Showing posts with label Paul Walker. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Paul Walker. Show all posts

Tuesday, February 5, 2013

Trailer: Fast & Furious 6 spoils but excites while laying down the flag as the biggest action franchise around.

Despite my hope that Universal wouldn't feel the need to expand upon their superb Super Bowl commercial, Universal doesn't just have a new trailer, but an incredibly lengthy 3:22 trailer to boot.  It basically does little more than to expand upon the plot spoilers hinted at in the teaser, with only the last 60 seconds or so devoted to spoilery stunts and action.  I could argue that the trailer should have ended at the 2:20 mark and gone out as an extended tease, but I know that I'm shouting at the wins.  It's great stuff, although I rolled my eyes a bit at the random shots of gyrating women and the cliche of having the main female heroine (newcomer Gina Carano) squaring off against the main female villain (back-from-the-dead Michelle Rodriguiez) rather than having cross-gender fighting.  Those quibbles aside, this looks pretty spectacular, and it seems that the once laughable Fast & Furious franchise is now basically the top pure action franchise in Hollywood in the moment, give-or-take the newly rejuvenated 007 franchise.  The stunts look great, everybody looks happy to be back, and this could easily be one of the biggest movies of the summer, if not the biggest behind surefire smashes Iron Man 3 and Star Trek Into Darkness. Sung Kang is still around, meaning that we're still in pre-Tokyo Drify territory.  Expect his fiery demise to get ret-conned somewhere along the way, perhaps in a gambit involving time travel.  Anyway, Fast & Furious 6 looks like a genuinely great piece of earthbound action.  Now can Universal quit while it's ahead and not spoil anything else from here on out?

Scott Mendelson

Sunday, February 3, 2013

Fast & Furious 6 teaser wins the Super Bowl. I dare Universal to not cut any more marketing materials until after it opens.

Well, that was worth the wait, but then Universal, like Paramount's Transformers series, has always done well by way of Super Bowl teasers with this long-running franchise.  A few notes.  A) Are the random shots of scantily-clad gyrating women really necessary?  B) I still think Universal is nuts not to open this one in April where it will absolutely dominate the pre-summer season.  Oh sure, it may well win the Memorial Day weekend race, but everybody loses a little by the demo head-to-head match ups.  The Hangover III and Fast & Furious 6 are literally targeting the same demographic and both films will open a bit less than they otherwise would have without direct competition.  Coming off the obscenely good and quite popular Fast Five, an unopposed Fast & Furious 6 would be looking at a $100 million+ Fri-Sun debut.  Heck, The Hangover part III may well have a shot at that too under different circumstances, even if the second film wasn't quite as beloved as the first one.  But going head-to-head?  Now both will be lucky to get past $75 million apiece.  For what?  A dick-measuring contest?  Anyway, last point, this is such a grand and effective teaser that I challenge Universal to stop.

Saturday, February 2, 2013

Fast & Furious 6 gets poster and most boring title possible.

They just couldn't wait one more day could they?  Universal is of course debuting the first teaser for the sixth Fast and the Furious film tomorrow during the Super Bowl, and the prime reason for curiosity was discovering what the title was going to be.  Well, wonder no longer, cause Universal had to release the above teaser poster and spoil all the fun.  And really, Universal, Fast & Furious 6?  That was the best you could come up with?  They could have gone with any number of more creative titles for this sixth installment.  And while my personal pick, Faster & Furiousier, is probably never going to happen (followed of course by Fastest and Furiousest), the producers certainly had license to have a bit more fun than they've obviously chosen to do.  Also, boring title aside, we have a synopsis, which takes the story in the most logical next direction (the gang teams up with Dwayne Johnson in exchange for pardons), but it's also a little odd when you consider the last film.  

If you recall, the whole point behind the big $100 million drug money heist was to earn the financial security needed to not live on the lam anymore.  Yet now we learn that they are basically suffering from the same 'this is no way to raise a family' issues they had last time.  Minor issues to be sure, likely more to do with the generic plot synopsis than any real script problems, but I do hope that part 6 is indeed a continuation rather than a rehash.  What made Fast Five more than just hollow action stunts is the attention to continuity from the previous installments that gave the film an emotional kick that it otherwise would not have had.  Anyway, Fast & Furious 6 opens May 24th, against The Hangover part III.  One of those should damn well move since they are both targeting the same demographic, but that's not my problem.  I'll post the Super Bowl teaser sometime tomorrow evening.  So what would be your pick for a better, more creative title for this sixth entry?  Oh, and the official synopsis is below (spoiler warning if you didn't stay for the end credits of Fast Five).

