Summer Movies I Hope Don't Suck - 2013

I'm going to try and keep this to just one post this time, unlike last year's two-parter.  It'll be tough, as there are a lot of films coming up this summer that could be said to qualify as "summer movies."  Heck, there were a few things I skipped that might have squeaked in if it was a slow year, like Hangover 3 (not even remotely interested), Kick-Ass 2 (ditto) or Tyler Perry Presents Peeples (Hmmm... I don't even know what to do with that). 

And then, of course, there are the animated films, which more and more fit the idea of a "summer movie," but which I have so far excluded from this summer preview series.  To be honest, this may have to change in the future.  For one thing, if Despicable Me 2 is anywhere near as good as the first one (doubtful, given the sequel curse), it will be one of the better flicks coming in the hot months ahead.


And then there is The Great Gatsby, which will be released in early summer.  Not a traditional summer movie by any means, and yet for some reason the trailer makes me want to see it.  It's the historian in me, I'd say.  I had to read that novel in high school, but it is among those that I have developed more of an appreciation for since reaching adulthood.  And the trailer really shows off the lush nature of the time.  All I gotta say is "wow!"  Talk about rolling in gratuitous wealth.

But enough on that for now.  Let's get on with the previews.  One thing to note, I have changed the part where I usually say "Probability of Seeing It Anyway," to something more appropriate.  With only a couple of exclusions, I did see all the films from the list last year (G.I. JOE: Retribution being one such exception, because it was delayed until this past spring, and I still haven't seen Snow White and The Huntsman, though my wife said it was good when she saw it on Redbox).  Instead, I have gone with a scale of probability to cost, as I use when reviewing films I have already seen.  It will go as follows: the percent chance of seeing a film in the regular theater, then the cheapseats, and then the video store/Redbox.  That makes a better breakdown, in my opinion.  Hope that clarifies.


Iron Man 3 (May 1?)



Well, well, well...  Iron Man 3.  By the time most people even see this post, it'll be in theaters (in the U.S., that is).  The trailer above says "April 25," but Yahoo Movies says May 1.  Having trouble making up our minds on when to release the big movie?

And is it really going to be a "big" movie?  Let's hope so.  The first Iron Man is eminently watchable and quite fun.  #2?  Not so much.  But I did break down a few months back and get it - used off Amazon.com - with some money left on an old gift card.  Between you and me, based on the trailer, Iron Man 3 looks more like the second film than it does the first.  That could be problematic.

And of course, The Avengers had Iron Man also.  Tony Stark was one of the better parts of the entire film.  And I do happen to think it was a good film, too.  So if Iron Man 3 can utilize the stuff from its first foray on the big screen and also the Tony Stark we all know from Avengers, it'll do alright.  Otherwise, it'll just be another big budget action hero film.  With Gwyneth Paltrow in her underwear, that is.  What, did her shirt get blown off by all the explosions in the trailer?

I'm just saying.

Probability of Suckage:  When I first saw this trailer a few months back, I was sort of underwhelmed.  Its content seems a bit formulaic.  If the movie follows that pattern, it'll probably be awesome to watch on a big screen.  With my incredulity turned off.  Temporarily.  So I'd give it a 50/50 split right now, based on my gut.

Probability of Where I'll See It: If it is reviewed as being REALLY GOOD, then I might try and scrape a few dollars together to see it in the big theater.  I'd say the chances of that are 50%.  If not, I'd say 95% chance of seeing it in the cheap seats, in a few months time (when it gets there, that is).  If it gets poor reviews, I'd say 100% chance of seeing it via Redbox later this year.


Star Trek - Into Darkness (May 17)



Attack of the lens flare reboot, part duex?  OK, so the trailer doesn't sport much lens flare, but everything else seems fitting.  Epic space ships battles?  Check.  Jumping out of spaceships?  Check.  People in trouble?  Check.  A villain you can't quite put your hands on, but seems really brooding and sociopathic and humorless?  A big check.

In fact, everything about this trailer seems reminiscent of the first movie.  But that's OK, because the first movie was pretty good.  Except for the part where Eric Bana (as the Romulan villain) re-wrote history and all the Star Trek I grew up with got ret-conned into oblivion, that is.  Who knows what will happen in this new Trek?  Spock could grow a mullet and do a live comedy/magic act in Vegas!  Kirk could become a senator for the state of Ohio!  Scotty could keep a pet iguana in Engineering!  Chekhov could get himself surgically altered to appear as a woman (I'd quip about "going where no man has gone before," but it's been done, so...)!

