“Tree of Life” grossed a pretty pathetic $13 million, “Happy Feet Two” grossed an abysmal $60 million, and “Moneyball” grossed only an okay $75 million. But in this market, where the concept of the movie star is all but dead, Brad Pitt was named the “top money-making star of the year.”

Number two was George Clooney who released two films this year that probably won’t gross $90 million combined.

Bosses at Quigley Publishing Company have asked theatre owners and film buyers to vote for their top 10 box office generators and this year exhibitors credited Pitt with bringing in more traffic than any other celebrity due to his acting and/or vocal appearances in Moneyball, The Tree of Life, and Happy Feet Two.

Coming in at number two was Pitt’s pal George Clooney for both The Ides of March and The Descendants, and last year’s winner, Johnny Depp, fell to third with The Rum Diary, Rango and Pirates of the Caribbean: On Stranger Tides.

(more…)

Director Clint Eastwood’s “J. Edgar” was supposed to be a key Oscar contender this awards season.

Instead, withering reviews and audience indifference have all but killed its chances at significant honors. That hasn’t stopped critics from soft-pedaling their critiques to support the film’s gay agenda, according to Andrew Klavan.

The film more than suggests J. Edgar Hoover (played by Leonardo DiCaprio) had a gay relationship with a fellow agent via clumsy dialogue and cliched confrontations. It’s precisely the kind of ham-fisted storytelling critics are supposed to call out. Klavan says critics like Manohla Dargis of the leftist New York Times instead chose to ignore such obvious flaws in their reviews:

“The tenderness of the love story in “J. Edgar” comes as a shock.” “Mr. Eastwood, working from a smart script by Dustin Lance Black… takes a dynamic approach to history (even as it speaks to contemporary times…)” “[Eastwood's] handling of Hoover and Tolson’s relationship… lifts the film from the usual biopic blahs.”

(more…)

So, because you all enjoyed that list so much, and because I apparently have a death wish, it’s time for another: The Top 10 Most Overrated Actors/Actresses of All Time.

Unlike last time, I will claim that these are objective facts, not subjective opinions, so that all my critics may have full liberty to attack me (To those same critics who claimed last time that I phrased my opinions in an “objective” manner, this is called being facetious. That means I’m kidding. Also, seriously? That was your criticism?).

Here are my criteria: are they considered great actors/actresses? If not, they can’t make the list (sorry, Rob Schneider). Are they actually great actors? If so, they can’t make the list (sorry, Laurence Olivier). Only those who are considered great actors but are not, in fact, great actors can make this list. Even then, I’m not claiming that these are bad actors unless I explicitly say that I am.

So, here we go. In the words of Han Solo, I’ve got a bad feeling about this …

10. George Clooney: Not a great actor. Not a good actor. Not really an actor. If you’ve ever seen a movie with Clooney where you didn’t say to yourself, “Hey, I’m watching George Clooney” every thirty seconds or so, you haven’t seen a George Clooney movie. You’re mixing him up with Kate Winslet. He’s a D actor. Dull in “Michael Clayton.” Dreary in “Up In The Air.” Dreadful in “Syriana.” Dismal in “Batman and Robin.” He’s not a low-rent Cary Grant. He’s an affordable-housing Robert Wagner.

9. Dustin Hoffman: He turned in some tremendous performances in his early days (most notably “Papillon,” “Kramer vs. Kramer,” and “Tootsie”), then became a caricature of himself. He has not done anything worthwhile since “Tootsie,” in fact. Even in his better performances, he is a bit too mannered for my taste, perhaps an effect of his method acting. Laurence Olivier thought the same thing. When they were working on “Marathon Man” together, Hoffman showed up on set after having not slept for several days in order to get “in character.” Olivier took one look at him and said, “Dear boy, it’s called acting.” (more…)

On this week’s episode of the HomeVideodrome podcast, we discuss Ozzy and Dio in Black Sabbath, wonder why Julia Roberts ever became America’s sweetheart and dedicate “Hell Awaits” by Slayer to Joe Paterno and Jerry Sandusky.  So go listen, and enjoy!

“The Departed” may have won Martin Scorsese a long overdue Oscar, the film doesn’t quite stack up to the source material, “Infernal Affairs.”   Originating from Hong Kong and directed by Andrew Lau and Alan Mak, “Infernal Affairs” has roughly the same basic plot as “The Departed,” in that it follows two moles on opposite ends of the law being driven to the edge of madness as the number of people they can trust dwindles as the body count rises.

