It's difficult (and a little silly) to try and judge an entire quarter-year's movies in one lump sum -- but that's what we seem to do at the end of every Summer Movie Season. That's when all our excitement, expectations, and final reactions come colliding together and we find ourselves thinking: "Was I actually looking forward to that piece of crap for four months?" But to me, each summer is like a walk through a carnival: Some of the attractions dazzle me, others simply don't interest me, and a few are just a waste of tickets. But once early May rolls around, I'm always ready for another trip to the Hollywood Movie Carnival. (It's where you find all the tentpoles!)

So while I'm elated to greet the upcoming season of "prestige movies," there's little denying that we've had one hell of a good summer, cinematical-ly speaking. I'm not talking about box office grosses, because frankly that stuff is so unimportant. What matters is that we got some good flicks, a few pieces of mindless (yet well-made) popcorn adventures, and even a few great films that will enjoy a very long shelf life. So while I'm not exactly sure that 2008 represents the finest Summer Movie Season of all time, I'd definitely say it was more good than bad. But if you can think of a summer that was better than this one, you know where to throw your comments. (In the comments section.)

The first giganto film of the summer has been given a DVD release date, according to Video Business, and if all goes accordingly it looks like you'll be able to enjoy Iron Man in the comforts of your own living room (legally) on September 30. There's no word on special features yet, however Amazon now allows you to pre-order three different versions, including your standard single-disc ($34.99), a two-disc special edition ($39.99) and a Blu-ray Special Collector's Edition ($39.99). (Note: Those are the list prices and each DVD is cheaper through Amazon.) The article also says to expect Indiana Jones and the Kingdom of the Crystal Skull to hit DVD in October with Kung Fu Panda in November. One imagines (and hopes) Hancock, WALL-E and The Dark Knight will all hit DVD by Christmas as well.

But back to that Iron Man DVD. Those of you attending San Diego Comic Con might want to listen up because Marvel will be hyping up the DVD at their Comic-Con booth by passing out a flash drive containing a sneak peek at the Iron Man DVD. Of course, should we get our hands on one, you'll be the first to know what's on it.

So, who's buying this DVD?

Update: Thanks to Cinematical reader Jeffrey for pointing us toward a look at the limited edition Crystal Skull packaging for the Indiana Jones and the Kingdom of the Crystal Skull DVD over at Amazon. Check it out below ...

Not to be a snake in everyone's boot, but the all-time opening weekend record is not in the bag for The Dark Knight just yet. The $155.3 million weekend estimate is just that -- a studio estimate -- and when the final numbers come out later this afternoon, Spider-Man 3's $151.1 million may still be on top of the heap. So everyone should chill for a few more hours.

Still -- $150 million! In one weekend! For a movie that's dark and scary and complicated and dead serious! That's pretty amazing, though my hopes for this wonderful film's box office staying power were dampened somewhat when I saw it a second time yesterday and heard the banter of the couple next to me, which consisted of statements like "Do you know what's going on? I don't know what's going on," and "I don't even understand who the bad guy is." (?!??) I guess you can't please everyone.

Anyway. $150 million +. First person to call it a disappointment because it's not the world's first $200 million opening weekend gets a kick in the crotch.

The weekend's counterprogramming saw mixed results. Mamma Mia!'s $27.6 million is an undeniable victory, though I think the market was begging for something not action- or family-oriented. I'm not sure what to say about Space Chimps' $7.4 million, seventh-place bow. I don't think anyone could have expected much more from a movie called Space Chimps.

The Dark Knight did a number on the superhero-themed holdovers, kicking Hellboy II down to the tune of 71%, and Hancock a somewhat gentler 57%. Hancock should see $200 million by the end of the week; Hellboy II probably won't get to $70 million domestic, though it should beat its predecessor's $60 million take.

The full top 10 estimates after the jump.

Sometimes a movie's concept tells you everything you need to know about it. Other times you hear one and go "well, that's kind of weird -- I wonder what they'll make of this." Surprisingly, Will Ferrell's latest project fits into the latter category. It's a dramedy called Two Face, written by X-Files vet Vince Gilligan, who also had a hand in the Hancock screenplay. The pitch: Ferrell will play a virulent racist who develops a split personality after an accident, and his alter ego turns out to be a bleeding-heart liberal.

