Fans were upset that the Asian-American actor, who faced an onslaught of hatred after her first "Star Wars" film, barely featured in the new movie.
Lucasfilm’s “Star Wars: The Rise of Skywalker” is completing the extended Christmas box office period with an estimated 5-day total of $135 million, bringing its 10-day domestic total to $361.8 million.After the Skywalker Saga finale earned $32 million on Christmas Day, some industry estimates were projecting that J.J. Abrams’ film could pull ahead of the domestic pace of its predecessor, “Star Wars: The Last Jedi,” despite having a significantly lower opening weekend. But as the weekend progressed, those estimates were quickly dialed down. “Last Jedi” had a 10-day total of $368 million, and that was before a Christmas Day surge that saw the film’s domestic total rise to $464 million after a full two weeks in theaters.Still, “Rise of Skywalker” took in $72 million for its Friday-to-Sunday second weekend, a 59% drop from its $177 million opening that is consistent with other blockbusters that have opened at that level. Globally, the film now has a total of $725 million with domestic market share still nearly even with an overseas total of $363 million.Also Read: Billie Lourd Pays Tribute to Mom Carrie Fisher on 3-Year Anniversary of Her Death (Video)Taking second is Sony’s “Jumanji: The Next Level,” which is proving to be a strong alternative to “Star Wars” as its distributor had hoped. With a $35.3 million 3-day/$59 million 5-day weekend, the “Jumanji” sequel now has a domestic total of $175 million.Adding to Sony’s big Christmas is the success of Columbia/Regency’s “Little Women,” which opened on Christmas Day on 3,308 screens and took the No. 4 spot on the charts with a $29 million 5-day opening. That beats industry projections for an opening in the low $20 million range and puts Greta Gerwig’s likely Best Picture Oscar contender in strong position to leg out to a domestic total of over $100 million. Word of mouth has been incredibly strong with an A- on CinemaScore and critics and audiences scores on Rotten Tomatoes of over 90%.Also opening this weekend and taking the No. 5 spot is Disney/Fox’s “Spies in Disguise,” which came in slightly below industry projections with a $22 million 5-day opening from 3,502 screens and a $38 million global opening. Reception has been strong for the Blue Sky/Chernin-produced animated film with an A- on CinemaScore and 72% Rotten Tomatoes critics score.Also Read: 'Spies in Disguise' Film Review: Will Smith and Tom Holland Do Espionage in Run-of-the-Mill Animated AdventureHowever, “Spies” is facing competition for families from “Jumanji” and the still surging “Frozen II,” which took in $26 million over the 5-day period to take third on the box office charts. “Frozen II” has now passed the domestic run of the original “Frozen” with $421 million and is $57 million away from passing the global total with $1.21 billion grossed after six weekends.The final big Christmas release of the weekend was “Uncut Gems,” which is setting new records for distributor A24. After providing their studio with a record $105,000 per screen average in its limited opening, the Safdie Brothers crime thriller has earned an $18.8 million 5-day wide opening from 2,348 screens. The film has a total of $20 million and is now expected to become A24’s highest ever domestic grosser, passing the $48.9 million earned by “Lady Bird” in 2017.Among holdovers, Lionsgate had some mixed results with their two current releases, “Knives Out” and “Bombshell.” “Knives Out” is showing strong legs in its fifth weekend, earning $16.6 million over the extended weekend to bring its total to $110 million. “Knives Out” now joins “John Wick: Chapter 3” as Lionsgate’s second $100 million-plus release in 2019 after not having any for the entirety of 2018. The Rian Johnson mystery has also crossed $200 million worldwide thanks to strong performance in China ($27.9 million) and the U.K. ($13.7 million).Also Read: 'Knives Out' Director Rian Johnson and Stars on Chris Evans' Viral 'Eat S-' Moment| Video“Bombshell,” meanwhile, is having a rougher time this weekend thanks mainly to stronger than expected competition from “Little Women” for female moviegoers. The film took in $8.4 million over the 5-day weekend, giving the $32 million production a domestic total of $15.6 million after two weekends. The film still has a chance to leg out in January, especially if stars Charlize Theron and Margot Robbie earn victories at the Golden Globes and help fuel interest.But that’s nothing compared to the struggles facing Universal’s “Cats,” which was removed from the studio’s FYC page earlier this weekend and is set to bomb with $17.8 million domestic and $38.2 million worldwide after two weekends against a $95 million budget before marketing costs.Read original story ‘Star Wars: Rise of Skywalker’ Pulls In $135 Million During Extended Box Office Weekend At TheWrap
January is a time to start afresh, to develop and work on good habits and healthy living. Here’s what coming and going from Netflix Canada in January 2020 — and as you enjoy, remember that the month will, eventually, end.
