comment #1

dino velvet says ...

No name draw stars. Crowded marketplace (it was one of four new releases). Contagion and Drive tapping the adult/thriller audience. Poor reviews. Weird trailer that shows the ending first and then flashes back.

comment #2

DuluozGray says ...

Uh, it looked like garbage and starred actors no one gives a shit about?

comment #3

great scott says ...

All of the above.

comment #4

Kakihara says ...

It's another remake, and of a movie which had niche appeal to begin with. Plus, it takes a swipe at red-necks who might be perceived as cipers for tea-baggers. And it doesn't have marketable stars or a marketable director. Oh, and it went up against the more critically-acclaimed Drive and Contagion and the family-friendly Lion King. But yeah, if Straw Dogs did this "well", Dragon Tattoo 2.0 is in for a world of hurt.

comment #5

sumo-pop says ...

I saw it this weekend, and it's well done enough, but it's clearly missing...something. For one, Bosworth is too prudish. Marsden is too stereotypically academic in the part. Skarsgaard is good, but has never opened a movie. I may get into trouble for this, but the rape scene is not disturbing ENOUGH. Plus, Bosworth's behavior after the rape would be hard to sell for even the most skilled actress. Not to mention, what was all that James Woods shit about?

I think it may be Peckinpah's very misogyny that made the original FEEL dangerous. I mean really, was this any better than the remake of The Last House On The Left?

I know it sounds like I'm dumping on it pretty heavily, but I wouldn't say it isn't watchable. Hell, at 2AM on a sleepless Saturday night on Cinemax, it might just do the trick. Not in the theater though. Too compromised.

comment #6

sumo-pop says ...

And yes, I know the village idiot subplot was in the original film. Didn't work to great effect there either.

comment #7

Colin says ...

Kakihara, Dragon Tattoo has a current Bond, and a very well known director. That's a terrible comparison.

comment #8

hollywoodtease says ...

Will be available at Redbox in how many days? I'll wait to rent this remake.

comment #9

Kakihara says ...

And yeah, speaking of rape, I don't really understand why they thought they could sell it in Straw Dogs if they failed to do so with that I Spit On Your Grave remake a year earlier.

comment #10

Kakihara says ...

Colin: A current Bond who couldn't sell a tentpole movie with Harrison Ford a few months ago, and a director who's so "well known" that his career is fairly uneven in terms of box office. And a guy who rarely scores hits with movies which are dark, to boot.

comment #11

sumo-pop says ...

I don't remember any ads selling the rape. And yeah, saying Dragon Tattoo is in trouble because of Straw Dogs is like saying Angelina Jolie's next action pic is doomed because of Colombiana.

comment #12

Buk94 says ...

DZ's box office prediction history is pretty terrible. Dragon Tattoo not only has a higher profile director/cast than Straw Dogs, it is also based on a book that every single person in the world has read. Except for me. Make your prediction now, DZ.

comment #13

great scott says ...

Who else but Danny Boy would compare a Peckinpah classic to what many believe is the worst film ever made?

comment #14

Kakihara says ...

sumo-pop: They weren't selling the rape, but they were obviously promoting the edginess of the material which would imply bad things happening. And Angie's next pic is doomed because no one wants to hear about the Serb massacre. I don't really get H'wood. If people don't like seeing movies about the Iraq war, why do they want to watch depressing shit about people getting fucked over in general like in Straw Dogs? Especially now. Torture porn only sells when it's Halloween-themed or when it's got a hook.

comment #15

Kakihara says ...

Buk: "Dragon Tattoo not only has a higher profile director/cast than Straw Dogs, it is also based on a book that every single person in the world has read."

Yeah, it was so well-received that the original did better in its native country than it did here.

great scott: Well, in my defense, there are a lot of people who feel that way about Straw Dogs.

comment #16

Colin says ...

Yeah, who would imagine a Swedish film with subtitles did better there than here.

comment #17

MickTravisMcGee says ...

