Home > Blogs > Sir Critic on Cinema > Archives > 2008 > June > 02 > Entry
‘Sex’ box office, Universal’s fire, and more
Got a number of things on my movie-loving mind this morning.
Sex and the City: Any doubt that remains about women being able to open a movie should have been quashed forever by the movie’s $55 million start. The most astonishing stat, however, is that the movie had a better opening day than Indy IV. (Indy made just over $25 million, SATC made almost $27). And for those people who think this is a one-weekend wonder, don’t bet on it. I’ve heard that several women are already planning to see it again.
A sequel, of course, is inevitable, but one has to wonder - how many “happy endings” upset by new crises can these girls stand? Whatever the case, can we please tone down the “men hate it” hype next time? No? Didn’t think so.
One other question: I heard one woman refer to Sex and the City as “Our Indiana Jones.” If the woman had said Transformers or Die Hard I would have understood. But I thought women liked Harrison Ford as Indy. Am I wrong?
Universal’s fire: I was sorry to read about the huge fire that burned much of Universal’s backlot in California, including the standing Back to the Future set that can be seen on the tram tour. Sadly, that means Back to the Future is gone from Universal in more ways than one; the Back to the Future ride was retooled into a Simpsons ride. Gives “Save the clock tower” a whole new meaning, doesn’t it?
PS Would it be nasty of me to say it was too bad the fire didn’t stop the MTV Movie Awards?
Sydney Pollack tribute: Turner Classic Movies has their tribute to the recently departed director tonight. I’m especially excited to see Three Days of the Condor.
Iron Man vs. Indy IV: Rewatched both yesterday. My opinion holds that quality-wise, it’s about a wash. Both movies are great fun but are undermined by faulty third acts. I give the edge to Indy because Spielberg directs better action scenes.
What move matters are on your mind?
Permalink | Comments (4) | Post your comment | Categories: Sir Critic muses
Comments
By Hillary
June 3, 2008 5:15 PM | Link to this
I loved SATC. Both the show (of which I own the box set of the series and I’ve probably watched EVERY episode at least 2 or 3 times) and the movie (which I fully intend to go see again and buy when it comes out). However, I don’t think there will be a sequel for several reasons: 1) The movie takes care of the characters… I don’t want to give anything away, but I don’t see what else they could really do for another 2 hour movie. I think they left everyone in a good/logical place. And 2) They had so much trouble getting this one made (look how long it took and the rumors of feuding and battles to be paid more, etc.) that I don’t know that they’d do it again.By Cali
June 2, 2008 5:18 PM | Link to this
The Universal Studios fire is so sad…I was just there a few weeks ago, and now some of the coolest stuff is all gone. I think it’s cool that they were still able to film the MTV Music Awards though.By SRCputt
June 2, 2008 3:26 PM | Link to this
I’d feel more sympathetic to women’s complaints that there haven’t been enough movies for them if they had showed up to In Her Shoes more than this. Just shows women are just as easiest drawn in by hype as men and kids.By Kim S.
June 2, 2008 1:49 PM | Link to this
Didn’t see SATC, then again I didn’t watch the show either. May catch on DVD. My comment regards “Iron Man” vs. “Indy 4”. Personally, when I walked out of IM, I wanted to walk right back in and see it again. When I left Indy, I was a bit disappointed. Indy was fun, but it seemed to be it got too bogged down. IM’s pacing was much better. Also, IM broke parts of its genre whereas Indy just seemed to adhere to the same rules as always - which didn’t always work. Not to mention that I found Tony Stark a more-dimensional character than Indy. Personally, I preferred “Iron Man” - but that’s just me.