Probability of Suckage:  As with Iron Man 3, there doesn't appear to be anything here we haven't seen before.  That could go either way.  The new Star Trek series doesn't have a bad sheep in its background... yet (but ironically, it does have a "Bad Robot" - small joke).  So I'm betting 30% chance of sucking.

Probability of Where I'll See It:  Nearly 100% chance of seeing it in the big theater.  I have a relative, who turned me on to Star Trek as a kid, who wants to see it together.  And hey - that's great with me.


Fast And Furious 6 (May 24)



Oh please.  Still, somebody must be watching these things.  Or else how could they afford to keep Vin Diesel in a job?

Vin.  What happened, man?  You were a rising star at one time.  Pitch Black spawned a whole host of interesting sci-fi stuff, including one of the best video game spin-offs from a film, Chronicles of Riddick: Escape From Butcher Bay.  And then suddenly, you become the paragon of trailer park action heroes?  I'm confused.  Did you mean to get type-cast, or did it just sort of happen?  Not that you were ever Sir Laurence Olivier or anything, but the grungy thing has really stuck to you until...  well, here we are.

Yes, Vin Diesel does that "everyman" scoundrel well, and that sort of thing seems de rigueur for the Fast and Furious movies (I think I saw ten minutes of one of these films one day, so I think I know how this works).  But my gripe is, how many times can we see the same tired car chase scenes with intercut gun battles and fist fights and scantily clad hootchie chics shaking their money makers, and not get more than just a tad bit dubious?

The answer?  Obviously six times.  Hence, Fast and Furious 6.  This time they didn't even bother to come up with a catchy title.  By the way, my favorite title had to be "2 Fast 2 Furious."  Does that mean it's the second movie, or the fourth one?  I can't tell.  You know, because two plus two equals...  four?  Sorry, my brain cells hurt just thinking about this series of films.

Probability of Suckage:  I'm obviously biased, but I'd say this film has all kinds of suckage potential.  If I step back and try to assume a "mainstream" point of view, I'd predict 65%.  Minimum.  If you can't tell, from my own point of view, it's a no-doubt 100%.  But that's just me.

Probability of Where I'll See It:  50% chance of seeing it on Redbox.  If I really want to maintain continuity for my end of year wrap up of the movies that did suck.  And if there's absolutely nothing better going on here on planet Earth at the time.  Sorry Fast & Furious fans, I'd rather watch the 1955 original with John Ireland and Dorothy Malone (who?) than catch an hour and a half of this junk.


After Earth (May 31)



Is there going to be a sequel (or should I say prequel?) called Before Earth?

You know, a person could start to wonder about Wil Smith's longevity.  A few years back, you couldn't go to the theater on the 4th of July and not see a big line for a newly released Wil Smith film.  The guy was Mr. Independence Day (literally and figuratively). 

But now, he's been bumped to Memorial Day.  Now I'm not saying one holiday is better than the other.  In fact, I have some very fond memories of Memorial Day camping trips with my best friend back in High School.  I kissed a girl for the first time on that first trip (me just out of my sophomore year, her just out of her senior; I guess I always had a thing for older women - grin).  She was a skan- er... let's say she was not a really nice girl.  But I still kissed her.

Where was I?  Oh yeah, the film's release date.  I do happen to think that being moved forward in the year from the holiday that Smith used to own to this one is a potential sign of losing steam.

As for the film itself?  Well, it seems to me that the trailer spoils it completely.  But if you didn't catch the subtle hints, I'll not give them away.  I will say, the action looks exciting, and Smith's son seems well suited to take up the family mantle.  I am also curious to see how the film compares to Tom Cruise's latest outing, Oblivion.  Haven't seen that, as of this writing, but I hear it's kinda dumb.

Probability of Suckage: 25%.  The CGI looks pretty decent, and the idea - though it's been done before - is cool.  The real hook for me is the father-son thing, which may give the film some needed emotional connection to the audience.  Maybe Wil Smith isn't washed up just yet.

