Got anything cheaper than free?

Mar 23, 2022

"Gimme the biggest guy in the world,
you smash his knee and he'll drop like a stone."

PINNED: this newsletter started as a way to highlight movies coming to theaters (see: the name). Then, "the bullshit" happened. And I started featuring movies in theaters, VOD or streaming (see: the +). Point is, if there's a movie worth checking out, you'll probably find it here.

I don't think it's something they're trying to yell loudly about, but during the release of The Batman a few weeks ago, AMC, the largest theater chain in the world (and the US), tested out variable pricing. As in, depending on the movie, time of the showing or the seat the person chooses, they pay more (or less, relatively).

It's something that's been talked about for a long time, but hasn't been done much in the States (AMC did some weekday vs weekend stuff a couple years ago, but that seems akin to matinees vs night showings). Although apparently the theater chain has been doing it for a while in Europe. It sounds like something people might get a bit annoyed and huffy about if they knew it was happening, but said as a person who sees a decent amount of movies in theaters, it does kinda make sense. I'm not saying I want to be forced to pay more for the best seats, but I guess I might not mind if "less good" seats were cheaper relative the others then too? Although not sure that's guaranteed to be the case.

But even further, it relates to the basic supply and demand issue. If lots of people wanna watch The Batman opening weekend, why not let them pay for it? And those who care less, can wait*. It's sort of what happens in concerts, where tickets cost more for more desirable bands - e.g. Drake concert tickets demand > demand for tickets to my one man musical I'm Me and That's All I Can Be (opening soon - stay tuned for announcements). But obviously with that situation, there are far fewer shows (although I'll perform for you anytime).

And whereas I understand (albeit a bit hurt by) the interest in my talents may be less than that of international superstar Audrey "Drake" Graham, movie studios are likely to be a bit less accommodating. Sure, you raise prices on the hit The Batman, or the next Marvel movie, but do you then decrease the price on a movie that's showing weak interest in order to get people to show up? Are you then "devaluing" the product? Theaters might not think so, but they're the ones selling the popcorn...

Personally I also like that idea. Case in point is I currently have a "season pass" to the Alamo Drafthouse here in LA; it allows me to see one movie a day for $30 a month (a single ticket is nearly $20). I've already seen a number of movies in the theater I probably wouldn't have. Obviously this is different than buying tickets individually, but no matter what, the theater is still paying the studio their cut for my visit (they more than make up for it with my concessions).

So is this the future? Do theaters become more like professional sports arenas and live music? I don't think it goes quite that far, but my guess is things will keep shifting in this direction as theaters become more of an "experience" setting (not the boldest of claims).

But honestly, all I'm worried about it is if I can still bring my carry on and not have to pay extra for it. That's the worst.

*this doesn't really get at issues around people who can afford to or not, but that's a larger discussion.

Extra Credit Movies: I featured three movies last week, and yet there were still a lot more released that I didn't. I kinda meant to give 'em a shout here, but honestly got a bit distracted. Now, not all of them would've been high on your list, but I'd at least like you to have been aware of them. Rectifyinggggggg now.

Probably the most notable was the Ben Affleck / Ana de Armas "sexy thriller" Deep Water on Hulu that is apparently, not that sexy. And not that good either. Hell, there's even this Variety article that details all the quixotic aspects of the movie. Bummer.

Others were the Regina Hall lead Master, the horror-ish drama detailing race issues at a haunted elite college (reviews were solid, if saying it's a bit "telly" and not enough scary) on Amazon Prime.

Netflix had Windfall, a thriller where Jason Segel tries to rob the uber-rich Lily Collins and Jesse Plemons (reviews are fairly meh, although liked the acting) and Disney + had their bland looking Cheaper by the Dozen remake that stars Gabrielle Union and Zach Braff (reviews confirm its blandness).

As for this week's EC movies, Naomi Watts is in a survivalist movie, Infinite Storm, where she helps a man caught on a stormy mountain on the east coast. Based on a true story. It's apparently playing nationwide, but don't think it'll be lighting up the box office. Not a lot of reviews, but what's there is ok I guess?

Then there's this cute looking romantic comedy that follows two people on an arranged marriage date that end up living together for a bit due to "the bullshit." Called 7 Days and stars Karan Soni you know from Deadpool 1 & 2 (or Safety Not Guaranteed) and Geraldine Viswanathan from Blockers and The Broken Hearts Gallery. Reviews confirm it's cuteness! Only in limited theaters for the moment.

Aaaand lastly, there's an Irish horror movie called You Are Not My Mother. Which, seems pretty straightforward, but solid. Mom is lost, comes home, seems creepy, is creepy, weird things happen. Also good reviews! Can stream at home on Friday.

THE LOST CITY

It might seem like a spoiler to show Brad Pitt in your trailer when he only has a "surprise" (but decently long) cameo. But this isn't the kind of movie that cares about that sorta thing, and Paramount isn't the kind of studio that wants to hide one of its movies' biggest assets, aaaand 2022 isn't shaping up to be the kind of year where people have the patience to comb through the internet for hints regarding a solid looking, but you know what you're gonna get adventure rom-com. Gimme that distraction, give it to me fast and just how I want it. Yes audience person, right away, obliges Hollywood.

