This weekend’s predictions and revenue results go as follows:

1. New Year’s Eve ($24 million) – The sub-par frame will hold it back from a “Valentine’s Day”-like opening, but it will still conquer the weekend easily. The biggest boost will come from those seeking glimpses of Sofia Vergara.

2. The Sitter ($10.5 million) – Jonah Hill’s films benefit greatly when he’s surrounded by other stars and not when he’s on his own. He’s basically on an island here as the lead. Most family audiences will hold off this one to wait for next week’s “Alvin and the Chipmunks.”

3. Twilight: Breaking Dawn Part One ($8.4 million) – This prediction has it on a better box office pace than “Twilight: New Moon” was at this point. The franchise is alive and well.

4. Hugo ($6.8 million) – The film continues to be very strong in its limited release with positive word of mouth. This creates a chance to leap “The Muppets” and continue a slow but effective road to respectable box office numbers.

5. The Muppets ($6.2 million) – The film is neck deep in controversy, and a 62 percent drop last week doesn’t raise much confidence. Already, reports are surfacing that the numbers are not strong enough to ensure a sequel. “Muppets” could very well lose this spot to “The Descendants” if not careful.

That’s how the weekend shapes up for Sensei, but what say you?

Well, that’s what it seems like on the outside to those closest to him (which would basically just consist of his mother). Dig a little deeper, and you find out that Bobby’s actual profession is that of a pickpocket, and his boss is a man who his late father owed $500,000 in gambling debt. Now, Bobby is slowly paying it off by working for him as an elusive street thief.

Oh, and the beautiful women? Well, one of them is three months pregnant and runs into Bobby. That becomes the central conflict of this hidden gem, available now via Video on Demand. Well, and the fact that Lt. Sullivan (Michael Madsen) is doing everything in his power to catch Bobby on account of the fact that Bobby got a little too greedy and pick pocketed his badge.

“Loosies” works mostly due to a strong and very likable script (which Facinelli wrote). The film gives us real characters with real reasons to dislike them, but what drives the film is how the actors and script show show us small details about each character that are positive. We want everything to be OK.

These characters are so different, yet their paths interconnect, bringing us a very unusual and entertaining film. Lt. Sullivan belongs in a Dirty Harry movie, while Bobby actually probably belongs in “Wall Street” (someone say “Wall Street 3?” On second thought, don’t), and Gallo’s eccentric boss just belongs in an eccentric Gallo movie, I suppose.

Each actor brings something unique to the script. They make the film interesting and drive it along. The script helps because it moves at a fast pace but never uses false gimmicks and Hollywood clichés to drive the plot forward. It simply tells us a story, and that should be fine with anyone who enjoyed old Hollywood before the new one rode in with a vengeance.

The film’s second half is its strongest and also one that conservatives will particularly enjoy. After finding out that Lucy (Jaimie Alexander) is pregnant, Bobby decides to just get rid of it. So, being the upstanding gent that he is, he offers to pay for an abortion and personally take her (which leads to some great scenes when Bobby can’t enter his home to get the money on account of scary Madsen being staked outside).

After finally convincing her, Bobby takes her to the clinic. He takes a strong look around. He sees another young couple and it hits him. It’s a baby, his baby. It’s not some stray dog. Thus, the film grows a heart and Bobby grows some old-school machismo.

In a world of “Transformers” and “Pirates of the Caribbean,” it’s nice to see an artist like Facinelli, best known for his work in the “Twilight” series, want to tell a real story with real characters and real hardships. The film isn’t great, but it has moments of greatness because of the fantastic performances by everyone all around. Facinelli is great in the lead role. He’s never showy and performs Bobby’s growth as a character perfectly.

Alexander has old-school charisma and steals every scene she’s in. Madsen fits perfectly into his role and Gallo, as usual, adds layers upon layers onto his character. By the end of it all, it may be hard to figure out whether Jax was truly evil or not. The direction by Michael Corrente is also impressive. The film may clearly be low budget, but the lighting and the way he focuses his camera gives great detail to the picture and adds a moodiness that wouldn’t have been there without it.

“Loosies” is not a masterpiece, but it is a solid piece of cinema. Forget the gimmicks, forget the clichés. Just sit back and enjoy a great story that will tug you along from start to finish all while entertaining you and leaving you with some food for thought, which is more than most movies today can say.