Probability of Where I'll See It: 60% chance of the big theater.  I'd set aside precious entertainment dollars for this, but they are in short supply these days.  But if not in the big theater, 99% chance of the cheap seats.  And if life is just too complex, even if the film is rated only mediocre, I'd say 100% chance of Redbox.  Of those mentioned so far, this seems the one I'd be most interested in seeing.

But there are more items to come.


Now You See Me (May 31)



To compete with Wil Smith and son, we have a movie about magic thieves?  Yeah, I might bite here.  After all, on-screen magic movies do intrigue me.  And if we need a counterpoint to Fast and Furious 6's thief motif (see what I did there?), this will do nicely.  Why steal cars when you can steal tons of cash?  And from the rich, just to turn about and give it to the poor.  With your cut of course, as the trailer implies.

Probability of Suckage: I think this film has less chance of doing poorly than other sci-fi/action flics mentioned so far.  The market is broader, for one.  And at the same time, it avoids that stereotypical trashy feel that Fast and Furious 6 exudes (if you haven't noticed, that film will be the whipping boy of the post).  So I'm going to go out on a limb, of sorts, and predict 20% chance of sucking, or even less.

Probability of Where I'll See It:  On the other hand, being a "safer" bet makes it a bit less appealing.  So I'd say the chances of seeing it in the big theater - for me - is about 20%.  That's if somebody dumped money on me and I could do whatever I felt like doing.  Competing against After Earth, this just doesn't compare for me.  50% chance of going to the cheap seats to see it.  Especially if the wife wants to.  And 85% chance of a Redbox viewing.  If it isn't rated poorly by the regular critics, that is.


Man of Steel (June 14)



Hmmm...  Personally, I like Superman.  Not as much as some other superheros, but I do like him.  But this one?  I'm not sure.  The jury is still out, as the saying goes.

Now I gotta say, Brandon Routh was just fine as Superman, in my book.  He had enough Christopher Reeve going to convince me.  And after all, for this child of the 80s, Reeve was Superman.  I didn't grow up with the comics, or the old black and white serial, or any of that.  I grew up with that legendary theme music, and the now hokey but - at the time - awesome special effects. 

And Superman Returns didn't offend me, as it seems to have done some others.  I thought it rather clever, myself.  Much more so than Superman III, or Superman IV: the Quest for a Coherent Plot.  I guess what I'm saying is, do we need another Superman reboot?  I'm not sure.

The problem gets stickier when you add in some of what I saw in that trailer above.  The government wants to take Superman prisoner?  Why?  He's the symbol of truth, justice, and... well, you get the idea.  Besides, Superman doesn't have to answer to any Earthly power.  He's above the law.  But he's inherently good, so it's alright.  It's when bad guys like General Zod (Superman II) come along, with the same power, that we run into trouble.  Those are the sorts of bad guys Superman is most needed for.

So what's I'm saying is, the film, based on its trailer, seems revisionist to me.  And that is problematic.  Besides, Kevin Costner as Jonathan Kent?  I don't know.  I'm not a Costner-hater, but just the same, I'm not sure he can do the job.  Tough shoes to fill.  Tougher, in some ways, than the filling the Man of Steel's boots themselves.

Probability of Suckage:  This one is entirely up in the air (no pun intended).  I'm gonna come down squarely in the middle.  50%.  Safest bet I can make here.  Too many unanswered questions.  And plus, the guy playing our hero just doesn't look... Super.  Not to me, anyway.  No offense intended, but there it is.  Superman with a scruff?  I'm feeling skeptical.

Probability of Where I'll See It:  Also up in the air.  On my own, it'd be 25% in the big theater.  But my wife is a huge Superman fan.  She may tilt it into a solid 100%, depending on her inclination to see this film.  Again, for me, the cheap seats would be a 40% or so.  But if my wife wants to see it there instead, it's a firm 100%.  As for the Redbox option, for the sake of my wrap-up, I'd willingly watch this for a buck and a quarter.  100% chance of a Redbox viewing, if the others fall through.


World War Z (June 21)



Zombie apocalypse on the big screen?  What could go wrong?

Oh, and one thing going in Z's favor?  Finally a zombie movie that doesn't just hit the United States.  I'm sick and tired of zombies overrunning the land of the free/home of the brave, and leaving places like Kenya and Czechoslovakia and Taiwan in happy fun land.  It's an "equal opportunity"brain-eating fest!

