thread for this, summer is long gone.

Regarding Tom Hanks, aside from "Sully", he hasn't had any hits in recent years. Does Toy Story 3 in 2010 count ?

Maybe he's going the way of Julia Roberts, whose time has seemingly passed (no hits since the early 2000s)

This message has been edited. Last edited by: David R,

I would agree with you because I personally can't stand watching Tom Hanks, but the fact is he is still a huge star. He's right up there with the highest paid actors. He has made a lot of bad movies, but it doesn't seem to stop studios from hiring him, especially with that close Spielberg connection.

Julia Roberts on the other hand is now used more as a recognizable name in mediocre episodic films, rather than an actual star. It might be because she is actually a fairly bad actress, but no one cared in her Pretty Woman days.

A sad truth is that male actors get to be leading men for a lot longer than female actors. It doesn't even matter if they stop making good movies, they still are employed. What's the last great movie from Costner, Pacino, DeNiro, Jackman (not X-Men) or even Craig (not Bond)? They will always get offers, the ladies get replaced by newer models. Unfair, but true.

The last few films that Tom Hanks did, prior to Sully, which is playing now:


A Hologram for the King
Ithaca
Bridge of Spies
Saving Mr. Banks
Captain Phillips
Cloud Atlas
Larry Crowne (with Julia Roberts)


Does anyone really remember these ? No-- they think about the films that he did in the 1990s

As you mentioned, he's got a newer one than "Sully", that being "Inferno" which is the third entry in the series that began with "Da Vinci Code". I've not seen any of those.
From those recent ones you listed, I've seen:
Bridge of Spies
Captain Philips
Cloud Atlas

He was very good in all of them, but the ambitious "Cloud Atlas" was easily the best of them.

Tom'll never top "Castaway", but I still enjoy watching him try.

He also has a newly minted, but already classic comedy character, David S. Pumpkins, courtesy of Saturday Night Live.

Google it up now if you haven't seen it.

quote:

Originally posted by chesspieceface:



He also has a newly minted, but already classic comedy character, David S. Pumpkins, courtesy of Saturday Night Live.

Google it up now if you haven't seen it.

That sketch was one of the lamest non-funny sketches that I've ever seen on SNL and I've been watching that show for nearly 30 years. I found it unbearable.

I saw it, it wasn't funny. SNL has way more lame sketches now than good ones.

If it wasn't for its brilliant political parodies, which let's face it practically write themselves in presidential election years , SNL should have been cancelled long ago in MHO.

There's probably not many things more subjective than humor.

It was very funny, to those who found it funny at all. Trust me on that...

quote:

Originally posted by chesspieceface:
There's probably not many things more subjective than humor.

It was very funny, to those who found it funny at all. Trust me on that...

Sounds like this is a 'Marmite' sketch. People either love it or hate it with absolutely nothing in between

Inferno with Tom Hanks has really crashed. It's made a horrendous 26 M in two weeks, and cost 75 M to make !

And Jack Reacher 2 less than 50 M in 3 weeks. What happened to the mighty Tom Cruise at the U.S. box office ?

However, Inferno has made 185 M worldwide and Reacher about 110 worldwide, so maybe they're both doing well overseas

This message has been edited. Last edited by: Tommy C,