“The Departed” is certainly more relatable to western audiences, given Scorsese’s flair for stylish, swear-laden dialogue, however “Infernal Affairs” is not only a tighter picture narratively, it also is a stronger piece of work thematically. Andy Lau and Tony Leung inhabit the roles later filled by Matt Damon and Leonardo DiCaprio, respectively. Lau has a golden-boy sheen about him that can turn sinister and threatening, while Leung has a world-weary demeanor that trumps DiCaprio’s overcooked performance.

(more…)

Had Oliver Stone directed the life and times of J. Edgar Hoover, there’s no telling how many conspiracies would have marched across the screen.

Clint Eastwood is a different brand of director. He’s more nuanced, more reasonable, and he won’t let his knee jerk while telling a complicated story.

—–

Eastwood’s “J. Edgar” is all richer for the director’s cautious instincts. We re-learn why Hoover is both celebrated and mocked thanks to a powerhouse turn by Leonardo DiCaprio as the nation’s longest-serving FBI director.

“J. Edgar” ultimately seems disinterested in Hoover as a law man or rule breaker. The film trots out a series of arguments for and against his hard-line tactics, not bothering to weigh in on either side of the ledger. Instead, it frames a love story between two men who cannot act on their urges – or even admit them out loud.

(more…)

If Hollywood supporters of President Spread-The-Wealth — specifically Matt Damon, Ben Affleck, Leonardo DiCaprio and Tobey Maguire – allegedly participated in alleged high-stakes poker games and allegedly won alleged money, did any of them report their alleged winnings to the IRS? Or, if they were concerned about the alleged illegality of these alleged high-stakes poker games, did they blindly donate the appropriate tax-the-rich portion to the treasury?

Greg Pollowitz at NRO:

Interesting. Maybe the next time Maguire is in D.C. for a photo-op with President Obama, he can explain to the president why he’s exempt from paying his fair share of taxes on the winnings — you know, to spread the wealth — or stop by the I.R.S. and drop off a check. 

Fox News reports on other potential legal problems:

Aside from Maguire, RadarOnline reported that entertainment industry power players such as Leonardo DiCaprio, Ben Affleck and Matt Damon also tried their hand in the high-stakes game, and that the illicit enterprise was still taking place in the home of a top Hollywood producer.

The Los Angeles Police Department did not immediately respond to our request for comment regarding whether or not an investigation was pending, however it seems these big names could all be in big trouble should legal proceedings escalate.

(more…)

It seems that the consensus is that 2010 was the worst year ever for movies and music.  That is, until 2011 comes to an end.  Every year is “the worst.”  I mean, really, what came out in 2007 that was worth while?  Or 2001 for that matter?

As entertainment falls further under the thumb of big business, we’re going to have fewer and fewer “movements” in media.  The grunge music of Seattle in the 90s, the pure funkadelic madness that came out of Minneapolis in the 80s, and the string of fun fantasy and sci-fi films produced by Steven Spielberg between 1981 and 1987 are a thing of the past.  The industry is more diverse, with studio executives throwing random things at the dart board, hoping something sticks.

A few things from 2010 will stick.  Here are the five albums and five films that rose above the dreck of the year.  I guess this was the worst year ever for entertainment.  Unless you count 1997.  Boy, did that year suck.

Music

I have a simple rule for music.  If it rocks, it works.  Genres are insignificant.  My ipod playlist makes no sense.  It may be the only place, besides the red carpet at the Grammys, that you can find Snoop Dogg next to Toby Keith. (more…)

According to Variety, the amount of political money from the entertainment industry is split about 73-27, with the majority going to the Democrats. That is a startling statistic. 27% of showbiz dollars go to REPUBLICANS? Are there really that many of us? Either something screwy is going on, or there are a LOT of Industry Republicans hiding out.

By raw statistics, that would indicate over a quarter of the entertainment business is Republican. Now it could just be that Republicans are more generous.  Democrats are notoriously cheaper than a Barney Frank ferry ride. Al Gore spent more money on harassable masseuses than he gives to charity. Bill Clinton’s idea of charity is giving away used underwear (though in fairness, some of the clothing he soiled is now considered museum quality). Joe Biden spends more on polishing his tooth marks out of his shoes than he routinely gives away.

Democrats are as hypocritical as Leonardo DiCaprio’s private jet. They talk all the time about the uncaring rich not helping the poor, but come tax time, the charitable giving recorded on their Schedule As is dwarfed by their mortgage interest on their luxurious abodes. Democrats think their public service and undying support of a powerful state is tantamount to charity. (more…)

Pop quiz: what do the following movies have in common?