Edward can hear vampire baby’s thoughts

And, despite the poor rating, “Breaking Dawn Part I” is perhaps the most loyal installment in the franchise spawned from Stephenie Meyer’s beloved novels. For its PG-13 rating, director Bill Condon really worked in as much as he could to make it tasteful yet risqué, from a visually enchanting wedding to a horrifying birth sequence.

Of course there is a huge audience that dislikes “The Twilight Saga” as well; probably a good portion of that includes Big Hollywood readers. They think the acting is horrible, the story is cheesy, the melodramatic moments are too much and the fact that a girl could be in love with a stone-cold vampire is out of this world.

However, can we really deny the fact that “Twilight” exhibits conservative values?

The fact that Bella (Kristen Stewart) decides to wait until after the wedding to lose her virginity is something to be valued. If young girls can take away one thing from these novels and films, I hope it’s that.

Meyer was raised Mormon, and a lot of her personal values are reflected in her book series.  Several readers were disappointed that Bella and Edward (Robert Pattinson) didn’t end up “doing the deed” in “Eclipse,” but Meyer stated in the “The Twilight Saga: The Official Illustrated Guide” that she holds to the values she was raised on and wanted to wait until after Bella and Edward’s wedding.

Bella and Edward, always in the honeymoon phase.

What about how Bella has strong family values? She loves her mother so much that she moves from Arizona to Washington to live with her father so her mother can travel with her new husband. In “Breaking Dawn,” we truly see that Bella is a daddy’s girl at heart, and that the two are very much alike. Her father, Charlie (Billy Burke), is that typical protective dad who doesn’t like Edward because he’s seen Bella get into a depressing funk over him. But Charlie does respect her enough to let her make her own decisions when she decides to marry Edward – maybe because when he decided to marry Bella’s mom he was just as crazy about her?

How about one of the biggest conservative values of all: Pro-life! Bella is completely selfless when it comes to her pregnancy in this film. She is willing to give up her human life, vampire life and even Edward for the life of her baby. Despite the fact that the baby is literally killing her, Bella wants to stick it out as much as she can in hopes that she will deliver a healthy baby. Bella says the baby is “a little miracle,” and she is ready to lose her life for her child’s. If that’s not pro-life, I don’t know what is.

It might be a good idea for parents to accompany their daughters to the film. The gruesome birthing scene may leave some teenagers a little queasy.

Bella has a strong relationship with both of her parents, she decided to get married at 18 to the man she wants to spend her life and she’s a strong pro-life advocate. These are all values conservative minds share. So, do you still hate “Twilight,” or do you now have a new respect for the underlying message it brings to young women?

The LA Times reports a new study by USC’s Annenberg School for Communication & Journalism uncovered some alarmingly consistent trends in the film industry:

In a survey of the top 100-grossing movies of 2009 — including “Transformers: Revenge of the Fallen,’ “Harry Potter and the Half-Blood Prince” and “The Twilight Saga: New Moon” – researchers found that 32.8% of the 4,342 speaking characters were female and 67.2% were male, a percentage identical to that of the top-grossing movies of 2008 …

.. Behind the camera, the gender inequality is just as dramatic: only 3.6% of the directors and 13.5% of the writers on the top-grossing films of 2009 were female, according to the study.

After all, how can you go wrong with vampires, super-powered wolves and a drop-dead knockout like Kristen Stewart? Trust me guys, it’s really not that bad. What fascinates me most about “Twilight,” however, is that the very ingredient that makes it so irresistible to young women is what also makes it so dangerous for them.

“Twilight” reinforces an age-old myth perpetuated by Hollywood and the media that young women should identify themselves through their relationships with men instead of figuring out what kind of person they are on their own. Consider the fan culture that “Twilight” has created – the whole concept is really a long-running feud or whether you’re on ‘Team-Edward’ or ‘Team-Jacob.”

Edward is the dark, mysterious guy that Bella becomes obsessed with, and Jacob is the supportive friend who is constantly competing for her attention. Despite how intelligent Bella is, her criteria for romance is flawed because it’s not based on whom she loves, it is based upon which guy she thinks she should be identifying herself through.