I bring up "Mr. I still look better than you sorry sacks even though I'm pushing 60" because as noted, even if he's featured prominently in the aforementioned trailer, this ain't his movie. And while he may serve a legit purpose and is a fun distraction, as are the rest of the supporting cast (see: Daniel Radcliffe, Da'Vine Joy Richardson, Oscar Nunez, Bowen Yang, Patti Harrison), you see this movie if you think you'll enjoy watching Sandy Bullock and Chay Chay Tatum (is the latter a real nickname? whatever. Let's go with it) spit lines back and forth as they try and escape from goons and thugs.

And sure, the premise is (very) close to the classic Romancing the Stone, where another famed novelist (Kathleen Turner) is roped into a jungle-set quest for some hidden treasure, but in a bit of a modern twist, Bullock's potential "savior" ends up being the one who needs saving most of the time. Yup, that'd be our Chay Chay.

But while most of the things that happen in The Lost City are ridiculous in their movie-ness, that part actually makes sense. That's because Mr. Chay Squared is "just" a cover model for the books Bullock's character writes. Sure, the character in the novels is a hero, but that's fake, just like the wig ol' Chanerooski dons for the photo shoots. And if it all leads to an incredibly predictable ending (it does), you won't care, because that's not why you came. You came for the sharp Sandra Bullock retorts and the muscled back and butt of a certain magical Michael. Which, you shall receive in abundance (abuttance?).

Vibe: the kind of bickering that's cute, fun and (mostly) enjoyable - ie nothing like the kind you experience in your daily life

Out   Friday
Watch   Theaters
The Trailer | 1 hr 52 mins | R | 🍅: 79%

EVERYTHING EVERYWHERE ALL AT ONCE

The above image of Michelle Yeoh with hot dog fingers is weird. But this also looks like an incredibly weird movie, so that tracks. And hey, what would you expect from two guys named Daniel who refer to themselves simply as "Daniels" in their directing credits, and whose first movie, Swiss Army Man, featured a scene where Paul Dano rides Daniel Radcliffe's kinda-sorta-not-so-lifeless-corpse across a body of water using his farts as a means of propulsion (you think I'm fucking with you? I am not).

But you know what Everything Everywhere All at Once also looks like? A darn good movie. Which presumably was not an easy feat when you're essentially trying to make a poignant story about a woman who has the unique ability to channel all the abilities of all the other versions of herself that could've been, if only she'd have made different decisions; all in order to save the world. Of course.

And btw, when I use the word "weird," I dunna mean it the way a skeptical parent refers to their experimenting teens's latest hairstyle. I mean it as a term of endearment. Because even if our world is a bit crazy sometimes, it still often falls prey to being a bit too staid and normal. An upside of being human is our limitless imagination. So why don't we use it more?

One reason we may not is that we get stuck in the doldrums of our daily lives. Which is exactly where Daniels start the movie - Evelyn (Yeoh) is running a struggling laundromat, facing tax issues, dealing with family strife and an overall sense she has failed to live up to her potential. But then comes the term you've probably heard when watching one of umpteenth recent Marvel movies - the multiverse. Sure, the hypothesized infinite versions of existence is a fun scientific debate, but it's also apparently rich fodder for a narrative involving a character who ends up examining the ways in which she can appreciate the reality that is unique to her. Toss in a few dimensional portal butt plugs, some bagel dresses, martial arts - sometimes involving fanny packs, sometimes not - and I guess you have Everything Everywhere All at Once? 🤷‍♂️

As you can tell, it's kind of hard to explain a movie where literally anything is possible, but the movie just screened in Austin at the South by Southwest festival where it was extremely well received. And even if a few reviewers got a bit overwhelmed by *ahem* everything, they still seemed to appreciate the directors for trying something. But everyone agreed Yeoh's ability to embody so many different characters while keeping it centered was a major highlight. This is her first time headlining a Hollywood movie, and critics note it's well appreciated, if long past due.

Also worth noting that her husband is played by Ke Huy Quan (also being praised in reviews) who you really haven't seen much since The Goonies and Indiana Jones and the Temple of Doom. Why? Cuz he says that there just weren't enough roles for asian actors. He credits Crazy Rich Asians - which also starred Yeoh - for inspiring him to get back into acting. How cool.

Vibe: endless possibilities (and oddities) made into heartfelt reality

Out Friday
Watch Theaters
The Trailer | 2 hrs 19 mins | R | 🍅: 96%

(called out from top, left to right)

Not much doin' this week; only have two trailers for you.

We have ourselves a full teaser for the Alex Garland movie, Men, which basically only stars two actors - Jessie Buckely and Rory Kinnear (who appears to play nearly all the characters opposite Buckley).

And then the cinematic version of the popular book Where the Crawdads Sing. Sorta looks like a thriller"ish" version of a Nicholas Sparks movie?? Don't hate me if you're a fan, just a quick take!

What's In Theaters +

Discussion about this post