411 Movies Roundtable: June 2008 Part 2

Posted by Owain J. Brimfield on 06.03.2008

The 411 staff continue their look at the big releases of the month!





Be sure to check out PART I if you haven't already!

Coming Attractions

JUNE 6TH

You Don't Mess with the Zohan
Studio: Columbia
Directed by: Dennis Dugan
Starring: Adam Sandler, John Turturro, Emmanuelle Chriqui
The plot: A Mossad agent (Sandler) orchestrates a scenario that will allow him to move to New York City and reinvent himself as a hairstylist.

Thomas: Is it an utterly ridiculous premise? Of course. But why is that different then any other Adam Sandler movie? A hockey player who becomes the raucous sensation of golf isn't believable, but it didn't stop Happy Gilmore from being hilarious. Sandler can be really hit or miss sometimes, but I'm willing to give this one a chance. Especially if Emmanuelle Chriqui looks as hot in the rest of the film as she does in the trailer. I would do very, VERY bad things to her. But yeah, it's the kind of silliness only Sandler, or maybe Mike Myers (more on him later) could make work.

Furious: Adam Sandler's comedies have been getting progressively worse since The Waterboy and seeing as his career as a serious actor simply isn't working he keeps going back to them. The one brief moment of hope, for me anyway, was during Click where he managed to fuse comedy and serious acting in perhaps his best acting performance, ever. I don't have high hopes for Zohan though given Sandler's track record over the past decade (Little Nicky, Mr Deeds, Eight Crazy Nights, Anger Management, The Longest Yard, Chuck & Larry).

Harris: Eh, could be a toss-up. While I like Adam Sandler, last year's I Now Pronounce You Chuck and Larry was terrible, horrible excrement. I enjoy Sandler playing the odd, goofy character every now and again, but let's see if this one can carry a movie.

McGee: I don't tend to like Adam Sandler, but I confess: the trailer made me chortle. I predict that it's either going to be god-awful stupid or so god-awful stupid it ends up being hilarious.

Lealos: I am a pretty big Adam Sandler fan. I love the low brow, frat boy humor and almost all of his movies leave me with something satisfying. I've followed his career since he was a cast member on SNL and I have a belief that Adam Sandler makes three types of movies. There are his movies for the guys (Happy Gilmore, Waterboy, Anger Management, Little Nicky), his films for the chicks (Big Daddy, Mr. Deeds, 50 First Dates) and finally there are his prestige pictures (Reign Over Me, Spanglish, Punch-Drunk Love). I am pretty sure he has no control at all over the content of his prestige pictures, but his personal creations seem willing to split his guy's and girl's movies right down the middle. When looking at the trailers of You Don't Mess with the Zohan, I am not sure who he is aiming for. Hair Stylist = chicks. Terrorists = dudes. Regardless, I'll be there opening weekend. No apologies.

Chamberlain: I have to admit, when I first saw the poster I had no idea what to think, but the previews are pretty damn funny. I don't love Sandler and I don't hate him either, but in the right roles he is gold, and this one might just be worth checking out to see if he captures the magic again.

Kristopowitz: This movie looks incredibly stupid, but I have a feeling that it's going to be better than most Adam Sandler movies. It seems as though he's playing an actual character here and not the loveable oaf he usually plays. What if this is the next Austin Powers type thing?

Snyder: The only thing that will probably keep this from being the worst comedy of the month is The Love Guru. Sandler can simply no longer be counted on for quality laughs, and judging by the lame trailer, this one won't be changing that anytime soon.

Brimfield: I hate goofy Adam Sandler. Serious Adam Sandler is decent and can turn in a good movie, but his goofy counterpart just hasn't made a film I've ever found funny. Thankfully, John Turturro is in the mix as well and that man just turns everything into gold dust, so I may even stick this one out.

Kung Fu Panda
Studio: Dreamworks
Directed by: Mark Osborne; John Stevenson
Starring: Jack Black, Ian McShane, Angelina Jolie, Dustin Hoffman
The plot: Po (Black), a reluctant panda bear, is recruited by a team of Kung Fu masters and trained in the ways of the ancient martial art in order to protect the Valley of Peace from an evil snow leopard.

Thomas: I can't say this is going to be absolutely awesome, but it does look fairly funny. Jack Black actually seems like he'll work better as a voice actor then a live-action one. Throw in the amazing Ian McShane, Miss Jolie, and Hoffman, not to mention Jackie Chan, Michael Clarke Duncan and Lucy Liu, and I'm highly optimistic. Add the fact that one of the directors is John Stevenson, who cut his teeth with crew roles on the first two Shreks and Madagascar, and it sounds like it could be a lot of fun.