What Bella is really trying to decide is whether she should hunt with Edward as a vampire or run alongside Jacob and his wolf pack. It’s never about her own identity; it’s about the guy and the flattery she gets from both men constantly competing for her. That’s not what real life relationships are based on however, and so those kinds of expectations can only lead one place – disappointment.

Unfortunately, young women have a lot of fantasy-based propaganda from Hollywood and the magazine racks to overcome. Our media and entertainment industry involving women revolve mostly around one thing: how to get men to chase after you. Most young people are looking for answers as it is, and for young women, the lure of identifying oneself through a relationship is very tempting.

The sad reality, however, is that it leads to a dangerous place. Hollywood and the media create a false perception that romance and relationships are based upon an exciting, competitive chase with a happy ending, and as a result women are constantly waiting for a fairy tale romance that most men can’t live up to. It also deludes them into thinking a relationship can offer them total happiness.

The result is a culture of young women who have been misled into believing that whenever they feel a void in themselves a relationship is the answer. That’s not true because real fulfillment can only come from within and discovering who you are outside of another human being.

“Twilight” is a great story and a fun literary series that has been transformed into an entertaining set of movies. I’m not saying they’re bad to watch, but they can be dangerous for a young woman to take seriously. In all likelihood, a lot of young women are going to walk out of movie theaters this weekend actually believing there is a real life Edward or Jacob out there for them, and instead of focusing on themselves they will focus their energies on finding “the one.”

But a young, capable, intelligent woman like Bella shouldn’t be spending so much of her time obsessing over another person. She should be focusing on herself and becoming the best she can be on her own. That’s a much healthier message for young women, isn’t it? This isn’t about feminism. It is about individualism, and that’s why I’m on Team Bella even if Hollywood is not – because Bella doesn’t need a guy as badly as she thinks. All she really needs is her own sense of confidence and her own dreams so she can figure out who she is without relying on another person to help identify her.

After all, confidence, determination and desire is what real dreams are made of, and believing in oneself is where real dreams begin – not from a guy or a relationship, and certainly not from Hollywood fantasies.

As with all “Twilight” films, the conversation quickly changes from “will it be successful” to “how many records can it break?”

This weekend’s predictions and revenue results go as follows:

1. The Twilight Saga: Breaking Dawn – Part One ($140 million) – This one’s concept is more directly focused on personal drama than overall events. Because of this, it will not play like previous entries which had broader appeal and even lured in some of those hard-to-get action audiences. Still, an impressive opening is expected. Look for a trial run here as the next one will have the best opportunity to challenge all-time box office records.

2. Happy Feet Two ($38 million) – This children’s film is hoping for a “Puss In Boots”-like opening. Compared to the “Kung Fu Panda”s and Pixar classics of the world, this one never really felt like a huge franchise player. The characters are not household names or carry much interest in storyline. Will draw the much younger audiences but was very expensive to produce. It also carries the burden that its predecessor was released five years ago. That’s a long time to hold audience interest. Film will boil down to the film’s music choices. If the tunes come off great, it will fuel enough positive word of mouth to over perform. If the music comes off bland, then the film could fall very quickly.

3. Immortals ($15 million) – After a very healthy opening last week, the fantasy actioner will continue on its “Expendables”-like run. This film doesn’t have much competition for action audiences and will pull a healthy amount away from the “Twilight” crowd; it’s in great position for another strong weekend.

4. Puss In Boots ($11.5 million) – The family film will be roughed up by “Happy Feet Two” and lose those all-too-important teenagers to “Twilight.” Still, it will hold its own and post a very healthy take. Whether “Boots” looks to be profitable with its high production budget is another story.

5. Jack and Jill ($10.4 million) – With audiences’ and critics’ ratings very low on the film, momentum has stalled considerably for Adam Sandler’s latest. This will not be helped by the enormous box office competition this weekend. The film will fight to avoid a significant drop and hope for a marginal one.

Bonus Picks: “J. Edgar” will fall significantly this weekend to around $5 million while “The Descendants” will post around $1.3 million in limited release.

That’s Sensei’s calls, but how do you see it?