I think the success of this concept depends on how frankly they're willing to approach the racism angle. Obviously there are certain things you're not supposed to say even in unflattering portrayals of racist characters, and certain things that Will Ferrell probably doesn't want to say for the sake of his career. (Side note: I find it a bit curious that period movies can get away with patently offensive displays of racism while movies set in the present tend to shy away, as if we're all pretending that we've solved the racism problem. Any counterexamples? Monster's Ball, maybe.) There's a lot of potential for trenchant satire in something like this, and a lot of potential to make something anodyne and boring, too.

No word on what comes first, this or Sherlock Holmes.

I was recently enjoying a fast-food lunch with my old friend Josh, and we were discussing the film we'd just seen. (A little something called The Dark Knight.) And in the middle of my ramblings I accidentally said something slightly insightful. It went a little something like this: "The thing about superheroes is that, on the outside, what with the costumes and the nifty gizmos and all the punching, they're kids stuff, which is great. But once you scratch the surface just a little bit, you're dealing with acres of subtext that kids can barely comprehend."

And then Josh asked me what my point was. It's this: We finally have some filmmakers who aren't afraid to handle superhero movies for grown-ups. I'd hardly call Hancock a family-type flick, both of the recent Marvel movies (Iron Man and The Incredible Hulk) managed to treat their "older" audiences with respect, last weekend's Hellboy 2 is chock-full of dazzling ideas, and now this: The Dark Knight. Dang. My review will arrive later this week, but I won't be the only one calling it the Godfather 2 of superhero movies. (In a lot of ways it's also a bit like The Empire Strikes Back! Tonally, anyway.) Best of all, the movie is a big meaty DRAMA, and I don't mean "drama" as in "masterpiece theater."

I guess Eddie Murphy knew something we didn't. I don't know how much the star showing up for the premiere of his own movie would have helped matters, but it couldn't have hurt. The poorly (though not abysmally) reviewed Meet Dave somehow turned out to be Murphy's worst debut weekend grosser since 2002's legendarily bad The Adventures of Pluto Nash, and before that 1998's Holy Man. Actually, Meet Dave's $5.3 million take just barely edged out Holy Man's opening. And that's pretty impressive. I probably shouldn't be too surprised, since even I didn't bother watching the thing, and I see just about everything. Bigger and better-looking films have at the moment cornered every demographic that Dave could have aimed for.

Better news for Hellboy II: The Golden Army, whose $35.9 million bow won't set any records this summer, but is a solid improvement on Hellboy's $23 million opening (it would go on to gross $60 million) and good enough for first. On the other hand, Journey to the Center of the Earth's $20.6 million, 3rd place finish has to be considered a mixed success. $11.7 million of that came from the film's 857 3-D locations (significantly less than a third of its total sites). That's not surprising, considering how much the movie was marketed as a 3-D affair; I wonder how many people went in thinking they were going to watch it in 3-D and went home disappointed. (Not receiving a pair of 3-D glasses would have tipped them off, I suppose.)

Nothing remarkable going on among the holdovers this week. Hancock dropped 47% in its second weekend and is sitting pretty with a $165 million cume (though recall that it was released two Tuesdays ago). Wall-E lost another 42% and, at $162.7 million after three weeks, it's tracking behind The Incredibles and Finding Nemo, but ahead of every other Pixar offering.

The full top 10 after the jump!

At times, I think my dream vacation involves traveling the world and watching a movie in a theater wherever I stop. But despite the fact that I'm a theater geek (as Erik Davis recently pointed out), I do have other interests, and, surprisingly, moviegoing is not usually my primary objective when I take a trip. I am often curious, though, and occasionally I'll check out a cinema in another land, especially if it's a cinema unlike those I frequent at home (such as the El Cerrito Speakeasy). However, after my visit to a faraway theater this past week, I have an additional reason to consider my dream vacation to be something entirely else: cross-country moviegoing would be really, really depressing.

Because I've never been on a cinema tour, I can't say for sure, but I'm assuming that a lot of neighborhood multiplexes around the U.S. lean toward the side of dissatisfactory moviegoing experiences. Whether a corporate-owned or independent business, there are a lot of reasons that a movie theater may be underwhelming its customers on a frequent basis. Look at the usual complaints from Cinematical commenters: expensive concessions and ticket prices, dirty auditoriums, too many advertisements and ill-mannered audience members are constantly cited as excuses for why people don't go to the movies. But more than all these typical reasons is the worst offense of all: poor exhibition.