Probability of Suckage:  Two words: Brad Pitt.  Can he pull it off?  I don't know.  Plus, I haven't read the book this film is based on, but I have read the author's Zombie Survival Guide, and it was kinda weird, to say the least.  So this one could be either really fun, or really dumb.  I'd give it a 60% chance of fun, and a 40% chance of suckage.

Probability of Where I'll See It:  I'll clear this up right now.  5% chance of seeing in the big theater.  I think the trailer is neat and all, but this film's premise just doesn't drag me away kicking and screaming to be devoured.  But 90% chance of seeing it in the cheap seats.  Seems more like a "see it on the big screen, but at a cut rate"-kind of movie.  If not in the cheap seats, 100% chance of Redbox.  Cause it has zombies.  They demand to be seen, ya know.


White House Down (June 28)



Channing Tatum, Jamie Foxx and Director Roland Emmerich?  To repeat myself (from the above preview), what could go wrong?

This is another one of those movies where I'm getting a sense of Deja-vu.  Didn't they just do a "White House overrun by bad guys"-movie early this spring?  I think it had the word "Olympus" in it.  Don't recall hearing much about that one. Must not have done too well.

As for this trailer, the CGI helicopters and car crashing upside down into a swimming pool (in slo-mo, no less) didn't do it for me.  In fact, the quote from Abraham Lincoln was the best part of the trailer in my opinion.  It's a great idea, but so is Communism, kids.  The execution?  Well that remains to be seen.

Probability of Suckage: 65%.  An action movie about the government being assaulted by internal terrorists could have so much potential, but the trailer makes it look like an action movie that somehow got cryogenically stored from around 1989 and only just thawed out on the present day.  Then they got around to making it, but with 9/11 themes and lots of cool effects they couldn't do in 1989 without rivaling the national debt.  Yawn.  You'll forgive me if I don't get in line now.

Probability of Where I'll See It:  Depends.  If it gets decent reviews in the mass media, I'd probably spring for a cheap seats viewing.  A 3% chance of big theater money spent here.  70% of cheap seats.  95% of a Redbox showing, by the time it comes out on DVD.  Hey, I like dumb action movies.  Just not trashy dumb action movies (Fast and Furious 6, I'm looking at you here).


The Lone Ranger (July 3)



The first trailer for this one, which I recall from this last Super Bowl, did not bring great enthusiasm to me.  However, having seen the trailer above, I'm a little bit more interested.  I was frankly kind of annoyed that Johnny Depp was Tanto, when I first heard about this.  Oh boy, more Captain Jack Sparrow-isms, I thought.  But maybe, if Jerry Bruckheimer doesn't foul it up and it can surpass the lofty expectations that a Disney film brings to mind these days, this show might be decent.

Then again, the CGI at the end of the trailer, especially that slow motion throwing of the bullet to the hero, makes me cringe.  I know, I know, it's a summer movie.  It has to be a little annoying.  But you have to wonder why a film that has so much potential for fun and excitement spends time in a probably very expensive trailer to rub it in your face that it is from the same outfit that brought you Pirates of the Caribbean (that's not entirely a good thing Disney - don't you remember that better than half those films sucked?).

Come to think of it, most of the trailers I've shown here so far do that "...from the makers/...producers/...people who worked in craft services on this really obnoxious film"-bit, to some extent.  Makes you wonder.

Probability of Suckage:  For me, I'm going with 60%.  I don't think Messieurs Bruckheimer and Verbinski are getting better with experience, to tell true.

Probability of Where I'll See It:  90% chance of seeing it in the big theater.  My wife already said she is interested in this one.  I think she has a mild thing for Mr. Depp.  Hey, she's a child of the 80s too.  If not the big theater, then 95% chance of the cheap seats.  And 100% in Redbox, if big screen movie money is not forthcoming in the months to come.


