E. Charl Hattingh, columnist for BOFC

Let me start of by discussing the state of movies today compared to the classics of yesteryear.  We have all heard the critics say that movies today just don't compare to the movies of the 30's, 40's, 50's and 60's.  They say that movies today just can't stand up to classics like "Gone With The Wind", "Casablanca", "Citizen Kane" or "Lawrence Of Arabia".  In fact, on the America Film Institute's list of the 100 greatest movies of all time, only 32 came out after 1969.  And of those 32, only 14 came out from 1980 on.  "Schindler's List" is the only 90's movie in the top 64 of the "greatest movies of all time"! ("Silence Of The Lambs" is #65).

What does this say about movies today?  All we have to see at the theater is one piece of crap after another!?  According to AFI there should be no reason for us to go to the theater.  Why don't you rather go rent some classics like "The Third Man"(#57), or "The Best Years Of Our Lives" (#37), or how about, what must be supurb, 1931's "City Lights" (#76).  Is it even possible to rent these greatest movies of all time?  Can you honestly tell me that "City Lights" is better than "Pulp Fiction" (#95), or "Platoon" (#83), or "Unforgiven" (#98), or even "Joe Dirt"?  Well, don't ask me, I haven't seen "City Lights", but I can tell you that according to critics that were all probably born after it came out, this movie is a masterpiece.  Critics must follow some sort of "Code Of Movie Justice" that tells them that black and white movies are classic...Uh, since they're black and white.  Is that why "Schindler's List" is the only 90's movie in the top 64?  No, that would mean that "Clerks" should also be in the top 100 then ("Clerks" would definitely make my top 100).  Don't get me wrong, the top 100 are full of great movies.  How can you go wrong by putting "Godfather" and "Godfather Part II" in the top 100?  "Star Wars" is definetly a top 10 movie, as well as "Pulp Fiction".  "Raiders Of The Lost Ark" and "E.T." also belong in the top 100, as well as "Silence of the Lambs".  Even classic movies like "Casablanca" and "Citizen Kane" are actually very good movies.

I have always told people that movies today really aren't as bad as critics make them out to be. We do have modern classics! We have "Braveheart", "The Sixth Sense", "The Shawshank Redemption", "The Matrix", "Titanic", "The Untouchables"...Okay, there's too many to mention, and I know I'm leaving out some great ones, but you get the picture. I do believe movies today are great...But, alas, I have to swallow my words. Today, as in 2000-2001, movies really aren't that great. Do you think that the best pictures of the last two years, "American Beauty" or "Gladiator" would have stood a chance against 1994's nominees ("Pulp Fiction", "Forrest Gump", "Shawshank Redemption", "Four Weddings And A Funeral" and "Quiz Show"). They never would have won. How about putting up Kevin Spacey and Russel Crowe against those best actor nominees? Not a chance! I still enjoyed "Gladiator" and "American Beauty", but are they best picture quality? Sorry, that's my opinion. I'm just trying to prove that movies, of late, have been what critics have compared them to in the past.

This year is no exception to the rule of bad movies of today. The only real contender I see so far for best picture is "Memento". Of course there is "Shrek", but I can think of only once that an animated film received a nomination. But, of course there is still two months before the end of the year.

Looking back on October, there really was only one breakout hit:  The Denzel Washington vehicle, "Training Day".  By the end of October it has made over $65 million, and should end its run between $80 and $90 million. Mr. Washington's performance is also the only thing that received somewhat of an oscar buzz in the month of October.  There were several other movies that did average to good business in October. No less than six movies opened higher than $10 million on its opening weekend. They include "Serendipity" (which should finish its theater run with about $60 million), "Bandits" (about $50 million), "Riding In Cars With Boys" (about $45 million), "From Hell" ($40-50 million), "13 Ghosts" ($50-60 million), and "K-Pax" ($65-80 million). But since none of them have received great word of mouth (still don't know about Ghosts and K-Pax), they haven't blossomed since their opening weekends. These days that is a rarity anyway. Movies that are doing better than I thought it would are "Serendipity", "13 Ghosts" and "Training Day". I kind of expected "Bandits" to do business along the lines of "The Whole Nine Yards", and that seems to have happened. "From Hell" is doing business way below my expectations, and I believe that most observers expected that it would do much better.

Actually we are headed for what seems to be a wonderful holiday movie season.  In November alone there are potentially big movies such as "Monsters Inc.", "Harry Potter", "Shallow Hal", "The One", "Spy Game" and "Black Knight".  Not that any of them will get any nominations, but all of them stand the chance of making $75 million+ (Of course Harry Potter could have that by the end of it's first weekend).  The only movie out of the bunch that could get nominated is "Spy Game", starring Robert Redford and Brad Pitt.  But both actors have suffered a little of late.  Redford's "The Last Castle", which debuted in October, is quickly falling.  His last directing effort, "The Legend Of Bagger Vance" was a box office flop.  Although Brad Pitt has had some good roles, his movies have done far less than expected.  "The Mexican" has been his biggest movie in a while, but it didn't make the $100 million it was supposed to.  "The Fight Club" was an outstanding movie, but didn't make that much (somewhere around $40 or $50 million).  I am looking forward to this movie, and I think that it will do good, but it won't make much more than $75 million in domestic box office.
The two biggest movies of the month are, of course, "Monsters Inc." and "Harry Potter".  "Monsters Inc." should do great business, up until the mighty "Harry Potter" opens later in the month.  "Monsters" won't do quite as good as the last Pixar film, but it should end up with around $150 million in domestic box office. 
"Harry Potter" is a different story.  The fan base for the books have grown steadily over the last few years, and this will turn out into a huge box office success.  This movie could make at least $250 million in the United States.

"Shallow Hal", "The One" and "Black Knight" could all turn out to be surprise hits for the month of November, and on into December.  "Shallow" looks like the first real funny movie in a long time from the Farrelly brothers.  It could end up flirting with $100 million by the end of its run.

I also believe that "The One" is going to be the break out hit that will finally make Jet Li an American movie star.  I know that many young people are crazy about the amazing special effects in the movie, and it's already being compared to "The Matrix" (though I doubt it will even get close to the quality of that movie).  And this movie is only rated PG-13.  Jet Li could have a $100 million blockbuster on his hands.

The other big movie opening is the Martin Lawrence comedy "Black Knight".  The previews look funny enough to push this movie past $50 million at the box office, maybe even as much as $75 million.

Join me again next month as I take a look back at November's films and what is to be expected for the month of December (LORD OF THE RINGS!!!!!!!!)