Kaki: "I don't really get H'wood."

We know, DZ. We know. But thanks for finally acknowledging it.

Anyway, why'd it bomb? No big-draw stars, tough competition, a crappy trailer and ads, and it looks like something that's been done 1,000 times before.

Plus, the title. "Straw Dogs." Seriously. Think about it. It may be mysterious and evocative but it's also ticket window poison.

comment #18

Bob Hightower says ...

Ugly topic for a film. Based on an ugly
original. Why make it again? Audiences
have some collective sense.

comment #19

Markj74 says ...

I'm sure everyone remembers DZ's prediction that Avatar would bomb and be outgrossed by Sherlock Holmes.

David Fincher must be opening the champagne right now.

comment #20

bobbyperu says ...

Some of idiotic comments on this blog a truly amazing, and I would guess the majority haven't even seen this movie. In two viewings, I thought it was exceedingly well-made and acted.

There's a real cancer in American moviegoers now -- they propel The Lion King back to number 1 but they can't be bothered to go see solid movies like Warrior or Straw Dogs. It's mind-boggling the amount of money spent to produce most films and how little an audience is willing to sit for.

Especially love the "ugly topic for a film" comment -- an examination of the male ego, aggression and the basest impulses in all men is an ugly topic?

Solution -- let's just make crappy movies about switching bodies and shitting Thai food, or killing our bosses while we snort coke, or faux highbrow junk about fake diseases spreading.

Perhaps the most asinine comment award goes to the analogy between Straw Dogs and I Spit on Your Grave. What kind of idiot would make that association?

comment #21

Colin says ...

Straw Dogs marketing campaign made it look like torture porn. Maybe they should have mentioned an analyses of male's basest behaviors.

comment #22

bobbyperu says ...

Yes Colin because that would have gotten people into the theater. The only way to sell it sadly is to emphasize the violence. Movie marketing is NEVER honest about what you are getting because they just want asses in seats. Why don't they bother to think about bad word of mouth, like in the case of Drive, which highlights this disconnect with an appalling C minus? One of the very best films this year being sold as an action film, which it is anything but. Brilliant.

comment #23

bobbyperu says ...

C minus for Drive on Cinemascore, to clarify.

comment #24

reverent and free says ...

I haven't seen Straw Dogs (2011) yet, but I can't help but imagine if someone like De Palma had helmed it. I agree with sumo pop that the unconscious feel of a man sweating and wrestling with his own demons behind the camera gives the original a certain edge.

On a side note, no one combines slo mo with quick cuts quite like Peckinpah anymore. It's an extremely effective technique, as Kael wrote in her review, of making the viewer simultaneously see and recall something in the same moment.

comment #25

CinemaPhreak says ...

You argue with Kakihara/D.Z. at your own mental peril. As mentioned before, this is the guy who boldly predicted an AVATAR flop and then would not admit being wrong.

comment #26

Gabe@ThePlaylist says ...

America:

"What the fuck is a straw dog?"

comment #27

Chase Kahn says ...

I heard a huddle of 15-16 year-old kids in the lobby when I was going to see "Drive". One of them was talking about "Straw Dogs," saying: "I think it's a remake or something..."

comment #28

CinemaPhreak says ...

The more interesting failure this weekend was I DON'T KNOW HOW SHE DOES IT which should have gotten at least twice the its $4.5M gross from Ms Parker's name.

I think Harvey Weinstein is truly over when he can't cut a trailer that doesn't at least get the SEX/CITY crowd in on opening weekend.

comment #29

Kakihara says ...

Colin: "Yeah, who would imagine a Swedish film with subtitles did better there than here."

And a no-name like Rooney Mara is going to make the remake a bigger hit because...?

mark: "I'm sure everyone remembers DZ's prediction that Avatar would bomb and be outgrossed by Sherlock Holmes. "

And people forgot my predictions that Kick-Ass and Jennifer's Body would bomb. I also like that it's only me who thought Avatar would bomb.

peru: "they propel The Lion King back to number 1 but they can't be bothered to go see solid movies like Warrior or Straw Dogs. "

If it makes you feel better, Lion King underperformed, compared to its original weekend opening, even if you exclude inflation.

comment #30

Rashad says ...