Pacific Rim (July 12)



Let me sum it up.  We have a twist on Battleship's water theme (you remember last summer's migraine-inducing computer-generated quickly-forgotten mess?), the stereotypical bridge attack scene (getting so cliche it is scary when it isn't in a big budget Hollywood action movie with aliens in it), F-22 Raptor fighter planes being beaten on (makes you think somebody hates the F-22 or something), vague allusions to Transformers, a touch of martial arts footage, that blunt horn noise in the soundtrack (good when first used, but it's been done until it is as cliche as the bridge attack scene), the black guy who gives the compelling speech (Morpheus did it better), and then two - count 'em - TWO post title "shock" scenes.  You know, the ones that are supposed to be eye candy to get the audience all excited by the end of the trailer?  They used to use only one, but that's been done too much, so now we do TWO.  After all, two is better than one, yes?

With a line up like that, why wouldn't I want to see this thing?

Probability of Suckage:  I'm going out on that limb again and saying this one will be around 70% chance of sucking.  It doesn't do anything that hasn't been done - and poorly done at that, -  lately.  The ideas are matched up differently, but they are all still there, just the same.

Probability of Where I'll See It:  100% Redbox.  50% cheap seats.  2% big theater money.  I just don't have a lot of faith in this one.


R.I.P.D. (July 19)



Well, the trailer starts off looking stereotypical enough.  And tell me, why do all heroes die on their backs?  Nobody ever dies face down if they are a star?

But then?  Things get interesting.  Reynolds, I can live with or not.  But Jeff Bridges in a send-up of the cowboy/Marshall/lawman?  That's got all kinds of potential.  And the humorous twists, like our heroes looking like an "old Chinese guy" (direct quote there) and a hot blond?

So it's Ghostbusters, but from the other side of the coin?  Yes, it has all the cliche moments that seem reminiscent of Men In Black, but still.  This one has "new" and "fresh" just dripping from it, when compared so far to what you've seen above.

Too bad it'll probably suck.

Probability of Suckage:  Tougher call.  It's unique compared to just about everything mentioned so far in this post.  I suppose that explains my chagrin at this preview stuff this year.  Everything's been done before.  And yes, even this film too, to a certain extent.  But at least it's not the same old stuff they recycled from last year.  So I have hopes.  Let's go 55% chance of suckage.

Probability of Where I'll See It:  Given my choice, I'd say 40% at best for big theater dollars.  100% in the cheap seats.  Or, barring that, 100% on Redbox.  It's just different enough for a summer movie to entice me in.  Please don't suck.  Please, please, please!


Red 2 (July 19)



You know, Mary Loise Parker just makes these films.  She's pretty, but not in that regular Hollywood way.  Can't exactly put my finger on it.  Maybe you'd say, she is "ordinary people" pretty.  That alone makes the Red movies approachable.

But that's not all.  Order now and you'll receive a star-studded cast, including "everyman"-Bruce Willis, "nobody does crazy like"-John Malkovich, "she's so classy that you'll forget its an action movie"-Helen Mirren, and - new to this sequel, Catherine - "I'm still hot at my age and will always be" - Jones, and Anthony - "I made Hannibal Lecter cool and I still can do anything they ask me to" - Hopkins!  All for just the low, low price of multi-billion dollars!  Call now, operators are standing by!!

Seriously, I liked Red, and I can only hope they didn't foul up this sequel.

Probability of Suckage:  Sequel?  That doesn't bode well, for me.  I'd say 40%.  That's a bit harsh, but sequels rarely live up to the hype.  But like R.I.P.D., I'm crossing my fingers here.

Probability of Where I'll See It:  80% in the big theater.  My wife liked Red as well, so I'm betting she'll want to scrape the barrel for money to see this one.  If not the big theater, 100% in the cheap seats.  Or 100% on Redbox, if the world is falling apart but the 'box is still working.


The Wolverine (July 26)



To preface this, I must say that I thought both of the X-Men Origins films were pretty clever.  I liked the one about Wolverine, and I liked the one from the 60s with Magneto and Kevin Bacon and all that.  In fact, I liked them better than the regular X-Men trilogy.  Those movies were exciting, but also a bit thin.  The Origins films felt more compelling.

But this next X-Men outing?  Wolverine goes martial arts?  Feels like a questionable cross-over at best.  And we make Wolverine mortal, so he can be hurt or even - gasp - killed?  So what?  Is this a way to kill off Wolverine?  Why would they do that?  And besides, couldn't they have just as well used the technology that was introduced in one of the old X-Men films trilogy.  I forget which one it was, but one of them featured a "cure."  And Logan wouldn't have anything to do with it.  So why now, all of a sudden?