Furious: Dreamworks has been a poor man's Pixar for quite some time. Every time they come up with an animated movie it feels like a second rate version of something Pixar has already done (Flushed Away, Shark Tale, Madagascar). Even their Shrek franchise, which seemed to be the jewel in their animation crown, has gone steadily downhill. As a result something like Kung Fu Panda, which seems promising on paper, is a film I'm immediately skeptical of. That said preview screenings have been fairly positive and they're getting released ahead of Pixar's WALL-E, which will mean no derogatory "WALL-E was better" comments. Should do some decent box office but I'm not expecting anything great.

Harris: I hate most of the Dreamworks animated efforts, and this definitely isn't getting me very excited. Shark Tale was awful. The Shrek series has been getting worse with each movie. This doesn't look much better and looks like Madagascar territory.

McGee: I'm so sick of seeing this trailer I could puke. Like all of DreamWorks' animation efforts, I think this will be cute, but largely forgettable, and maybe even a little painful to sit through. Plus, going up against Pixar is always a bad move.

Lealos: My wife's number one most anticipated movie. I love Jack Black and she loves fat pandas who know kung fu. Looks like this movie may push my Zohan viewing back a little thanks to the wife. It should be funny but will be only the second best animated film of the month by a LONG SHOT.

Chamberlain: Kung Fu? Check. Panda? Check. Jackie Chan as a monkey? Check. What more do you want people? I am stoked to see this film and I don't care who knows it! Maybe it's just my love for all things wushu, wuxia, kung fu and any combination or tribute therein, or maybe it's just my appreciation for a good, fun time at the movies. Either way, everything I've seen from this one makes me think it will be a blast and I can't wait to see it.

Kristopowitz: I think this looks pretty decent. The animation looks good, the voice talent seems top notch, and the previews are hilarious. I'm interested to see how much it does its first week, just to see how the year long advertising scheme worked out.

Snyder: You know what part is hilarious in the trailer? When the Panda hits that guy with his stomach, and says "ska-doosh!" HAHAHA. Ska-doosh! That's not even a real word! And we all know it's funny as hell when you do something, and say a made-up word at the same time. Oh man…"ska-doosh." Comic genius, that Jack Black is.

Brimfield: This looks to me like it's trying way too hard to be wacky, zany, and other horrible y-words. Having said that, with the exception of Jolie the voice cast is particularly strong and Black has yet to overstay his welcome in my house, so this could prove decent after a few tasty beverages.

The Promotion
Studio: Third Rail
Directed by: Steve Conrad
Starring: Seann William Scott, John C. Reilly, Gil Bellows
The plot: Dueling assistant managers of a local grocery store (Scott and Reilly) vie for a coveted promotion to manage the bigger, fancier store soon to be opened by their corporate employers.

Thomas: John C. Reilly and Sean William Scott are good with comedy, but this doesn't look so great. If the trailer is accurate, they both look to be trying their best, but the humor seems forced, and I just can't get excited about a film that looks like it's trying to be the next Employee of the Month. Which, if I can be frank, was pretty crappy to begin with.

Furious: Seann William Scott. Go away. Please.

Harris: Looks like more low budget comedy trash that Scott and Reilly probably filmed over a weekend for the easy paycheck. Haven't heard a darn thing about this one, and it will probably get a low profile release.

McGee: Sounds like something for me to run away from screaming.

Lealos: I like Seann William Scott. I thought he was the only good thing to come out of Mr. Woodcock. He was also really fun in The Rundown. I just want to say that Seann William Scott is not Ashton Kutcher. Scott is actually talented. This film is also written by the man who gave us the underrated The Weatherman. I like the idea of Scott and John C. Reilly playing off each other, but this is a wait for DVD for me.

Chamberlain:I do like Seann Scott, but for me he's never been funnier than he was as Stifler, and every time I see him in a movie, part of me wishes it was in that role. I'm not saying he can't do different things well; he's executed perfectly in a few movies (The Rundown comes to mind). I guess I just miss the Stiff Man. Who would definitely NEVER run a grocery store, by the way.

Kristopowitz: I don't know what to make of this movie. It sounds like a great concept, and the cast looks decent enough, but doesn't this seem like a bigger Employee of the Month type movie? I'm interested to see what exactly is so dang funny about two managers vying for a higher management position. Will it be satire or just laugh out loud type funny stuff?

Snyder: Are we sure this is coming out on the 6th? I haven't seen one damn ad for this thing. Hell, I don't think I've ever even seen an image of it in the dozens of film magazines I look at every week. Then again, judging by the premise, that's probably a good thing, as it sounds to be in the same vein as Employee of the Month. And we all remember how fantastic that one was, right?

