Coming out May 7th, Van Helsing (rated PG-13), may not have the title name
to be considered attractive, but I believe this movie will be a good start
for the summer blockbusters. This movie will get people into the mood
for action packed, summer movies. By no means will it be a really big summer
blockbuster, but people are interested in lore about the Wolfman, Dracula,
and Frankenstein's monster. And to think we'll get the chance to watch
Hugh Jackman hunt them down, is all the more appealing.
And don't forget the English beauty Kate Beckinsale is also in this movie.
Kev's prediction: ~$120 million mark in America.
Compared to: X-Men did $158 million
Coming out May 14th, Troy (rated R), has an ensemble of actors
which I think will be my personal favorite of the summer. Starring
Brad Pitt, Eric Bana, Orlando Bloom, Sean Bean, Brian Cox, Peter O'Toole
and Diane Kruger (Helen) this war epic is ready to go!
Since I love ancient times and war movies, you can't get any better than this.
Taking place thousands of years B.C., this is the epic tale of the Trojan War.
The battle scenes look more awesome than anything before, the storyline is
well known, so it seems that this could be a hit right from the get-go. Of
course my expectations will be low in order for me to enjoy and cheer all the
more for this movie, but I don't know how many people will flock to go see this movie.
I mean, it should do great, because it has a love story in it which will
bring more women audiences, and it has swords which takes care of the men.
But being rated R will stop it from grossing super blockbuster type dollars.
All in all, it should be a movie worth seeing this summer.
Kev's prediction: ~$190 million, possibly closer to breaking 200.
Compared to: Gladiator did $188 million.
Coming out May 21st, Shrek 2 (rated PG), should be another fun film
continuing the Shrek story. Starring voices again will be the great cast with
Mike Myers, Eddie Murphy, Cameron Diaz, and John Lithgow . Basically this sequel is about
Shrek and Fiona coming back from their honeymoon to meet her parents. Not knowing who she married
or the fact of her status we shall see how her parents "try to fix" things.
Although sequels never do better than the orginal,
I'm sure that because this is a computer animated and not a traditional
animated film, it will bring in more audiences. With the great humor and
storyline of the first, this sequel should follow the same standards. The soundtrack to the first
film really worked out too. Instead of composing an entire soundtrack from scratch, they borrowed
songs already done and they fit well into the movie. I am curious what they
will do for this second film. The first
movie worked so well, because it added more adult-aimed humor and had the "Disney"
type magic because the some of the producers of Dreamworks had come over from Disney Studios. Dreamworks hasn't
made the greatest of cartoons, but quality will probably be put into this film. Afterall, so far, all computer animated films
have a record of great success whether they be from Disney or not.
Kev's prediction: ~$210 million.
Compared to: Shrek did 268 million, Signs did 228 million.
Coming out May 28th, The Day After Tomorrow (rated PG-13), is brought
to you by the same producers as "Independence Day". With that said, there should
be some pretty awesome graphics and stunning special effects. Starring Dennis Quaid,
Jake Gyllenhaal, and Ian Holm, I don't think this cast will bring in the audiences;
only the special effects will do that.
This movie is about the world coming to an end from catastrophic events caused by Mother Nature and
not aliens from outerspace. Because I saw the movie "The Core" which was about
the same idea of Earth coming to an end because of nature, this movie will not be a blockbuster.
"The Core" was actually pretty good, mainly because I thought it was going to be stupid. This film however
has some major backers in the special effects department though. With no big names to the film
and no cool, main "bad guy" this film will do poorer than expected. It still might be worth seeing
though in the theater for the effects you can't get at home.
Kev's prediction: $120-150 million...any more if turns out to be better than I thought.
Compared to: Independence Day did 306 million, The Core did 31 million.
Coming out June 4th, Harry Potter and the Prisoner of Azkaban
(rated PG), is the third installment of the Harry Potter movies. Starring the now
familiar faces of Daniel Radcliffe, Emma Watson, Rupert Grint, and Gary Oldman,
this should continue on the success of the series. This movie is about Harry's third year
at Hogswarts, beginning the film during the summer just before school starts. The notorious
Sirius Black has escaped and is now looking for Harry! The characters are getting older, but
because of the wonderous success of the books, that should not take away from younger viewers.
What will be taken away is just the matter of the fact that this is the
third movie. With the exception of Lord of the Rings, the third movie of a series still
does not do better than the first. I think they came out with this movie a little
later than they should, but switching to a summer release is the next best
alternative than the usually Thanksgiving time previous releases. As before,
I am eager to see how this one turns out expecting a delightful amount of
fantasy with magic and fun-filled storyline. For strategy purposes, since none of my
friends will be caught dead in line for this movie with me, I'll have to take along
a little cousin or two, telling people "Yes, I brought my little cousins so they could see Harry Potter"...
or I could do what I did last Harry Potter movie: "What? I thought this was the line for
the new James Bond movie???" haha!