Gone with the Wind (1939), Star Wars (1977), The Sound of Music (1965), E.T.: The Extra-Terrestrial (1982), The Ten Commandments (1956), Titanic (1997), Jaws (1975), Doctor Zhivago (1965), The Exorcist (1973), Snow White and the Seven Dwarfs (1939), 101 Dalmatians (1961), The Empire Strikes Back (1980), Ben-Hur (1959), Avatar (2009), Return of the Jedi (1983), The Sting (1973), Raiders of the Lost Ark (1981), Jurassic Park (1993), The Graduate (1967), Star Wars: Episode I — The Phantom Menace (1999), Fantasia (1941), The Godfather (1972), Forrest Gump (1994), Mary Poppins (1964), The Lion King (1994)

If you said they all made scads of money, bravo — they are the top twenty-five domestic box-office champions of all time (adjusted for inflation, of course).

But consider another similarity: surprisingly few of them relied on established A-list movie stars — the most famous, the highest paid — for their moneymaking prospects. Gone with the Wind had Gable, yes. The Sting had Newman and Redford. The Godfather, Brando.

As for most of the rest, they either featured no A-listers at all, or used them before they became bonafide movie stars. In fact, many of those pictures can take credit for sending now-famous actors into the celestial Hollywood firmament in the first place. Gone with the Wind made Vivian Leigh known to the world. The Ten Commandments did it for Charlton Heston. The Graduate, Dustin Hoffman. The Godfather, Al Pacino. Star Wars, Harrison Ford. Mary Poppins, Julie Andrews. (more…)

One of the big stories in filmdom today is about all the concerns surrounding the marketing of Christopher Nolan’s new film “Inception,” which cost a reported $160 million to produce and hits theatres next Friday, July 16th. According to Reuters, awareness isn’t as high as the studio would like, especially in Middle America.

Well, here’s one way to entice Middle America into your film, insult them by having your three main stars hit the promotional circuit and savage Dick Cheney and Sarah Palin as stupid and evil: 

—–

QUIZ: What makes you most want to see “Inception” now?

1. Ellen Page’s insufferably cruel sanctimony?

2. Joseph Gordon-Levitt’s pathetic, butt-boy me-toosim?

3. Leonardo DiCaprio’s wild hypocrisy?

Actually, “wild hypocrisy” is an understatement….

The same Leo you see in that video belly-aching with so much touching concern over Mother Earth, just happens to be the very same elitist whose PRIVATE jet-setting helped cause the chaos that cost hundreds of World Cup fans — who had spent upwards of $1300 for tickets — the ability to attend the game. Found buried yesterday in the sometimes useful L.A. Times: (more…)

So what gives? Are these areas just not glamorous enough? Do celebs not want to further highlight The One’s pathetic response?

Celebrities love causes. They love them for a couple of reasons: one, it makes them seem like “serious” people despite making a non-serious living as entertainers – or, as in the case of “professional reality show stars,” making a living by leeching off the system. Two, it’s free publicity. After all, you aren’t a celebrity if you aren’t being “celebrated” by an adoring public.

As such, celebrities often embrace “feel good causes” that enhance their PR value and their egos. Take “green living,” for instance. Why all the Hollywood hooh hah about carbon footprints and other such nonsense? Christopher Grey of WND has a theory:

Celebrities want attention, but they also want credibility because they typically don’t have any. Environmentalism is an easy cause for them to promote to get attention and at the same time appear somehow thoughtful and even educated because it is allegedly based on science. Of course none of this has anything do with reality, but this is the entertainment business. Reality is not important at all. Image is everything. Talking about recycling, stopping offshore drilling, solar power, and electric cars is a lot easier than really trying to do something for people in the world like feeding the hungry, helping abused children, or building houses for the homeless.

It also deflects attention from the obvious fact that celebrities are often some of the most wasteful, energy inefficient, materialistic, shallow, and superficial people in our society. A classic recent example was James Cameron, who talked about how his film, Avatar, was a shining example of environmentalism. Obama echoed this praise. This was the most expensive movie ever made about a war on an alien planet. What exactly about this movie helped to conserve resources or save our planet? The answer is absolutely nothing.

(more…)

“Inception” opens July 16th, and represents one of those rare cerebral summer flicks that sometimes end up being the best studio offering of the season. With Christopher Nolan’s name on it and this mind-blowing trailer that promises plenty of realistic-looking special effects and action set upon a strong emotional foundation, every new piece of publicity makes it more of a must see.