Brimfield: Reilly has been doing a few too many Ferrell-flavored comedies recently, so it'll be interesting to see if he retains his deft touch in an indie movie. I'm not sure Scott ever possessed a deft touch, but if there's anyone who can teach him, it's Reilly. One for DVD rental more than anything.

Mongol
Studio: Picturehouse
Directed by: Sergei Bodrov
Starring: Tadanobu Asano, Amadu Mamadakov, Khulan Chuluun
The plot: A young Mongol boy endures years of poverty and torment before forming one of the most powerful empires in human history; as Genghis Khan, the leader extends the Mongol Empire from East Asia to Central Europe - creating a legacy that lasts for over 150 years.

Thomas: This was a nominee for Best Foreign Language Film last year, and it looks quite interesting. It's a tall order to try and humanize someone as infamous as Genghis Khan, but it seems as if they made a hell of an effort at it. The fight scenes look like they'll be good, and for those that don't mind subtitled movies, this looks like a serious winner.

Furious: Seeing as Genghis Khan conquered most of Asia, and a fair sized chunk of Russia for kicks, I think he's overdue a huge overblown epic war movie about his life. After all his most memorable cinematic appearance to date is ransacking Oshman's Sporting Goods in Bill & Ted's Excellent Adventure. Hardly fit for one of war's finest leaders. I look forward to this and hope it channels Musa: The Warrior, which was another sweeping Asian epic with lots of swordfighting and not Seven Swords, which is shit.

Harris: OK a Genghis Khan flick, haven't been hearing about it, or much buzz over it. I'd probably watch it if it was on cable. But as of now, I have no desire to try and see it in theaters.

McGee: I'm kind of a nerd when it comes to historical pieces, so this intrigues me. I don't expect much, but it might be worth checking out. Hopefully it isn't just trying to cash in on the 300 barbarian action bandwagon, and there's actually a decent story to it.

Lealos: This was nominated for an Oscar and is about Genghis Khan. As the 411 writer with what seems to be the most interest in prestige pics, I still don't know enough to say anything about this one. Variety does claim this is supposed to be the first part of a trilogy, so there you go.

Chamberlain: This certainly has that epic feel to it.

Kristopowitz: Wasn't this the movie that was nominated for Best Foreign Film at the most recent Oscars? The one from Kazakhstan? It's got to be worth checking out if it was nominated for a Foreign Oscar, right?

Snyder: This looks pretty excellent, if you ask me. I'm a sucker for giant sweeping epics like this…as long as they're done right. And casting Tadanobu Asano – one of Japan's most intriguing actors – in the title role is definitely a step in the right direction.

Brimfield: Epic, in a word, although this will undoubtedly have a poor US box office take. This is just the kind of film I'd enjoy going to see at the local student cinema in my old town, and if I get the chance I'll be doing the same for this one.

JUNE 13TH

The Incredible Hulk
Studio: Universal
Directed by: Louis Leterrier
Starring: Edward Norton, Liv Tyler, Tim Roth, William Hurt
The plot: Geneticist Bruce Banner (Norton) takes flight in order to understand -- and hopefully cure -- that the condition that turns him into a monster. Complicating his situation is the military initiative that wants him captured and controlled, as well as the arrival of a more-deadly nemesis: The Abomination.

Thomas: I really want to not be worried about this one. I really, REALLY do. I love Edward Norton, and I love Tim Roth. Liv Tyler makes me cry as Betty Ross, because I have never liked her in anything she's ever been in. No, not even Lord of the Rings. Maybe, just MAYBE Empire Records. But I like the new rendition of the Hulk miles ahead of Ang Lee's cartoony version, and this seems to be doing everything right that the first did wrong. Hopefully, they can turn this franchise around.

Furious: I honestly don't get why Marvel has to do Hulk again. I've never been overly fond of the character and I feel Bruce Banner is one of, if not the, most dull alter-ego's in the Marvel universe. If anyone can make it work it'll be Ed Norton but if Internet gossip is to be believed, and Norton isn't denying it, there have been arguments over the screenplay and the final cut. If Iron Man was smooth sailing for Marvel this could be the opposite but Iron Man's success could drag people out to the cinema just to catch another Marvel flick. Early screenings have been promising but only done in bits and aimed strictly at fanboys. I'm also extremely worried about director Louis Leterrier who's only done 3 films to date and of those Jet Li's Unleashed is the best (the other two being Transporter movies) and that's not one of Jet Li's better films quite frankly. I've been proved wrong before but I worry about the director's chops.