I'm still a little iffy on the way this whole Dark Knight thing was handled; how it was screened for press three weeks prior to its arrival in theaters, with Warners letting folks go crazy with regards to reviews, interviews and all that jazz. The pre-hype has reached an epic level, sure, but doesn't it sorta take away from films like Hancock or Hellboy II: The Golden Army? Shouldn't they get their time to shine? I feel like The Dark Knight kinda stomped into town, shoved off a bunch of other films and said, "I'm here now ... a little early, so deal with it."

Well, we are dealing with it. And it's interesting to see how different forms of media are handling the promotion of the Bat-quel. Online, of course, you're getting all the geeky reviews -- with some folks stopping just short from calling it the greatest thing to ever happen to cinema in the history of the universe. Last night on TV, my local news did a whole piece on Heath Ledger's performance and how everyone is talking Oscar and how, ya know, he's dead and stuff. I wasn't paying too close attention, but some of the ridiculous things they said -- about Ledger being dead and how that's the only reason why people want to see the film -- were just so overtly offensive to anyone with even a half an ounce of respect for the man. I was a tad disgusted, but then again I kind of expected it -- these news organizations don't look at people as human beings, they look at them as stories. Sensational stories.

But back to the hype ...

Back at this year's Sundance Film Festival, a bunch of folks were "losing it" over Jonathan Levine's The Wackness -- saying, to a certain extent, that it was the dopest flick of the fest. And that's cool. Support those films you love, right? Well, not long after the film premiered at Sundance, it was acquired by Sony Pictures Classics. Wonderful! A film a lot of people loved was picked up and would hit theaters at some point later in the year. Ah, but all was not well in blogger land -- see, a few bloggers were disgusted that SPC picked it up, going so far as to send an email around trying to get other people to either join their cause and/or write about it. Their reasoning was that SPC had a poor track record when it came to promoting indie films, and were afraid The Wackness would become yet another casualty. That it would disappear in limited release ... and be eaten by a Cabbage Patch Kid, or whatever.

And so it was. Some folks agreed with their cause, while others couldn't understand why they'd be upset when, in reality, their favorite film WOULD eventually hit theaters. You can't say that about every Sundance film, or festival film for that matter, and so the simple act of being picked up for distribution is, well, kind of a big deal. After a flurry of posts from a few different blogs which attacked the deal, attacked the teaser poster and then attacked the first teaser trailer, it all seemed to fizzle out. From that point on, SPC continued to poor on the Wackness marketing: We got roughly four or five different trailers, a poster, a viral campaign, a dope website, TV spots and a slick soundtrack.

Was SPC botching it all up? Hardly ... but then came the film's box office debut this past weekend ...

The biggest movie star in the world has another July 4th notch in his belt. His fourth huge Independence Day release (fifth if you count Wild Wild West, which came out June 30th) is also his biggest: the outrageously underappreciated Hancock had a $66 million 3-day weekend, and $107 million over the five-and-a-half days from Tuesday night through Sunday. It's the third-best 3-day of the year, behind only Iron Man and Indiana Jones. The figure is skewed since the movie came out on Tuesday and Friday was a national holiday, but that's the stat.

The wide release of the critically acclaimed Kit Kittredge: An American Girl didn't go over too well: the movie took in $3.6 million on over 1800 screens. Not too surprising given its extremely narrow target demographic, but I was expecting it to expand a little bit stronger.

Wall-E took a pretty harsh 47% hit in its second weekend -- 30-40% has been more standard for recent Pixar releases -- but its $128 million cume is nothing to cry about. Wanted had it even worse after last week's surprisingly robust debut, dropping 60% to $20.6 million for the weekend and $91 million total. And no one wants to see The Love Guru, which dropped out of the top 10 in its third week and won't make it to $40 million.

The full 3-day top 10 after the jump.

Can you make a summertime movie that gives audiences excitement, adventure and real drama -- and still have it flop? Are Hancock's reviews missing the big picture? And does the success of Sex and the City mean that the niches of movie marketing are going to get even more narrow? Joining us this week to talk about all these topics and more is David Poland, editor-in-chief of Movie City News and author of The Hot Blog. Cinematical's podcast is now available through iTunes; you can subscribe at this link. Also, you can listen directly here at Cinematical by clicking below:



As ever, you can download the entire podcast right here -- and those of you with RSS Podcast readers can find all of Cinematical's podcast content at this link.

"If you don't make it yourself, it isn't fun. It's entertainment."

