Leatherheads

There’s a simple explanation for why George Clooney’s Leatherheads (no. 3) performed well below expectations this weekend: it just wasn’t that good of a movie. Were 21 (no. 1) or horror flick The Ruins (no. 2)—both outgrossed Leatherheads here in the city, with 21 managing to more than double Leatherheads' receipts—that much better? No, at least not according to the critics, who panned each film in equal measure. But when a movie like Leatherheads caters directly to an older audience—one that has actually heard of Preston Sturges and one that presumably relies on reviews in choosing how to spend their anemic Social Security check—it’s much harder to counter what’s written in the papers or on Web sites. The truth, however, is that Leatherheads probably isn’t that bad of a movie; it’s just that its prospective patrons have higher standards.  read more »

Every time we think the weekend box office can’t surprise us, something comes along to make us say … really? Last weekend, the surprise prize went to 21, the blackjack movie we know, logically, we can’t truly judge without seeing, but yet we still feel like we kind of can. Doesn’t the preview tell us all we need to know?  read more »