Harris: The majority of hype, build-up, marketing, and promotion this summer went to Iron Man at the expense of The Incredible Hulk. It was the right way to go. Iron Man had a lot more potential at the box office, and less baggage than something involving the Hulk. And its a move thus far that has paid off for Marvel Studios. The Incredible Hulk? Well it looks interesting, and I hope it strikes the right balance that the 2003 movie failed in doing. But again we shall see. It's definitely coming during a crowded time for releasing.

McGee: Hated the first movie, but I love Ed Norton and I'm hoping that maybe his much-talked-about influence can help this one. The rest of the cast is awesome, too, and rumor has it that this flick looked to the old live-action TV show for inspiration. That sounds great to me, but I have my doubts as to whether audiences in general will feel the same. If it can strike a balance between story and "Hulk Smash!" then it could be on to something.

Lealos: I liked Ang Lee's Hulk. I thought it was just about everything a thinking man's comic book movie should be. It was smart yet still looked like a comic book movie. I am in the minority. Now we get to see the epic "Days of Edward Norton's Lives: Part 2." If you missed part 1, it was called American History X. Let's see if his tinkering and prima donna antics can give us a movie worthy of all the behind-the-scenes gossip. With Norton as Banner and Tim Roth as The Abomination, I will definitely be there opening weekend. My prediction: It will make a lot less than Iron Man, but quite a bit more than Speed Racer. And it will only be the third (or fourth, depending on Hancock) best super hero movie of the summer.

Chamberlain: Ang Lee's Hulk is the only comic book movie in recent years that I have truly disliked (and yes, I include Elektra in that statement). It was just... well, it was boring as hell is what it was. This one looks like it can redeem the big green guy, cause it looks straight up kick ass. Granted, I also liked the looks of the first one before I saw it, so you can never be too careful. But I think Marvel knows what people want (Hulk. SMASH!) and this time, they'll deliver.

Kristopowitz: I kind of liked Ang Lee's Hulk movie (although I'd like to know what exactly happened to Nick Nolte's character at the end. Why did he become a giant bolt of lightning?), but I don't mind Marvel "rebooting" the franchise with Edward Norton in the lead role as Bruce Banner. The previews have been okay (the big monster fight that's seen in the trailers looks fun but cheesy), but because Iron Man sort of raised the bar for superhero movies (especially Marvel Comics superheroes) this Hulk reboot has to kick butt. Just has to. What happens if this movie tanks and The Avengers never happens because of it? Wouldn't that suck.

Snyder: As much of a comic-book nerd as I am, I've never really been that into the Hulk. Still, I was a little excited when I originally heard that Marvel was going to make a more action-packed film in order to make up for the crap-fest that was Ang Lee's film. Now that I've seen the trailers, though, I can't help but revert back to my original under-whelmed state. I'll probably check it out, though, if only for the Tony Stark appearance.

Brimfield: I'm just not a fan of the Hulk, but now that an Avengers movie seems to be on the horizon I'll be going along to see this and hope it turns out somewhere as well as Iron Man did, even if that's a tall task. Anyway, Tim Roth's always an enjoyable bad guy.

The Happening
Studio: 20th Century Fox
Directed by: M. Night Shyamalan
Starring: Mark Wahlberg, Zooey Deschanel, John Leguizamo,
The plot: A family is on the run after natural disaster threatens the entire planet.

Thomas: Oh, is it time for another M. Night Shyamalan film? Let's see. Vague as hell trailer? Check. Ridiculously stupid and vague title? Check. Good cast that will probably go to waste? Check. Let me guess, there's a twist ending? Yeah, after Lady in the Water, I'm taking the advice of The Who when it comes to Night. "We won't be fooled again."

Furious: M. Night Shyamalan has this weird reverse career deal going on. He started great and has been going slowly down the crapper. You're supposed to start small and work your way up to greatness, in theory. Look at the average ratings on IMDB.com; Sixth Sense 8.20, Unbreakable 7.20, Signs 6.90, The Village 6.60, Lady in the Water 6.00. See a pattern there? The Happening has some pretty freakish imagery going on in the trailer, the Red Band version anyway, and there is an inkling that this could be M. Night's comeback film. It could well be his last chance to impress or The Sixth Sense will be just a distant memory.

Harris: Somewhere down the line I'll probably give Shyamalan a chance again to see how he approaches Avatar: The Last Airbender. But for now, it looks like more of the same tiresome same old from Shyamalan that audiences started rejecting with The Village and continued with Lady In The Water which was just... WTF. Won't see it. Years ago a movie like this from Shyamalan was getting much bigger hype and build-up. How the mighty have fallen.