Basically, what I'm saying is, this feels like a cash-in.  Let's put cool special effects and 3D technology and martial arts and a favorite X-Men character all together and shake 'em up and see what falls out.

Probability of Suckage:  Given X-Men franchise-related films track record lately, I'd say they probably will make this film watchable.  So I'd bet, based on that track record alone, we're talking 30% chance of suckage.  But there's always a first time to really blow it.  Hey, this could be the one.

Probability of Where I'll See It: 35% in the big theater.  With finances the way they are, it's hard to say, so far out.  But I'm not inclined to run right out and see this new ninja-fied Wolverine.  The cheap seats are more likely, at 75%.  If the film is highly regarded, I'd even bump that to 85%.  If not, a guaranteed 100% chance of Redbox. 


2 Guns (Aug 2)



Wahlberg and Washington in a quasi-buddy comedy film?  Quote: "We're working in the same vicinity, um.. together."  "Together?"  They seem well matched.

And it's not a sequel.  So that's a good thing.  Then again, you have all the stereotypical content here.  Gun fights, lots of money, half naked woman, gasoline-powered explosions, more gun fights, car chases (every good movie has some sort of chase scene), and humor.  I guess we're going for the "if it ain't broke, don't fix it"-model.

But if it works...

Probability of Suckage:  55%.  There have been some legendary buddy films made, and then some utterly forgettable ones too.  Will this one be in the former category, or the latter?  Only time will tell.

Probability of Where I'll See It: 10% in the big theater.  The humor, but not over-the-top humor, give it just the edge needed to make it at all plausible for a viewing.  Then again, 50% for the cheap seats.  If I had nothing to do on a Saturday night, I'd watch this.  And 90% in the Redbox category.  The only reason I wouldn't see it at all is if it gets bad reviews in the press.


300: Rise Of An Empire (Aug 2)



Can I tell you a secret?  I'm a closet 300 fan.  I never read the graphic novel (aka: "comic book with a fancy price tag"), but when I first saw 300, I was impressed.  It's not historically accurate (not even close, though the idea is there), and it's gruesomely gory and full of nudity (both female and male - could have done without most of that), but the film itself is really compelling.  Heart-pounding, and well executed, even if it is coated in CGI like hairspray on a debutante.

Let's face it, the best stories are the ones based in fact.  And the Battle of Thermopylae is one of those jaw-droppers from history.  Yes, it's gotten lots of good press to make it more exciting than it really was (like the fact that there were more than 300 soldiers present from the Greek side - the Spartans were just the smallest and most formidable contingent).  But it's legacy is one that continues to inspire the imagination.

The thing is, the trailer for Rise Of An Empire doesn't give us much.  What's the story, kids?  Just because 300 is a guilty pleasure, that doesn't mean anything carrying its name is going to be as good.  Maybe a new trailer will come out and help this situation.  We'll see.

Probability of Suckage:  Hard to say, based on the abbreviated trailer.  I'm going to risk it and say 50%.  It's a sequel , so it has that going against it.  On the other hand, the time period in question has so much potential for epic story-telling.  So it could be really awesome.  In that "guilty" sort of way, I mean.

Probability of Where I'll See It:  15% in the big theater.  Unless it gets really good press, I don't see this as being a really big demand for first-run showing money.  But in the cheap seats?  80%.  This is a big screen film, I'd bet.  Redbox, 98%.  If it gets bad reviews, I'd still see it, but only for the sake of completeness.


Percy Jackson: Sea of Monsters (Aug 7)



Tell me, is that even the same kid from the first movie?  I'm gonna say no.  That could be a good thing.  See, I didn't really love the first movie.  My wife, who read all those Percy Jackson books, says that if you take the first movie into account as just a film, it's great.  But if you look at it as a translation of the book to the silver screen, it's terrible.  They slaughtered the plot, you could say.  And all I can say is, it didn't highly impress me, whether it was faithful to the original or not.

So here we have a long awaited sequel.  Obviously somebody has faith in this franchise.  And they put some effort in.  There are some cool things in the trailer, like that line of teeth rising out of the sea.