I apologize to my colleagues and readers, because most film critics, reviewers and cinephiles have been known, at least at one point in his or her life, to call a movie "fun." I certainly am guilty of it somewhere, in some review or blog post or whatever. But I'm here to finally set the record straight, even though David Mamet clearly already informed us via the quote above, which is spoken by his wife, actress Rebecca Pidgeon, in his 2000 film State and Main. A movie can not be fun, it can only be entertaining. That is, if we're merely watching it on the screen and had no involvement in its production. Actually, even if we make a film ourself, watching it afterwards should technically still be considered entertaining rather than fun.

Of course, a movie experience can be fun. I have fun at a lot of movies I attend, but not because of the movie I'm watching. Like in the case of my recent experience with The Strangers, the movie was not what was fun, not even my observance of the audience was officially fun. But for me, the ticket buying, the popcorn eating, the sitting in the dark is all fun. And the movie was entertaining, as was the crowd. I guess that the experience of watching a movie at home or on your iPod can also be fun, but still in any scenario, the actual movie itself is never fun; it's only entertaining.

Okay, so we went through something similar with Frank Darabont's unused draft of the latest Indiana Jones installment, which managed to be a bit better (read: Mutt-less) compared to the still entertaining end result. Now, it appears that the original draft for Hancock -- long titled Tonight, He Comes -- has popped up by way of Jeff Wells over at Hollywood Elsewhere (read it here). Oh, and if it's authentic, it happens to be missing the next-to-last page.

I've found the behind-the-scenes hearsay -- conveniently summed up in this NY Times piece -- on this film to be fairly fascinating. First, as scripted by Vy Vincent Ngo, Tonight had made the rounds as a reportedly hard-R superhero drama that capitalized on the somewhat sexual nature of the title. However, it seems once Will Smith was brought on board, Sony saw fit to tame things down considerably.

Even as recently as April, the MPAA had twice handed them an R instead of the sought-after PG-13, and now the finished result runs a choppy 92 minutes -- distinctly shorter than indicated in AICN test screening reports which made particular mention of a subplot involving statutory rape. Of course, as Wells brings up, it's hard to ignore the involvement of producer/screenwriter Akiva Goldsman, whose recent work on Smith's last hit, I Am Legend, had a similarly slapdash second half at the compromise of the original material.

I've yet to get more than a couple of pages into this thing, but do you guys think this is the real deal, and if so, do you guys think that this is the real film compared to what's on thousands of screens this week?

Well here's something you don't see every day: A big, flashy summertime "tentpole" movie that A) takes chances, B) bucks convention, and C) takes some real risks with its subject material. Obviously the safe approach is for Will Smith to do (yet another) easily-digestible (if somewhat mindless) blockbuster like I, Robot or I Am Legend or Independence Day -- but this time the endlessly profitable Will Smith is working with a rather distinctive director who refuses to cater to formula. That director would be Peter Berg, and this guy has yet to make a bad film.

Unfortunately the production history on Hancock is not a fantastic one. There was a revolving door of directors and script polishers before Columbia finally started production -- but there were still marketing issues, last-minute reshoots, and MPAA miseries to deal with. And yet, despite all that, Hancock arrives like a breath of weirdly fresh air for moviegoers who like a little heart and soul mixed in with their hyper-kinetic action mayhem. Toss some sharp wit and an impressive display of edge into the mix, and I think you may have one of my favorite movies of the summer. (Although one can plainly tell that there was some late cutting done to the flick, all in the name of the almighty PG-13 rating, of course.)

It was a good weekend at the box office for both of last week's newbies, marking the first time in history that two films opening on the same weekend pulled in over $50 million each. Here's the top five:

1. Wall-E: $63 million
2. Wanted: $50.9 million
3. Get Smart: $20.2 million
4. Kung Fu Panda: $11.7 million
5. The Incredible Hulk: $9.6 million

Only one major release this week, but we've also got one going into wider release.

Hancock
What's It All About: Will Smith plays Hancock, a hard drinking anti-social superhero, and a PR agent played by Jason Bateman sets out to repair Hancock's public image.
Why It Might Do Well: Will Smith may not always have the Midas touch (I Am Legend left me cold) but he's got quite a few successful blockbusters under his belt, and people are loving the superhero flicks these days. I've liked Bateman's work a lot since Arrested Development, and I'm always glad to see him. Also, Cinematical's own Kim Voynar has given the film her seal of approval.
Why It Might Not Do Well: Unlike most big-budget superhero movies, this one doesn't originate from another media like comic books, so it doesn't come with the core fanbase of an Iron Man or an Incredible Hulk. Also, the 36% fresh rating at Rottentomatoes.com is not encouraging.
Number of Theaters: 3,900
Prediction: $45 million

And going into wider release this week...