McGee: As I've already said, I'm devoted to M. Night and Wahlberg, so I have high expectations for this one. The deliciously ambiguous trailer only helps heighten the anticipation. Unfortunately, it's competing with The Incredible Hulk, which almost certainly dooms it to box-office failure.

Lealos: I feel this column is turning into a "things we didn't know about Shawn Lealos" column. I already stepped to the edge with my love for Adam Sandler films and Ang Lee's Hulk. Now I make the ultimate jump: I love M. Night Shyamalan movies. Please don't throw things at me. I saw Sixth Sense and Unbreakable on their opening days and have undying love for them both. I saw Signs and thought it was a really solid, little flick. A lot of people agreed at the time, but have joined the revisionist history ranks since, denying their original enjoyment of the film. I saw The Village on its opening weekend and I have NO PROBLEM with the twist at the end, anything less would have been a waste of time. It is not up the level of his previous three flicks, but it was not horrible. The only Shyamalan movie I have not seen in theaters is Lady in the Water. I waited until DVD to watch it because of the horrible reviews. My thoughts? It is his worst movie, but it is not the abomination people make it out to be. It is not a good movie, but people make it sound like the signs of Armageddon begin with its release. The Happening has me interested. I really like Mark Wahlberg and I don't believe Shyamalan can make an uninteresting film. I want to see this one in theaters.

Chamberlain: I wonder if this is the movie that M. Night tortured Ari Gold over on Entourage with his ever changing script. And hey, Mark Wahlberg = Vinny Chase! I'd be more likely to see this if it WAS a Vinny vehicle.

Kristopowitz: I'm not that big a fan of Shyamalan's (although I did like Lady in the Water, even though it was pretentious), but I'm interested to find out exactly what the hell is happening because the various trailers I've seen for this don't explain all that much. There's that "red band" trailer that shows a guy being sucked into a giant lawn mower (which led some people to say that this is Shyamalan's Maximum Overdrive), and while that's always fun and cool to see in a movie, why exactly is it happening? And since this is Shyamalan's first R rated horror flick, what is he going to do all that different from his previous movies, besides maybe more "F" words? Are we going to see Shyamalan paint the walls red so to speak?

Snyder: Does anybody else besides me think that one part of the trailer where Walhberg just stares at the screen for like ten seconds is freakin' hilarious? Anyway, this is going to be a kind of make-or-break film for Shyamalan, as his stock has obviously dropped in recent years (I love how the ads for this one only mention Sixth Sense and Signs, ignoring his last two flicks). I'm pretty sure I've already heard what the twist is with this one, and it sounds like something that could either be pretty neat or amazingly lame. With Shyamalan, you never know till you see it, but I'm keeping my expectations low.

Brimfield: I'm looking forward to this a surprising amount, as Shyamalan looks to regain some of his filmmaking luster. All the ingredients, bar the horribly poor title, add up to one of my favorite sorts of movie, so I'll be lining up eagerly for this one and hoping it doesn't dash too many expectations.

JUNE 20TH

Get Smart
Studio: Warner Bros.
Directed by: Peter Segal
Starring: Steve Carell, Anne Hathaway, Alan Arkin, Terrence Stamp
The plot: Maxwell Smart (Carell), Agent 86 for CONTROL, battles the forces of KAOS with the more-competent Agent 99 (Hathaway) at his side.

Thomas: So the big question with this is, will it be another 40 Year Old Virgin or another Evan Almighty? My hope is for the former, which I can appreciate, even if I didn't love it like some people. Steve Carell, really, should stick to more natural comedy like he did in Dan in Real Life and Little Miss Sunshine. Either way, this should be fairly good at least, as he's paired with a good cast, and I can't wait to see how The Rock Dwayne Johnson does in another chance at supporting comedy. Terrence stamp is always a joy to watch, and Hathaway should be a good straight (wo)man. Peter Segal has a tolerable track record, so we'll see how this goes.

Furious: I used to watch the Get Smart TV show. I loved it. Mel Brooks created a genuinely funny weekly spy spoof but I question the need for a modern version of it. After all there have been plenty of spy spoofs in recent years (I'd only just erased the memory of Spy Hard from my brain and I'm working on Johnny English) and frankly there hasn't been a good one in some time. That said if they can keep the humor in line with the TV show and funny Steve Carell turns up there's potential here. I like Alan Arkin and Terrence Stamp and Anne Hathaway is clearly aiming for a new market here. I'm hoping it works. I want it to work.