The thing is, based on the trailer, it looks like we're trying so hard to be Harry Potter.  And there can only be one Harry Potter.  So why not be yourself?  Or go a new direction?  Yes, it has Olympic gods and such, but it's just a different covering for the same "teenage-heroes-fighting-evil" shtick.  And Harry Potter did that really well.  If I want to see more of that, I'll watch a Harry Potter movie.

Probability of Suckage:  Depends on how you look at it.  If you look at this as a book-to-movie outing, and it doesn't deliver, the chances are probably 85% suckage.  If they do deliver, maybe only 15%  And if you don't care, but just watch it as a movie of its own accord, I'd bet 45%.

Probability of Where I'll See It:  I have no great desire to see it, and my wife was so disappointed in the first one, I'd say 1% chance of big theater viewing.  In the cheap seats, maybe 40%.  I'd guess 65% Redbox.  I imagine my wife will bite by that time, unless she hears it's good - "just like the book."  But I wouldn't hold my breath.


Elysium (Aug 9)



So Matt Damon told his agent, "everybody else has a summer film, so where's mine?"  And somebody decided to throw him a bone and put him in this one.  That's the conversation I'm betting on.

It's another "suck it, rich people," film.  Everybody rich and powerful live on this artificial satellite, while the rest of humanity lives on a scarred mess called Earth?  Sounds like America vs. the rest of the world, if you ask me.

And Matt Damon gets a mechanical suit and goes all Terminator/Robocop/Bruce Willis on their butts?  And Jodie Foster is rich and powerful and snobbish?  And there are the requisite explosions and crashes and such?  Well, this certainly has potential... to suck.

Probability of Suckage:  This far out, if I had to base it solely on the trailer, I'd say 70%.  The story has been done before.  Then again, District 9, despite its flaws, was pretty good.  So maybe it'll be the late summer hit of the year.

Probability of Where I'll See It:  5% in the big theaters.  By that time, I'll be busy with other things.  Like getting ready to graduate and all that.  So I doubt I'll have time to see it.  Plus, like so much in the theater this summer coming up, it's been done already.  Then again, maybe I'll catch it in the cheap seats.  70% chance of that.  Or 95% via Redbox.  It looks worth seeing, just not worth spending big dollars on.


The Mortal Instruments: City of Bones (Aug 23)



With the size of this preview, I almost stopped at Elysium, and called the rest of the year's outings a bust.  But this one, after having looked at the trailer, looks interesting.  Like Buffy The Vampire Slayer (the film, not the deplorable - in my opinion - TV series), but without the direct focus on vampires.

Then again, it does reek of the teenage angst that so many of these kind of movies suffer from. And it looks to take itself way too seriously.  And the studio putting it out, though this isn't a guarantee of badness, is not known for producing "A" quality material.

Then again, I kinda like this sort of topic.  Hidden worlds within worlds, demons and angels (not the book by what's-his-name, but the subject), and whatnot.  So I include this as a possible summer movie of worth.  Then again, they could do what they did to Constantine, and really foul it up.  That one had moments, but overall?  Not so good.  Hopefully somebody did better with this.

Probability of Suckage:  My hopes for the summer blockbuster lineup are kinda depressed now, after having gone through the coming attractions, so I suppose you'll forgive my moroseness and allow me to say I bet a 60% chance of suckage.    But I have this small hope that this one will beat the odds.  I don't know why.  Call it wishful thinking.  Call it a hunch.  Call it indigestion, if you want to.

Probability of Where I'll See It:  Big theater dollars?  10%.  Even if I was a fan of the books it purports to be based from, and even if I was super-excited to see it, I'd just as well save the money.  But I'd go 65% chance of seeing it in the cheap seats.  By the time this goes to the local second-run house, it'll probably be near Halloween, and I'll need something to watch to get my "spook" on.  Unless of course, it really sucks, in which case it may be in Redbox by Halloween, if not earlier.  Then I'd say probably 0% chance of seeing it in Redbox.  If it really sucks, that is.


So that's it for this year, kids.  It looks like, all in all, it's a cheap seats kind of summer.

The parting comment:

Source: SnorgTees.com

This is from a T-shirt.  It should be worn to the films After Earth, White House Down, World War Z and Elysium.  And any other disaster movies that happen to get released this summer.  Like Fast and Furious 6!  Oh, and here's some free advertising: go here to buy the shirt.