Kev's prediction: ~ $240 million.
Compared to: The first Harry Potter did $317 million, second did $262 million.
Coming out June 16th, Around the World in 80 Days (rated PG),
is a surprising movie to come out. Why is it surprising? Well because it
stars Jackie Chan, with guest appears by Kathy Bates, Arnold Schwarzenegger, Luke and Owen
Wilson, etc. Now the title of the movie explains the storyline and since
it is a remake from the 1956 original, it could be a fun movie. I don't know
how they chose Jackie Chan as the leading role, but since I am a fan, I'll
give this movie a chance. I'll have to see the previews before I decide
if I want to spend the money for theater viewing or just wait for it on DVD.
Overall, this movie is not a summer blockbuster and probably could have waited
for another time of year to be released. However, since it should be a
lighter movie, it may be a choice to go to while other movies are packed.
Kev's prediction: ~$65 million.
Compared to: Shanghai Knights which did $60 million.
Coming out June 18th, Garfield: The Movie (rated PG), should be
the unpredictiable surprise summer movie. Starring Bill Murray (the voice of Garfield),
Breckin Meyer, and Jennifer Love Hewitt , mixed reviews are coming in. The basic storyline goes
that Garfield wants Odie out of his home, but when Odie is dognapped,
Garfield has to spring into action to save his friend.
On one hand everyone loves Garfield, but will this movie be another botch like
"Cat in the Hat"? Taking an unorthodox technique with a computer animated Garfield
and putting him in real life settings. Closet thing that comes to mind is how
Gollum was created in Lord of the Rings. Of course you don't have to worry
Garfield will look that scary, he won't be the same we are use to from his
comic strip and tv cartoon drawings. That might have some effect to how
many people will want to watch this movie. I think this movie will fair ok, but not be
a summer blockbuster. It reminds me to much of when Godzilla came out as an expected
summer hit. Well, the movie changed Godzilla too much and the movie never did great enough
for a sequel (which was planned, but after the first one did not live up to expectations, has been
put on hold indefinitely). I don't know if I'll see this movie or wait for it on
DVD. If more previews come to change my mind, I just might have to see
another family aimed summer movie.
Kev's prediction: $100 million.
Compared to: The Cat in the Hat which did $100 million.
Coming out June 30th, Spiderman 2 (rated PG-13), is going to be
without a doubt the summer blockbuster of 2004. Everyone already knows this.
Starring Tobey Maguire, Kirsten Dunst, and Alfred Molina , we should
see another comeback of the masses for this movie. The basic storyline goes
where we are two years later with Peter Parker. Trying to live the life
of super hero and college student are taking their toll. He also is conflicted with
his love for Mary Jane, the bitterness towards Spiderman from his friend,
and a new villian, Dr. Octavtius aka Dr. Octopus. Now being prejudice towards
the first Spiderman, because it upstaged StarWars that summer (2002), I can be glad to
know this is a sequel and there is no competition from StarWars: Episode 3 this year...although
I wouldn't mind them going head to head. Anyways, sequels don't do as well as the first one,
but that's nothing to worry about. If you liked the first Spiderman, you'll probably
really enjoy this one. The sequel they have worked and taken out what they
didn't like about the first one and now have experience to what is expected
from the audience. Plus with the visual display of our man Spidy and the new cool
villan Dr. Octopus, the fun factor on this movie will be sky high for summer movie goers.
Besides, they know it'll be great because it's coming out just before
July 4th weekend. Ring a bell to movie's whom have done this with super
success in the past???
Kev's prediction: $340 million.
Compared to: Spiderman which did $404 million, Finding Nemo and Lord of the Rings 2 which both did ~$340 million.
Coming out July 7th, King Arthur (rated PG-13 or R), probably
will end up the movie that had potential, but failed. Starring Clive Owen,
Stephen Dillane, Keira Knightley, and Ioan Gruffudd , this cast for this movie
looks like garbage for a summer hit. I only know Keira Knightly because she
was the hot woman from Pirates of the Caribbean. The storyline speaks for
itself because we all know about King Arthur and the many films done on the subject.
Only this time they are trying to do the story more based on the real King Arthur
or whoever his real name was and not on King Arthur the legend. So it adds to its own
twist and own version, but this movie looks like it is lacking just too much.
Plus there are scenes of Guinevere looking like a mad warrior, which in my
opinion is just to get women's rights groups happier for the matter. I think
she looks stupid because she's all suppose to be a queen and besides, she's too
skinny to fight. If they wanted a warrior fighting queen, go get Xena. At least Lucy
Lawless is more realistic looking to kicking ace. I'll probably see this one only
on DVD just because I like the time period and lore.
Kev's prediction: a mere ~$50 million.
Compared to: First Knight which did only $37 million and that even had Sean Connery!
For more listings and info go to Movie Web