“The Twilight Saga: Breaking Dawn – Part 1″ is yet another installment sure to baffle those who didn’t fall in love with author Stephenie Meyer’s novels. This time, our star-crossed lovers face some difficult choices involving life, death and the perils of bringing a baby into a mixed marriage – vampire and human, that is.

The first of the two-part franchise finale finds Bella (Kristen Stewart) and the ghastly pale Edward (Robert Pattinson) prepping for their wedding day. Edward tells her he once lived a more “traditional” vampire life but only chose murderers to snack on. Yet Bella probably wouldn’t care if he confessed to driving a busload of nuns into a ravine; she’s still madly in love with the handsome bloodsucker.

The wedding is everything a Twi-Hard fan could crave, and the film blends some gentle humor into the picture-perfect proceedings. Bella’s jittery pa (Billy Burke) looks more troubled than a man giving away his 18-year-old daughter to a man more pale than Uncle Fester.

The trouble really begins when Bella and Edward consummate their love at long last, a sequence directed with care by “Twilight” newbie Bill Condon (“Dreamgirls,” “Gods and Monsters”). The franchise has never been so PG-13 before, but parents will be relieved that the moment of passion is treated as delicately as possible.

Their coupling comes with complications, most of which involve Edward not knowing his own strength. But it turns out the undead can still be mighty fertile, and in no time Bella has a bun in her oven, one that may end up killing her.

The “Twilight” films will clearly never satiate casual movie goers no matter who works behind the scenes, be it young at heart auteur Catherine Hardwicke (“Twilight”) or the musically minded Condon. The source material is simply too flawed to yield a cinematic classic.

So we’re left to appreciate the smaller pleasures each film affords. In “Part 1,” that means watching Taylor Lautner, playing the hot-headed were-stud Jacob, flashing a semblance of range as the third part of the franchise love triangle. He’s still a work in progress, but at least now he doesn’t merely clench and unclench his jaw whenever he’s angry.

Bella and Edward’s romance remains a sweet and perfect thing, the franchise’s unabashed beacon of joy. Marriage doesn’t change that, but the spectre of death does force them to confront the reality of their choices.

“Part 1″ lacks such insignificant details as dramatic tension, at least until the stubborn fetus starts sapping Bella of her life force. Fans won’t care, but everyone else will wait… and wait… for some conflict to enter the frame. Even Jacob appears on his best behavior, as are the various members of the Cullen clan.

When a threat surfaces in the form of Jacob’s werewolf buddies, the sense of danger barely reaches an “I’ll grab my mace” level.

Yet the budding sense of maturity suits the franchise. The action sequences in every “Twilight” film can’t get our pulses racing, and the cheap special effects will never bring horror fans into the fold. Stewart and Pattinson, regardless of their off-screen relationship, relish the chance to push their characters in new and challenging directions.

“The Twilight Saga: Breaking Dawn – Part 1″ ends on a brief but satisfying high, the kind that might promise a rousing finale if only the first four films didn’t consistently underwhelm.

—-

Guess Universal Pictures decided to get on board with the fairy tale trend after “Alice in Wonderland” and “Red Riding Hood” were received so well from the critics. Not! “Alice” scored a mediocre 52 percent rating on Rotten Tomatoes, while ‘Red’ sits at a measly 11 percent.

But Hollywood doesn’t make movies for critics, they make them for the money, and any film that bounces off of a fairy tale is likely to bring in major dough. With director Tim Burton’s “Alice” raking in more than $300 million, I’m sure “Alice” producer Joe Roth is looking to bring in a similar dollar amount with his new spin on a classic yarn.

The Roth-produced “Snow White and the Huntsman,” hitting theaters in Summer 2012, is Hollywood’s latest attempt to turn a fairy tale into a blockbuster. In a twist to the genre, the Huntsman (a “Thor”-reminiscent Chris Hemsworth) is ordered to take Snow White (Kristen Stewart) into the woods to be killed. He ends up becoming her protector as they battle to take down the Evil Queen (Charlize Theron).

The trailer centers around Theron’s wicked Queen, with the actress looking more beautiful (and scarier) than ever. K. Stew puts on her usual stoic face as Snow White which doesn’t look much different from “Twilight’s” Bella. Not sure how I feel about this “Snow White” because of Stewart’s involvement. She is a horrible actress, and if she can’t pull it together for this movie, then she needs to take a break and try theater, where she would be much better suited.