—–

In the hands of any other director, the premise of entering someone’s dreams to gain their secrets would be worrisome. The key to that kind of concept is The Rules. Without the rules the premise can get away from you — become unwieldy — and you end up with a film where a lot of numbing special effects infest a dull but attractive world where nothing makes a damn bit of sense. With “Memento,” the man who brought us George W. Bush “The Dark Knight” proved that he’s more than capable of grabbing hold and executing a seemingly impossible idea and making it work… brilliantly. (more…)

Big movie twists are fine. I appreciate them when they work and sometimes even when they don’t. There’s all kinds of gimmickry in storytelling and The Twist has always been one of my favorites. Regardless, we all love a movie twist that knocks us out; a “Sixth Sense” kind of twist where (with the help of the filmmaker) you rerun the story in your mind and feel a great amount of satisfaction as the pieces all come together. Even less successful movie twists work on some level. The last reveal in “Unbreakable” might not have been a “Sixth Sense” wowser but is arguably successful within the context of its own world and without the specter of its predecessor might have received the respect it deserved.

In order for this kind of twist to work, however, a film must accomplish two things. First, the story shouldn’t require the twist in order for it to be successful. What precedes the twist should be stand-alone compelling – a good movie all on its own.  Second, the twist should make you want to see the film again, and as soon as possible, because now what came before takes on an entirely new dimension that requires another viewing to truly savor.

And this is where “Shutter Island” fails. *SPOILERS COMING*

The two hours or so to director Martin Scorsese’s Big Reveal is a long haul, especially after you lose all interest after the first thirty-minutes due to a narrative that never gels or grabs hold. The acting is fine and the look of the atmospheric production is top-notch in that foreboding kind of way (aided by Bernard Hermann-esque flourishes in the score). But the mystery of an escaped patient on a big spooky island simply isn’t all that compelling. Nothing makes much sense once the second act really gets going, and while the Big Twist does work in explaining what came before, the thought of reliving two muddled unfocused hours was the furthest thing from my mind. (more…)

Is it better to live as a monster or to die as a good man? It’s a central question revealingly asked only at the end of an emotional ride in Oscar-winning director Martin Scorsese’s latest film, “Shutter Island.” Set in 1954, Leonardo DiCaprio leads a strong cast as Federal Marshall Teddy Daniels, who visits a mental hospital while investigating the disappearance of a brutal female inmate. Ashecliffe Hospital, located at a former Civil War fortress on Shutter Island off of Boston’s harbor, is a haunting facility that Daniels believes is a cover for government-funded mind control experimentation. The fact that Daniels saw the horrors of such scientific experimentation as a soldier during World War II, and that the man responsible the death of his wife (Michelle Williams) is a resident of the mysterious institution spur his investigation, lending personal drive to his federal orders. 

But as migraine-fueled hallucinations intensify and the administration become increasingly secretive and restrictive, Teddy’s investigation forces him to confront the truth that the island’s doctors depict. And it’s ultimately left to the audience to decide what truly happened on Shutter Island. 

Set against the backdrop of a hurricane, nightmares are more terrific, sunshine more comforting—and scarce. Daniels and his new partner Chuck Aule (Mark Ruffalo) arrive at Shutter Island to an oppressive symphonic score making the gray skies and dreary buildings exaggeratedly eerie. But for the rest of the film, music plays masterfully to emphasize mystery—or in the film’s most tragic moment, its absence and the cheerful chirping of birds accentuate the heavy emotions of the moment, allowing audiences to focus solely on the performances of DiCaprio and Williams. Supported by a strong cast, “Shutter Island” has had the best acting I’ve seen in a film so far this year, and I doubt it will soon be beat.  (more…)

You can find today’s Gregalogue, “People Died, WaPo Lied,” over at BigJournalism.com!

Tonight, we’ve got Chris Cotter, Imogen Lloyd Webber, Tom Shillue, and my mom! Also a very special Joshua McCarroll segment!

The payoff for sitting through a dozen craptacular releases is that one movie where you actually say, “Damn, that was worth the $11.50 and the kidney I spent to see it.”  As a modern moviegoer, you must be an eternal optimist.  You must hope against hope that the trailer you liked didn’t contain every single good scene and funny joke in the movie, and that the reviewer who raved isn’t covering up some pinko agenda that’ll make you choke out on your Goobers. 

You have to believe that out there somewhere is an action movie director who knows what a tripod is.  That there is a young lead actor who has never starred in a CW television series about beautiful but sensitive teenage male models with supernatural powers.  That there is a comedy screenwriter who can imagine a “funny” situation not involving a bodily fluid.  That Michael Cera will one day play a different character.