James Cameron’s breakout film “The Terminator” may not have been a hit in theaters, but it was such a cult favorite on home video that it spawned one of the biggest and most lucrative movie franchises in history. With “Terminator: Dark Fate” in theaters, let’s look back at all six feature films in the saga, and see how they stack up against each other.6\. “Terminator Salvation” (2009)The fourth “Terminator” movie has a great cast — Christian Bale, Anton Yelchin, Bryce Dallas Howard, Helena Bonham Carter — and a smart idea, to give all the time-travel a rest and actually set one of these post-apocalyptic thrillers after the apocalypse for a change. Unfortunately, director McG is more interested in chaotic action than in the story, the new revelations about the universe are groan-inducing, and Sam Worthington’s forgettable protagonist, a survivor with a secret, takes valuable screen time away from everyone and everything else.”Terminator Salvation” is the movie fans were waiting for, a film finally set in the future starring John Connor, and it failed to deliver in almost every way.5\. “Terminator Genisys” (2015)Alan Taylor’s failed attempt to reboot the “Terminator” franchise plays like a whole bunch of fan theories thrown into a blender. Kyle Reese (Jai Courtney) goes back in time to rescue Sarah Connor (Emilia Clarke), only to discover that she teamed up with a Terminator (Arnold Schwarzenegger) years ago and is also capable of protecting herself. The timeline is a mess, on purpose, and it’s up to them to fix it. There are some interesting ideas in “Terminator Genisys,” but that only gets the film so far, and only if you’re completely addicted to the minutiae of this franchise. The actual story falls apart quickly, thanks in no small part to Courtney and Clarke failing to capture the magic of the original characters, and a plot that’s all set-up for future sequels and very, very little payoff.4\. “Terminator 3: Rise of the Machines” (2003)Jonathan Mostow’s entry in the “Terminator” franchise is better than its reputation suggests, following the classic formula in an unexpected way and building up to a gut-punch finale that finally solves the paradox underlying the franchise: if Skynet was only built because Skynet sent a Terminator back in time, then how did Skynet get built in the first place? Nick Stahl takes over as John Connor, Claire Danes plays the woman who will one day become his second-in-command, and Arnold Schwarzenegger has to protect them from a new breed of Terminator, the T-X, played with menace and unusual physicality by Kristanna Loken. The action sequences are phenomenal — the truck chase is one of the highlights of the series — but the humor falls flat, and the frenetic pace gives us very little time to connect to the characters. “Terminator 3” is not a bad film, and yet, compared to the first two, it can’t help but look subpar.3\. Terminator: Dark Fate (2019)The latest attempt to reboot the franchise, ignoring all but the first two films, is an absolute winner. Tim Miller (“Deadpool”) takes over, in a story about a new Terminator coming back in time to kill a young woman named Dani (Natalia Reyes), who is protected by a new kind of cyborg (Mackenzie Davis) and Sarah Connor herself (Linda Hamilton). The story hits familiar beats, but the characters are rich and distinct, and the film treats its contemporary backdrop like the sort of sci-fi dystopia that movies like the first “Terminator” warned us about. Fantastic action, memorable characters, surprising humor, and impressive relevance. “Terminator: Dark Fate” doesn’t play like a cash-in sequel, or fan fiction, or even a mixed bag. It’s a legitimately great “Terminator” movie.2\. “The Terminator” (1984)James Cameron’s original film, inspired by the works of Harlan Ellison, plays as much like a horror movie as a sci-fi action flick. Linda Hamilton plays Sarah Connor, a mild-mannered waitress who doesn’t realized she’s been targeted for extermination by a high-tech robot from the future, played by a terrifyingly cold Arnold Schwarzenegger. Only Kyle Reese, a fiercely dedicated soldier from the future, can save her before the Terminator ends her life and prevents her son from saving the future from the tyranny of the machines. Bold, violent, idea-driven filmmaking, with practical effects so impressive you’d hardly know it was a low-budget production. Everything about “The Terminator” feels epic. Or at least it did, until the sequel came along and redefined what “epic” could be.