It’s still almost a lock that “Snow White” will take the number one spot its opening weekend thanks to the “Alice” connection behind the scenes and a cast sure to draw a diverse crowd.

The other “Snow White” film, “Mirror, Mirror,” is set for a March 2012 release and stars Julia Roberts and Lily Collins. May the best twisted tale win.

“The Hunger Games,” Hollywood’s latest attempt to turn a young adult book series into a franchise, won’t hit theaters until March 2012. But the film’s new trailer offers some hints about the wannabe blockbuster.

—–

Jennifer Lawrence, so good in both “Winter’s Bone” and “X-Men: First Class,” stars as a woman chosen to compete in a ghoulish competition set up by a power-hungry government. It’s a futuristic yarn where citizens yearn to break free from their oppressive regime.

The trailer doesn’t give us much in the way of political commentary, and it’s doubtful the minds behind the movie have anything but “Twilight”-esque box office figures in mind.

The trailer doesn’t give us much to chew on, period. The science fiction elements feel flat, as if they were cribbed from a bad SyFy original series. And good luck finding any romantic sparks between the main characters.

The source material’s clout may still be enough to draw a crowd on opening weekend. I never thought I’d miss Robert Pattinson or Taylor Lautner, but either “Twilight” regular could give these “Games” a boost.

Throughout the three-year history of this space, we’ve posted countless stories about the Hollywood blacklist. In the American capital of free speech and tolerance, conservative leanings are tantamount to career suicide.

We know most Hollywood conservatives keep it in the closet, but it turns out there is one secret far more dangerous — a secret so closely guarded among the trade unions, a lawsuit was filed to prevent a website from leaking the data. That big secret is actors’ real birth dates.

As movie audiences have become younger, movie roles for the elderly have become quite sparse. Being a Hollywood star is a really sweet gig, kinda like being a rock star in normal clothes. Who would ever want to give it up just because Father Time is sounding the gong? It’s a lot like the new film ‘In Time,’ where you’re dead at twenty six unless you have enough money to fix yourself.

Through the use of computer graphics, actors can still be action heroes long after receiving their AARP cards, and thanks to high-tech plastic surgery, actresses who should be eating brunch with a host of ladies in red hats can still work nude. So when IMDB started publishing birth dates on the Internet, well, you can just imagine the chaos that ensued.

In a town where a woman like Cher (born May 20, 1946) still wants to play a single mom, revealing birth dates can be tragic.

Adult teenagers have been the norm in Hollywood since a middle-aged Mickey Rooney (born September 23, 1920) took Judy Garland (born June 10, 1922) to the high school dance. The trend continues today with women old enough to be mothers playing sisters and women old enough to be grandmothers still playing mothers.

Hollywood is like a living, breathing, version of ‘Twilight,’ where actors are eternally the same age, and high school politics have deadly consequence. Perhaps that’s the reason why conservatism is loathed in Hollywood. It’s associated with previous generations, and those who subscribe to it are revealing their true age. An obvious tell that a teenager might really be a vampire is an affection for Buddy Holly music.

The funniest irony about this scandal:  it wasn’t too long ago, actors were linking up behind Julian Assange (born July 3, 1971) like a human centipede. They applauded the WikiLeaker’s brave stance, publishing information they thought was public domain on the Internet (although not many of them were thrilled when they learned their latest blockbuster was available on the Internet as well).

Michael Moore (born April 23, 1954) even choked up bail for Assange. Steven Spielberg (born December 18, 1946) offered to do a movie about his heroics. Everyone speculated that Sean Penn (born August 17, 1960) should play him and that Susan Sarandon (born October 4, 1946) should be cast as his mother, Christine (born 1951).

These people delight in sharing every intimate detail of their lives on tabloid pages, but a secret like how many birthday candles they’ve blown out in their lifetime is just intolerable. Something that is trivial to most Americans is garlic to the immortal vampires of Hollywood. It’s quite telling that our nation’s security is not as important to these people as their own vanity. They would rather see the nation fall to terrorists than let you know their real age.

That’s something that should be remembered by anyone who seeks Hollywood endorsements as voting criteria.