What's wrong with The Lion King being #1 again? It's a positive more than anything

comment #31

Corto1 says ...

Straw Dogs & Warrior deserved better fates. Marketing on both were horrible & misrepresented the films. Too bad. Heads will roll at Sony for Dogs.

comment #32

reverent and free says ...

On the subject of GWTDT, has anyone heard whether they speak in Swedish accents. As effective as non verbal trailers are, they are sometimes a bad omen. Case in point: Daniel Day-Lewis in Nine.

comment #33

Kakihara says ...

Actually, Dragon Tattoo could still pull through if that Shining remake, er, Dream house, does well.

comment #34

ManhattanMadcap says ...

It also didn't help that, Ebert aside, the critical reception was a general "meh".

Seriously, the blind Lurie allegiance on this site is baffling. "Nothing But the Truth" got the ostensibly straight-to-DVD release it deserved, and the rah rah-ing for it in some parts seemed to stem only from a certain desperation to stick it to the villainy of the Bush era.

"The Contender"? "The Last Castle"? With this latest failure, maybe it's not too late to return to film criticism.

comment #35

arispil says ...

@ Bob Hightower - "Ugly original"?? Good grief who ARE some of you people?

comment #36

K. Bowen says ...

In the absence of LexG, Jeff and I have stumbled onto the new dynamic.

Jeff writes "How could this movie or that movie not make X million dollars at the box office?"

And then I say, "Nobody/Not many people know who X (Carey Mulligan, Alexander Skarsgaard, James Mardsden) is." Sometimes I pepper this with, "even though they're huge in the alternate reality of the film blog world" or 'They could ride a bus through Denver without being noticed" or "The ones who do still think of him as 'the guy from 'The Notebook.' ' "

I have to say that I think LexG was much more entertaining.

comment #37

actionlover says ...

"'Bucky Larson' will pull big opening weekend numbers because it's been proven that people like movies about guys with buck teeth. Don't believe me? Here's proof.. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uF1oK_Q9OmE "
- Dee Zee

comment #38

Kakihara says ...

When the hell did I say Bucky Larson was gonna make dough?

comment #39

TL says ...

Shit, Laurie's never made a movie that made money. And every one of them has been a burn. What did you expect?

comment #40

DeafEars says ...

I saw it and while it was better than I thought it'd be, its primary value is showing in relief how great the Peckinpah film really is. A career low for James Woods. Walton Goggins was an oasis of authenticity while having next to nothing to do... pretty ugly photography too. If you're on the fence, definitely a renter.

comment #41

bobbyperu says ...

Deaf-

"Ugly photography"? The widescreen cinematography and score are two of the films aces in the hole. It's drenched in atmosphere from its opening shots of the swamp...

comment #42

DeafEars says ...

The film looked grainy and drab to me. YMMV. The score was ok.

comment #43

George Prager says ...

I thought Bucky Larson was going to be a because of UNCLE BUCK.

comment #44

HarryWarden says ...

Too bad about the failure of SD. It's a very solid remake only hampered by Bosworth; they should have gotten someone else. Would have been nice to maybe see someone new paired with Marsden. Otherwise, the performances are aces and the film effectively tense.

comment #45

Terry McCarty says ...

Perhaps Rod Lurie ought to have remade an unabashed 70s revenge-movie exploitationer like THE HOUSE BY THE LAKE.

It's no more known to much of today's audience than STRAW DOGS. And Clint Culpepper/Sony could have sold it to to the youth market as a January release.

comment #46

George Prager says ...