“Terminator 2: Judgment Day” (1990)Cameron’s sequel raised the bar for action filmmaking and visual effects, with a film that revisits much of the original’s plot (even some of the dialogue is the same) but pushes it as far as moviemaking could go. Sarah Connor spent years training her son, John (Eddie Furlong), to be the hero of the revolution, before she was institutionalized for her paranoid fantasies and paramilitary acts of terrorism. But when John is targeted by a new liquid metal T-1000 (Robert Patrick), and rescued by a heroic older model (Schwarzenegger), he realizes she was right all along. Together they try to change the future, kill an unkillable machine, and make seemingly impossible images and action sequences look plausible. They succeeded. “Terminator 2” may be a bit of a retread, but it’s a singular, ambitious entity; not just one of the best sci-fi movies, but also one of the best action movies, and one of the greatest spectacles in movie history.Read original story All 6 ‘Terminator’ Movies, Ranked Worst to Best (Photos) At TheWrap
(Below you’ll find some pretty massive spoilers for “Avengers: Endgame”)“Avengers: Endgame” is the biggest earner ever at the box office, and it had a budget to match — it’s easily the most expensive movie to date in the Marvel Cinematic Universe. Which is actually kind of curious, because despite also being the longest MCU film it really has significantly less action than the three other “Avengers” films.It’s likely that we can chalk up that higher budget/fewer set pieces discrepancy to the price of assembling such an enormous cast full of big stars. Sometimes it felt like every major character who has ever appeared in the MCU showed up at some point or other, and it’s not cheap to get so many big names together at the same time.But “Avengers: Endgame” didn’t just bring back the big stars. A bunch of minor characters also got to return in some surprising ways. But maybe none were more surprising than this one character who appeared for only a brief moment at the very end of the movie.Also Read: Here's Why Black Widow Didn't Get a Memorial At the End of 'Avengers: Endgame'The character in question is a teenage boy who appears with all the other mourners at the funeral of Tony Stark. In this shot the camera pans across a bunch of people after Pepper Potts (Gwyneth Paltrow) sent the original mini arc reactor that Tony crafted back in “Iron Man” into the lake. For the most part all the people we see are major characters who have shown up in the MCU recently, except for this one kid who’s standing there alone looking at the ground.You’ll be forgiven if you don’t recognize this guy, because he looked a lot different the last time he appeared in the MCU. That character is Harley Keener, played by Ty Simpkins, who you’ll remember from “Iron Man 3” as the kid from Tennessee who helps Tony (Robert Downey Jr) recharge his suit while he investigates a mysterious death. “Iron Man 3” came out way back in 2013, and Simpkins was just a kid at the time, and he’s grown up a bunch since then.Here’s what the character Harley Keener looked like in “Iron Man 3”:So, yeah, no shame in not being sure about that one — Simpkins looks completely different now than he did back then.Also Read: 'Avengers: Endgame' - What Happened With Loki and the Tesseract?It’s very interesting also that they would bring him back at all — a character that has not been mentioned at all since that movie six years ago. Is Harley Keener coming back to the MCU? I guess we’ll find out.Read original story ‘Avengers: Endgame’ – Who Is That Random Kid at the End of the Movie? At TheWrap
(Major spoilers ahead for “Avengers: Endgame” and the whole situation with Black Widow, aka Natasha Romanoff, but you probably already knew that given the headline)Even though Black Widow (Scarlett Johansson) didn’t get a movie with her name on it in the first decade of the Marvel Cinematic Universe, she’s been just as central to the franchise as anybody. She was introduced back in “Iron Man 2” and has been instrumental in so many major events. So it’s puzzling that “Avengers: Endgame” didn’t really spend any time memorializing her at the end of the movie, which spends so much time saying goodbye to Iron Man (Robert Downey Jr) and Captain America (Chris Evans).It’s puzzling also just within the context of the movie — Natasha’s sacrifice made everything that came