Monday, December 12, 2011

Rant #635: Holiday Flops

I am sure that you heard that this past weekend was the worst in the past three years for the movie industry.

In fact, even fewer people went to the movies this past weekend then went to theaters right after the 9/11 terrorist attacks.

"Only" $77 million was made this weekend. The top film was the flop "New Year's Eve," a film that will probably wind up on most "worst" lists for 2011. It recorded a "paltry" $13.7 million in ticket sales. It was followed by another new movie, the dreadfully reviewed "The Sitter," and the other top movies included "The Twilight Saga: Breaking Dawn-Part 1," "The Muppets," "Arthur Christmas," "Hugo," "The Descendants," "Happy Feet Two," "Jack and Jill," and "Immortals."

Each and every one of these films received poor to horrible reviews when they came out--including "The Descendants," sorry George Clooney fans--and heck, with this slate of films, why would anyone want to go to the movies today?

My wife and I have been talking about this recent slate of holiday movies, and I cannot ever remember a worse lineup of movies during holiday-time ever.

And I mean ever.

The next "blockbuster" that is supposed to thrill us is the "Sherlock Holmes" sequel. You know, the sequel where Robert Downey Jr.'s portrayal as a lazy slob superhero--Arthur Conan Doyle is probably turning in his grave--will continue. My family saw the first one, and even though my wife just loves Downey, she even said that it was one of the worst movies she ever saw.

So we won't be going to the movies for a long, long time.

I don't know where Hollywood's head is. The either remake movies or retread old ideas, and let me tell you, it generally does not work.

My parents were the type of people who used to go to the movies every week. And they continued going every week--they are now both 80 years old--until the past few months. They just can't justify spending $9 or more on the slate of films that Hollywood is releasing nowadays.

And don't be fooled by the dollar figures. Remember, movies cost about $9 a ticket now, and a couple of dollars higher for 3D fare. So while revenues have probably increased, the number of tickets sold has actually decreased.

And also, let's not forget that if you want to eat anything at the movie theater, you are going to have to pay for it, and pay for it with a lot of money.

So for a family of four, a movie day can cost over $50.

Why go to the movies? You can see the same trash, and save money, at home.

We did just that. My wife and I rented--and I really mean we rented because there was nothing else out there--a movie called "Bad Teacher," a film which certainly spells the end of Cameron Diaz's movie career.

She plays a teacher who is only in it for the money for a future boob job.

Yes, you read that right.

Diaz--who was never my cup of tea anyway--is horrific in this movie, as is her former real life boyfriend, Justin Timberlake.

The movie is embarrassing.

But we paid just $1.30 to see it through the local Redbox machine.

What trash.

And I know the other day I said that the "Three Stooges" movie looks interesting.

It does--but I pretty much expect that to be trash too.

But yes, I will probably fork over my money to see this trash.

Movies are a habit, and even though my family and I don't go regularly anymore, I wouldn't say the recent garbage put out by Hollywood is its death knell.

Dopes like me will always go to the movies, even if it isn't a weekly occurrence anymore.

But please, Hollywood, please put out something that is worth seeing.



  1. Most things out there are not worth our time. It's okay though, the movies will put themselves out of business soon enough. When people don't want to go to the theatre or fly in a plane then things really have to be changed. Movies should be a distraction from all the stress of modern living, not add to my discomfort.

  2. Agreed. And I cannot believe all the trash that's out there now. Not very holiday-like, in my opinion.



yasmin lawsuit