Like Joaquin Phoenix, I too have thought of pursuing a rap career. I’m also thinking of learning about wine. It combines snobbery and alcohol, so I don’t know how I don’t.


I was talking to a director about 3-D a while back and he was poo-pooing the very notion. “Great, we’re back to the 50’s again.” I couldn’t agree more, but it’s the new hotness, and like IMAX stuff, it’s a way to make the theatrical experience more than the home viewing one.

The problem here is that this model has not been successfully set up with theaters. Much like how digital projection is still something of an anomaly, 3-D screens are limited and the idea of it advancing to greater depth is going to take some soothing.

Theoretically this is a great idea. When you have a – say – fourteen or even a ten screen theater – even with two or three films released a week, there’s always enough screens for a film to keep playing, and if people feel like they have to see something theatrically, you might see a film that holds on and on as a result. But if such a theater only has one or even two screen equipped to handle such a product, and there is a constant stream of 3-D films, then the whole process is soiled.

And then the other problem is that the home video revenue stream takes the hit as well, which is doubly painful as the reason why you go 3-D in the first place is to keep the film from feeling like something that could just as easily be watched at home. And if the film can’t keep playing theatrically, then when it comes to home video – which is already drying up as the industry shits itself, and doesn’t know if blu-ray or downloadss are truly the future – the film is going to be at a loss in a way that even pan and scan never effected home video from purchasing.

But this switch to 3-D is relatively new, and it’s possible that theaters will adapt with the help of studios in an effort to help keep people coming, and both parties may be happy to try and expand this to being a regular function of theaters. But we’re not there yet. And the stream of product is coming. Of the 7.000 prints of Monsters Vs. Aliens shipped, only 2000 or so are in 3-D. That better change by the time Avatar hits, for everyone’s sake.


So there’s a Monsters Vs. Aliens movie opening this weekend. Dreamworks is proud of this, but off-season proud. So let’s say Watchmen money. Let’s say $53 Million. And then there’s Haunting in Connecticut, which is coming after a string of horror films. It’s PG-13, Lionsgate and cheap. Let’s go under $20, but not be surprised if it hits that. And then there’s 12 Rounds. I’m supposed to possibly see this tomorrow at the Grauman’s Chinese. What can I say? It looks awesomely Renny Harlinish. But only nuts will see it.

So let’s do it:

1. Monsters Vs. Alien Vs. Predator – $53.6 Million
2. Haunting somewhere and shit – $16.5 Million
3. I Love You, Man – $12.5 Million
4. Knowing – $11 Million
5. Duplicity - $8 Million

And then Sunday we do what we do.