after, including Tony’s own sacrifice, possible.If Black Widow hadn’t killed herself on Vormir so that Hawkeye (Jeremy Renner) could return to the present with the Soul Stone, then they wouldn’t have been able to save all those people Thanos snapped, and then Tony Stark’s snap to wipe out all of Thanos’s forces wouldn’t have been possible. Her sacrifice mattered just as much as Tony’s did. Indeed, Tony’s sacrifice wouldn’t have been possible at all had Natasha not made her sacrifice first.Also Read: 'Avengers: Endgame' - That Last Scene Makes No SenseBut when we get to the end of the movie, we get a big memorial for Iron Man with a huge number of famous heroes showing up to pay their respects, while Hawkeye and Scarlet Witch (Elizabeth Olsen) hang out in the corner having their own private mourning ceremony for Natasha and Vision, who apparently nobody other than them — and Bruce Banner (Mark Ruffalo), I guess — cared about.It would have been a great moment to elevate a character who always operated from the shadows, never getting the acclaim that Tony always received. The one time Black Widow stepped into the spotlight was at the end of “Captain America: The Winter Soldier,” when a US Senate committee threatened to put her on trial. The people of the MCU finally had a chance to give Natasha the respect she was due, and they just didn’t.On the commentary track on the home video release of “Avengers: Endgame,” co-director Joe Russo addressed this concern, and blamed next year’s “Black Widow” movie for the lack of a memorial for Natasha.Also Read: 'Avengers: Endgame' - Who Is That Random Kid At the End of the Movie?“People have asked why Natasha didn’t get the same amount of screen time post-death as Tony did,” Joe Russo said. “Well, Tony does not have another movie. Tony is done. And Natasha has another film. And Marvel Universe obviously does not have to move forward linearly anymore. But that character still has more screen time coming.”So there’s your answer — Natasha Romanoff didn’t get a big memorial in “Endgame” because of the prequel movie coming out next May, whereas Tony Stark is not gonna be in the MCU again for the foreseeable future. Though they didn’t mention Vision specifically, there’s probably a similar reason for the lack of love for him after he died in “Infinity War,” since he’ll be back somehow in the “WandaVision” Disney+ show in 2021.There is an interesting sentence in that answer, though, that caused a big exclamation point to pop up over my head, though: “And Marvel Universe obviously does not have to move forward linearly anymore.” Since the MCU has done multiple prequel movies that didn’t involve time travel, including the first “Captain America” movie that was the fourth film overall in this franchise, it seems incorrect to say that the MCU ever “had to” move forward linearly.Also Read: 'Avengers: Endgame' - What Happened With Loki and the Tesseract?To me, this implies that the “Black Widow” movie will be more than just another prequel like “Captain America: The First Avenger” or “Captain Marvel,” which took us to the past to set up heroes that would have an impact on the present. To me, the implication is something I have long suspected about “Black Widow”: that it will involve characters from the MCU’s post-“Endgame” present somehow.But Marvel still has yet to confirm anything along those lines about that film. When they presented footage from the film at Comic-Con a couple weeks ago there was no indication that it would be anything other than a straight prequel — one that likely will set up a new player for future movies, like probably Florence Pugh’s Yelena.We’ve got a while to wait before we find anything out about what the “Black Widow” movie really has in store for us. It’s nine months until the movie comes out, and it’ll probably be December at the earliest before we get a proper trailer. So sit tight.Read original story Here’s Why Black Widow Didn’t Get a Memorial at the End of ‘Avengers: Endgame’ At TheWrap
From Walmart and Amazon to Best Buy, there are big discounts on various sizes of TVs just in time for the Super Bowl.
NEW YORK (AP) — Matthew McConaughey notched one of the worst debuts of his career, Oscar nominees saw only modest bumps and M. Night Shyamalan's "Glass" easily remained No. 1 on a quiet weekend in movie theaters.
When asked point-blank if he regretted working with Singer, Rami Malek said that he "was not aware" of the allegations against Singer.