UNCLE BUCK was a hit, why not Bucly Larson? Is is it because people haven't forgiven Dean Jones for HERBIE RIDES AGAIN? or is because audiences would rather watch a BRIDEMAIDS remake like LEAVING LAS VEGAS than Norm MacDonald in an all-black version of LONG DAY'S JOURNEY INTO NIGHT.

comment #47

Cadavra says ...

The title wasn't a problem in 1971, when they didn't even bother to explain what it meant. But then again, in 1971 the national IQ hadn't dropped by 40 points.

comment #48

Gaydos says ...

Has anyone here talked about certain weekends that are the ultimate dumping ground weekends for movies? Say what you will about The Biz, but there is some thought and logic and if you pay attention, you can see the headlights coming.

comment #49

actionlover says ...

"'Bucky Larson' DID perform better than expected among adult females age 18-24, like I said it would. Kind of like how I knew Carter wouldn't win a second term in '80 because of Rabbitgate."
-Dee Zee

comment #50

Terry McCarty says ...

bobbyperu wrote:
Why don't they bother to think about bad word of mouth, like in the case of Drive, which highlights this disconnect with an appalling C minus? One of the very best films this year being sold as an action film, which it is anything but. Brilliant.

Guessing at least part of the Cinemascore audience distanced from the film the same way Scott Mendelson did:
http://scottalanmendelson.blogspot.com/2011/09/review-drive-2011-is-just-art-house.html

comment #51

Joe Leydon says ...

Actually, Cadavra, they DID have to explain the title back in 1971.

http://bit.ly/pv0NZD

comment #52

Bob Violence says ...

no 1971 audiences were all intimately acquainted with pre-Qin Chinese philosophy, as further evidenced by Peckinpah's successful revisionist western White Horse Is Not a Horse

comment #53

Bob Violence says ...

p.s. I sorta wish everyone had stopped posting here after Prager's post, so we could just sort of leave this thread as a monument to its majesty

comment #54

bobbyperu says ...

Terry-

Are we cherry picking reviews from other critics here now? Let's take a look at Drive on Rotten Tomatoes and MetaCritic and all witness that Scott is in the slim, very slim minority.

comment #55

zumpano says ...

DZ:

How about if Girl w/ Dragon opens higher than 20 mil opening weekend, you agree to NEVER POST YOUR BULLSHIT HERE EVER AGAIN

You know ABSOLUTELY NOTHING about movies, box, office, life, etc.

If you don't love movies; GET THE FUCK OFF THIS BOARD

You are a tool and an idiot and a person who has been proven wrong COUNTLESS TIMES

And you're nothing new, you're just a REMAKE OF A PIECE OF SHIT

comment #56

Big Black says ...

DZ, you think adaptation of the international best-selling phenom novel The Girl With the Dragoon Tattoo is in trouble because of how poorly Straw Dogs did this weekend?

And then you go on to say that the awful-looking Dream House could somehow help Dragon Tattoo "pull through"?

comment #57

Kakihara says ...

zumpano: It's being released during the X-Mas season and will be competing with MI4, TinTin, and the second weekends of the Sherlock Holmes and Chipmunks sequels. Still feel lucky on that one?

Big Black: Yes. If Dream House can't do it for Craig, why do you think Tattoo would? And those Hannibal books still make money, but the last adaptation which was a hit was 10 years ago.

comment #58

HarryMoseby says ...

D.Z. finally renders an entire universe of message board participants speechless.

comment #59

Terry McCarty says ...

bobbyperu wrote:
Are we cherry picking reviews from other critics here now? Let's take a look at Drive on Rotten Tomatoes and MetaCritic and all witness that Scott is in the slim, very slim minority.

True, but since he has a very current-mainstream-friendly sensibility as a critic, his review seems to sync with the disdainful Jim McMahon "that's kinda artsy, ain't it" mindset that some audience members espoused last weekend.

comment #60

flyboots says ...

for us is what could have been been Coach Purses Outlet been ... who would look in their chimney for a missing child. ... We kind of can have humor in
now because it turned out well."Surgeon Amputates Patient's Penis Without Permission