Scott Mendelson

Since Dom (Diesel) and Brian’s (Walker) Rio heist toppled a kingpin’s empire and left their crew with $100 million, our heroes have scattered across the globe. But their inability to return home and living forever on the lam have left their lives incomplete.

Meanwhile, Hobbs (Johnson) has been tracking an organization of lethally skilled mercenary drivers across 12 countries, whose mastermind (Evans) is aided by a ruthless second-in-command revealed to be the love Dom thought was dead, Letty (Rodriguez). The only way to stop the criminal outfit is to outmatch them at street level, so Hobbs asks Dom to assemble his elite team in London. Payment? Full pardons for all of them so they can return home and make their families whole again.

Tuesday, September 13, 2011

An oft-told tale: Why Point Break is this era's Invasion of the Body Snatchers.

The film world rolled their eyes in collective disgust yesterday after it was announced that Warner Bros. was financing and/or distributing a remake of Kathryn Bigelow's Point Break.  That 1991 cult-favorite of course starred Keanu Reeves as FBI Agent Johnny Utah, who goes undercover as a surfer to catch a gang of bank robbers, led by Patrick Swayze, who pull heists to finance their endless summer.  The film is cheesy to the point of being high opera, but I always admired how straight-faced it was, and how seriously it took its violence.  The picture takes awhile to achieve a body count, but when it does, its jolting.  In this film, the loss of any life, be it an innocent bank guard or one of the robbers, was tragic and cause for mourning.  And the finale was refreshingly grim, acknowledging that a violent crime story doesn't have a happy ending just because the bad guys all died.

Saturday, April 30, 2011

Friday box office (04/29/11): $33.2 million for Fast Five, $79-83 million weekend debut likely. Prom and Hoodwinked Too under-perform.

With an opening day that is bigger than all-but two live-action opening weekends this year (Battle: Los Angeles's $36 million opening and The Green Hornet's $33.5 million debut weekend), Fast Five kicked off the summer movie season in high style. The film pulled in just 11% of its opening day tally in midnight screenings. If the picture performs with the same 2.4x weekend multiplier as Fast and Furious ($30m/$72m), it's got an $80 million opening weekend on tap, bigger than the two largest opening weekends of 2011 (Rio and Rango) combined, nearly $10 million higher than the last picture, the record for an April debut, and the biggest three-day opening in Universal's history (the prior record holder is The Lost World: Jurassic Park with $72.3 million). Obviously we'll know how it plays tomorrow, but I'm personally expecting a less frontloaded picture than the previous entry, if only because it's a much better film (although that may not be a factor until next weekend). There's nothing breathtaking about a well-marketed sequel in a popular franchise performing in line with expectations, but it's still nice when a good genre film opens well. Prom made just $1.8 million while Hoodwinked Too grossed just $1.1 million. I don't know how much Dylan Dog: Dead of Night made on just $270,000 on 875 screens.

Scott Mendelson

Wednesday, April 20, 2011

Review: Fast Five (2011)

Fast Five
2011
130 minutes
rated PG-13

by Scott Mendelson

Fast Five is frankly something of a miracle. Here is the fifth entry of a ten-year old franchise that has rarely surpassed mediocrity, but which now offers up a chapter that borders on genuine greatness. Here is a sequel that pays explicit attention to what came before and rewards viewers who actually watched and enjoyed the previous films. Unlike so many later sequels that basically just disregard the prior sequels and try to be a sequel to the original or a stand-alone reboot, Fast Five embraces its character relationships and continuity. I had not seen any of the Fast and the Furious films until the week prior to seeing Fast Five. Having watched the prior entries over a period of a few days, I really didn't care for any of them. As much as I enjoyed Fast Five, I cannot even imagine how rewarding this movie will be for those who have loved this series since the beginning.

LinkWithin

Related Posts with Thumbnails

Labels