Harris: I enjoy Steve Carell a lot on The Office, and a couple of his movie roles, but for the most part I dislike his lead roles. I'm really not keen on the idea of a live action Get Smart movie, as well as a guy like Carell as Maxwell Smart romancing Anne Hathaway as 99. I don't think it will be quite as big of a bomb as Evan Almighty, but I don't see it being a huge hit either.

McGee: My Crappy Adaptation Sense tells me this can not end well, but I'm remaining optimistic. I loved the show, and Steve Carell is the perfect actor to fill Don Adams' telephone-shoes.

Lealos: This is the month of the comedy. We get Adam Sandler and Mike Myers and two animated features, but I think Get Smart might have the most laughs of them all. Steve Carell was born to play this role. The Rock is fantastic in these type of movies as well (he was the best part of Be Cool). This movie should be full of gags and jokes and might be the best comedy of the entire summer.

Chamberlain: This movie looks really, really funny. And it looks like it's set to capture the perfect balance between buffoonery and action that you want in a summer movie. That, and Anne Hathaway is just gorgeous. And yes, I will go see a movie for that reason alone.

Kristopowitz: The previews have been hilarious, the cast is great, and the show the flick is based on is a classic. What the heck could go wrong? Lots, probably. I don't want to think about any of that, though, at least right now. I just want to see if everyone involved can pull the flick off without much in the way of general stupidity, because, again, while I have the utmost confidence in everyone involved, a comedy like this can very easily fall into the stupidity trap. What should be funny isn't and, as a result, everyone involved ends up trying too hard (Alan Arkin I'm looking at you). Let's just hope there's very little of that here.

Snyder: Talk about dream casting. In a million years, you couldn't find a better choice to take over for Don Adams than Carell. That doesn't necessarily mean the movie will be any good, but there are enough funny moments in the commercials so far that I'm sure this will be a fun flick – probably one of those ones you see, laugh at, and then forget about immediately after. Could be worse, I guess. It could be the next film.

Brimfield: Not being familiar with the TV show that spawned this I don't know if it'll be a faithful update, but it looks to be a mildly diverting slice of popcorn entertainment, even if Carell is starting to stretch the acceptable boundaries of playing dumb.

The Love Guru
Studio: Paramount
Directed by: Marco Schnabel
Starring: Mike Myers, Jessica Alba, Romany Malco, Justin Timberlake
The plot: Pitka (Meyers) an American raised outside of his country by gurus, returns to the States in order to break into the self-help business. His first challenge: To settle the romantic troubles and subsequent professional skid of a star hockey player (Malco) whose wife left him for a rival lover (Timberlake) before the NHL Stanley Cup.

Thomas: Oh, dear gods in the heavens. I'm sorry, this just looks utterly retarded. Myers, like Sandler above, can do stupidly silly better then almost anyone, but this just looks straight-out DUMB. I don't imagine any way, based on what I've seen, that this will be remotely funny. Go back to giving us Austin Powers's and Shreks, Mike. They may not be what they're used to, but they'll sure as hell be funnier then this piece of crap.

Furious: Well Mike Myers sure found the key to comedy gold didn't he? MIDGETS. Midgets are funny. Midgets getting hit with hockey pucks are funny. While the rest of the movie has every potential to be horrible the very presence of Verne Troyer means we'll be in for a few midget related hijinx. Kinda sad when your movie career has degenerated into doing bad sequels to good movies and relying on midgets. But on the upside; this means there may be So I Married an Axe Murderer 2 on the way! WE HAVE A PIPER DOON!

Harris: I plan on seeing it, but as far as execution, it could be a toss-up. I love the Austin Powers movie, and I generally think Meyers is a solid, consistent comedic performer and creator. Most of all at least he's doing something different. However this looks very much like a sketch character, so it will be interesting to see if its someone who can carry a movie like Dr. Evil or Austin Powers. Jessica Alba still can't act, and I don't care if she's hot. Meyers picked a terrible leading lady he has to carry on his back just like Beyonce in Goldmember who looked like she didn't belong at all.

McGee: Much like Zohan, this one looks like a disaster, but it could be so disastrous that it ends up working. Myers managed to make Austin Powers an embarrassingly stupid success, so maybe he can work his magic again. And, lord help me, Timberlake cracks me up.

Lealos: Never count out Mike Myers. The guy knows what is funny. I believe the Austin Powers movies got better with each installment. I enjoy his crazy characters and impersonations and, ignoring Cat in the Hat, think this should be a return to form for the best SNL alum of his era.

Chamberlain:I like Mike Myers, I really do. And as a fan of the Montreal Canadiens I'm really not the most unbiased reviewer of any movie that revolves around the Toronto Maple Leafs. But throw out the Leaf angle, put any other pro sports team in its place, and this movie would still look TERRIBLE. This Pitka character looks more annoying than funny. Jessica Alba is as smoking as ever, but not even her presence could persuade me to see this.