In that spirit, a spirit of Pollyannaish hope in the face of overwhelming evidence indicating that Hollywood’s product will almost certainly continue to demonstrate that evolution is a two-way street, I present ten movies that are coming within the next six months that might actually be good – or at least not make me throw things at the screen and slap around the ushers. (more…)

Timothy Treadwell loved bears. In the name of loving them, with a stalwart sense of the innate sanctity of his mission, he continuously abused them for thirteen years. Time and again from 1989 until 2003 he invaded their territory — startling them, scaring them, angering them. Interrupting their hunting, their mating, their sleep, their play, he would coo sweet nothings at them in a flamboyant, high-pitched whine. He gave the savage beasts silly names like Lulu, Cupcake, Daisy, Ginger, Booble, and Mr. Chocolate, robbing them of their natural dignity. He firmly believed he was their protector, and unleashed torrents of self-righteous hatred upon anyone who dared question his treating of one-thousand-pound predators as if they were cute cuddly teddy bears. Handsome and charismatic, yet narcissistic and naïve, filled with honest caring, yet a smooth liar thoroughly at home in delusion, he became a constant danger both to himself and to everything he loved, ever on the verge of instigating a sudden volcanic eruption of nightmarish unintended consequences.

In short, Timothy Treadwell was a perfect liberal. He loved bears, with all his heart.

And then one ate him.

The story of Treadwell (1957-2003) is told in Grizzly Man (2005), a film destined to be remembered long after the likes of Crash, Brokeback Mountain, Munich, Capote, and the rest of that cinematic annus horribilis are blessedly forgotten. Directed by the fearless and unflinching German filmmaker Werner Herzog, it’s also an intensely conservative film, in its conclusions if not in its subject. (more…)

I just finished voting for the Screen Actors Guild awards and after wading through the five “screeners” they sent me I started wondering about the leading men of today.In this day of confused metro-sexual male stars one might wonder where all the real men have gone. 

Look at the leading men of today. When I saw Leonardo DiCaprio as a tough guy in Gangs of New York I wasn’t sure if it was a drama or a comedy. Matt Damon isn’t too bad but I‘m not convinced he could take a punch. I like Bill Pullman but he looks like he is always on the verge of breaking into tears. George Clooney, please my sister could throw him down and twist him up like a pretzel.

Here are my top five unrecognized real men of filmdom. I skipped the obvious choices like The Duke and Clint and went for some guys who are well known but not often looked at as Alpha dogs. Can you imagine any of these guys sitting in anything but a leather barber chair? Can you see any of them wondering if they should get frosted tips or a mani-pedi? Just being a tough guy wasn’t enough for my list they also had to have the craft of acting down too! (more…)

Today, Scribner sent along this timely excerpt from “Without Fidel: A Death Foretold in Miami, Havana and Washington,” a new book by award-winning journalist Ann Louise Bardach. For those of you who don’t know, today, on behalf of Vanity Fair, Sean Penn’s in Cuba hoping to secure an interview with Fidel Castro. As you’ll read below, this is not Penn’s first trip and he’s pretty chummy with the Castro brothers. And don’t miss the short excerpt at the very end — an amusing anecdote revealing how visiting stars like Leo and Jack Nicholson are put under constant surveillance in Uncle Fidel’s Cuba. As long as it’s not Dick Cheney, right?

Without Fidel
by Ann Louise Bardach

Chapter 12 – Raul’s Reign: The Grave Yard Shift

In October 2008, Raul Castro granted his first interview as president of Cuba – and one of the very few he has ever given. The lucky recipient was not one of the dozen accredited reporters based in Havana. Nor was it a journalist who has covered the Miami/Havana beat, nor one of the hundreds of requests from representatives from media organizations and academia who have filed requests with the Foreign Ministry. Rather, Raul Castro’s first interlocutor would be the actor/director, Sean Penn, who periodically weighs in on politics.

Penn had just winged in on a Venezuelan military jet from Isla Margarita, the picturesque island near Caracas, having had spent two days with a convivial Hugo Chavez. With him were the writer Christopher Hitchens and historian Douglas Brinkley, whom Penn had invited to accompany him, presumably to lend gravitas to his efforts. The three had hoped to reprise their luck with Raul Castro and, according to Penn, seemed to have been promised as much. (more…)

-”I take a three-minute shower,” [Jennifer Aniston] told Elizabeth Rogers and Thomas Kostigen, authors of The Green Book. She even brushes her teeth while she’s in there.

-“Entourage” star Adrian Grenier has lived in an apartment insulated with old pants.

-Vegetarian and planetary crusader Tobey Maguire reportedly has banned all leather products from his house. He also “makes everyone take off their leather belts and shoes and leave them by the door!”

-Leonardo DiCaprio “stays green at home, too—with his $3,200 eco-friendly toilet!”

-Bob Dylan sells “renewable grocery bags” at his concerts. (more…)