Kristopowitz: We haven't seen Mike Myers in full on goofball character mode in a while, and since it doesn't look like we're going to be getting another Austin Powers movie anytime soon, I guess we'll all have to settle for this. The previews suggest the flick follows the same sort of path the first Powers movie did, so if Love Guru is at least half as funny as the first Powers movie Myers could have another franchise on his hands.

Snyder: Ugh. Have you ever seen a trailer for a comedy that is as aggressively unfunny as this one? OK, maybe Norbit. As a matter of fact, yeah, that's what I have to say about this one. The Love Guru is going to be this year's Norbit.

Brimfield: A hearty "meh" to this one, as I think even Myers has realized his career will surely not hit the heights of Austin Powers ever again.

Kit Kittredge: An American Girl
Studio: New Line
Directed by: Patricia Rozema
Starring: Abigail Breslin, Stanley Tucci, Joan Cusack, Chris O'Donnell
The plot: Young Kit Kittredge (Breslin) looks to weigh in on the Great Depression by having the story she's written about the era published in Cincinnati's major newspaper.

Thomas: I'm so beyond tired of Abigail Breslin already. She's just annoying as hell. Sure, Little Miss Sunshine was good, but nothing she's done since has been. This doesn't look as terrible as most of her recent work (Nim's Island, anyone?), but it still looks like a bad attempt at family-friendly junk. Also? Who the HELL told Chris O'Donnell he could still have a career? Seriously.

Furious: Is this some kind of American thing? The title seems like it should make sense but I'm not getting it. I think Abigail Breslin is a little young to be having her own movies, good though she has been so far in other things. Proof being how little I care about this release.

Harris: Haven't heard much about this one either, but definitely don't plan on seeing it. Hey, Chris O'Donnell still exists and he's getting work... good for him.

McGee: I haven't forgiven Breslin for Nim's Island, but even with my bias, this looks like so much heart-warming schlock. I think I'll pass

Lealos: It's June's little girl's flick. I'm not a little girl, by the way.

Chamberlain: Right on, a movie about a journalist! And I'm a journalist! But I still won't go see it.

Kristopowitz: I don't know anything about this flick. I don't know what else to say except it'll be great to see Stanley Tucci back on the big screen again.

Snyder: For those of you that don't know, I work at a Borders Books & Music, so I am well aware of how popular this series of books is. I won't be seeing it, but you can bet your Barbie's that a lot of young girls will.

Brimfield: Breslin is rapidly turning into the female Haley Joel Osment, and I have no interest in what sounds more like it should be a straight-to-DVD film.

JUNE 27TH

WALL-E
Studio: Walt Disney
Directed by: Andrew Stanton
Starring: Ben Burtt, Jeff Garlin, Fred Willard
The plot: A trash-compacting robot sets off on an adventure to discover the meaning of life.

Thomas: Everyone's going ga-ga over this one, and I'll admit it looks good, but I'm not super-jazzed. Of course, I felt the same way about Ratatouille and it was really good, so I could well be wrong. I just don't find the little guy as charming as everyone else, and while it will be good, I don't see it connecting as well as past Pixar films did. But then, I could be totally wrong, and have before. Yes, some times critics do admit to being wrong. So we'll see.

Furious: Ever since the trailers started doing the rounds here at 411 months ago this movie has had a little buzz attached to it. Pixar has a ridiculously high win percentage. A Bug's Life is a little ‘meh' and Cars was perhaps a little disappointing but that's only because Pixar's reputation is so good. Andrew Stanton's last directorial performance was on Finding Nemo, which is up there with both Toy Story's as my favorites from Pixar. I have little doubt that this will be a) cute and b) awesome.

Harris: I like the trailers, and Pixar seems to almost never fail at producing fried cinematic funnel cake gold. I like the idea of these characters having these electronic voices, and it looks like a fun ride. I'm psyched and I hope to fall in love with WALL-E this summer.

McGee: Pixar delivers, period. The first full trailer gave audiences a better idea of the story, and it looks like classic magic from the world's premier computer animation studio. It's a little sad that it's really Pixar rather than Disney keeping the tradition of films TRULY for all ages alive, but I'll take what I can get.

Lealos: The one movie that can overtake Indiana Jones at the worldwide box office. This will be a monster hit. It will be huge. It looks like a return to form for Pixar and with Ratatouille, should clinch back-to-back Oscars for the company. I just can't wait for this movie. Everything about it looks spectacular. Then again, the fact that it is mostly a silent film will kill its box office potential. I really hope people aren't that stupid.

Chamberlain: This looks... interesting! And Ben Burtt, right on! I don't always get to these Pixar movies while they're in the theaters, but I'll do my best to check this one out.

Kristopowitz: The WALL-E robot is cute as hell in the previews, and since Pixar doesn't make "bad" movies, I'd suspect they have yet another big moneymaker on their hands. As I understand it, the title character doesn't speak, so there's a concern that that could harm the movie, that it'll be hard for the audience to identify with a character that doesn't emote like Buzz Lightyear or Lightning McQueen. I think some people are worrying too much, but we'll see how much not speaking hurts the movie, won't we?

Snyder: I don't know anyone who has seen this trailer and not been completely charmed by it. Hell, I already want my own WALL-E. Pixar might as well start stretching their wallets out now…they've got another winner on their hands here.

Brimfield: This looks just wonderful, and exactly the sort of movie that would appeal to me as a youngster. Thankfully, I'm happy to embrace my inner child and go see this, as it looks to be a perfect combination of science fiction and animated filmmaking.

Wanted
Studio: Universal
Directed by: Timur Bekmambetov
Starring: James McAvoy, Morgan Freeman, Angelina Jolie, Terrence Stamp
The plot: When Wesley Gibson (McAvoy) discovers his recently murdered father was an elite assassin, the young man is recruited into his father's old organization and trained by a man named Sloan (Freeman) to follow in his dad's footsteps.

Thomas: People seem to be waiting with baited breath to shit all over this one, but I haven't seen anything to dislike yet. James McAvoy is on the cusp of stardom, and this really looks to be the one that's going to push him over the edge. Again with Terrence Stamp - good month for him, which means a good month for me. And Jolie looks just beyond hot in this one, and perfectly cast. Freeman will do his usual reliable goodness, and this one's just going to be amazing. Everyone else can see WALL-E this weekend, I'll be at Wanted.

Furious: I've already mentioned this as my pick of the month. Timur Bekmambetov is better known as the director of Russian extravaganza Night Watch. It's one of the more visually thrilling films made outside of the US in the past 5 years. It's easy to see why Hollywood came calling. Interesting casting on this debut too with four very different actors coming together for a good old fashioned action romp. I've seen the trailer a few times this week (on the Balls of Fury DVD and at the cinema ahead of Indy IV) and it's definitely a movie I would watch based on the trailer.

Harris: It looks like a low-rent version of The Matrix, and its sent fans of the Mark Millar graphic novel into a tizzy. It will be caught up in the rush and onslaught of movies and flop. Mark Millar will have to let go of his delusions of being the next Frank Miller in Hollywood and stay writing Marvel crossover events for good.

McGee: Morgan Freeman is awesome. Angelina Jolie is usually awesome (and always nice to look at.) Stuff blowing up is awesome. So why am I not excited about this movie? Could be because it doesn't look to distinguish itself in the slightest from countless other summer blockbusters.

Lealos: This looks like the kind of stupid fun movie that the Summer Blockbuster made its name with. It will not be very successful, as it will lose out to WALL-E and then have to stave off Hancock and The Dark Knight. But, damn it looks like a giant brainless blockbuster. This month doesn't seem that bad after all.

Chamberlain: The previews for this tell me two things. 1) It looks pretty bad ass. 2) Gone in 60 Seconds is no longer the only movie in which I actually found Angelina Jolie to be really hot.

Kristopowitz: I don't know about everyone else, but I think I've had my fill of hip and edgy action movies featuring pseudo Eurotrash assassins shooting people with two guns while hanging out the side of a car. Or, well, really, action movies about assassins period. Aren't there other action movie hero types out there that can be used? I mean, is this flick just going to be Swordfish but with Morgan Freeman in it?

Snyder: I enjoyed the hell out of the comic book this one is based on, but I guess that's irrelevant since this looks nothing at all like the comic. Still, it'll be nice to see what Bekmambetov (the director of Night Watch and Day Watch) can do with a big Hollywood budget, and Jolie is looking pretty smokin' in the trailers. I'll check it out.

Brimfield: I haven't been following this one too closely, but what I've seen looks pretty compelling and it's a great choice for release at the height of the summer movie season. As Jeremy said, this should be the movie that cements McAvoy as a big-league player, and might even have the potential to develop into a worthy franchise.



The votes are in... WALL-E is the 411 staff's hit of the month, while The Love Guru is our shit of the month!


That's all for now, folks. Stay tuned next month for a look at The Dark Knight, Hellboy 2 and a whole lot more!

All poster images courtesy of IMDB.