Hmm... 4/29. That can only mean one thing.

In a few days, summer starts. At least it does ifyou ignore those pesky astronomical details. Some scientists may put stock in that, but I know that summer runs four months of every year, give or take a little bit. And in keeping with tradition, it starts off big. Movie season is upon us, and while the Holidays may provide a fair share of newsworthy flicks and something always tends to make a name for itself somehow in the offseasons, by and large summer is where movie box office stories are made.

This summer is a few steps above the rest, though. While many a year has had feel of a "summer of sequel" there may never be another summer quite like 2007, where we not only get a huge helping of sequels, most of them are at LEAST second sequels. I've heard it's been dubbed the Summer of Threequels, in fact. If a bit kludgy, it's an accurate descriptor as six franchises are seeing their third sequel hit sometime in the next four months. Three of those are three of the four biggest franchises this decade.

Hell, those three are hitting us just in MAY.

Beyond that, there's tons of big word offerings from perennial blockbuster names like Pixar, Michael Bay, and JK Rowling. And even if some things aren't going to break the bank, in four months there's plenty of time to spread the moviegoing love around to some smaller offerings.

So what's this summer going to look like?

May

May 4 - Spider-Man 3
The pedigree for Spider-Man is huge. The first two films have a combined gross of nearly $800 million dollars. That's a record. In fact, if you picked out the best two films from any film series only one has a one-two punch that's grossed more: Star Wars. Five years ago, people probably knew Spider-Man was going to be big. $114 million big, though, was such a huge number that it didn't feel real. It shattered the Harry Potter opening weekend record (made less than six months previous) by nearly $25 million. If you want a point of comparison, if a film opens in the offseason to $25 million and makes $114 million in its entire run, it's usually considered a success.

Spider-Man is like Barry Bonds, except that everyone likes him as he's crushing the competition.

Yeah, everyone loves Spider-Man. It's become less common for huge grossing films to garner extremely positive reviews, but Sam Raimi's human offerings have done much to engender good feeling all around. Yes, the films aren't perfect, but it's arguable that the approach taken is what separates at $400 million Spider-Man from a $200 million Spider-Man.

So, we can expect more of the same, right? Probably. While the budget ($250 million) and running time (2:20) may feel excessive (the budget's twice what the original cost), it'll be worth it. There's a complex set of plotlines and character developments at play, which all culiminate in an amazing multi-way battle between some of the biggest icons of the Spider-Many mythos.

About the only thing you can say bad about the franchise at this point is Sony's co-opted the text for the PS3. Not good to tie an albatross to a swinging spider.

Opening Weekend - $125 million. Final - $375 million.

Also, there's Lucky You, as the obligatory counter-programming drama. While Curtis Hanson might be a well regarded director and the cast is full of bright talent... it doesn't matter. Even older folks are going to see Spider-Man.

May 11
It feels like April all over again. In case anyone hasn't noticed, April is the new dumping ground for films. Something like eighteen opened every weekend to fight over the scraps left by 300, Wild Hogs, and Blades of Glory. In the end, a clear victor emerged and that was Disturbia.

The second weekend of May is similar. Four new films open, all of which could be considered counter-programming in the face of the behemoths before and after. I don't think any of them are going to go too far, but the best chances are for 28 Weeks Later (sequel count 2) or Georgia Rule. I say this becuase I haven't seen any advertising for the other two films. 28 Days Later was fairly successful and while nobody associated with it is back for this offering, the name recognition is there. Georgia Rule is classic counter-programming as a chick flick. Even so, the entire runs for these films combined might not match the opening weekend gross for Spider-Man.

May 18 - Shrek the Third
Oh, what a tangled web Shrek weaves. The crowning achievement for Dreamworks Animation... hell Dreamworks as a whole, is that lovable green ogre. While completely middling (and I believe now owned by Paramount) as a company otherwise, the first two Shrek films combined for a bit over $700 million domestic. The first even took home a Best Animation Oscar, beating out Monsters, Inc. (which it also beat out in the box office tally of '01). Shrek 2 is the third biggest film of all time, after a monsterous $108 million opening weekend and a $440 million finish.

Of any film being released in the next month, Shrek 3 has by far the weakest immediate competition. The last animated film was Meet the Robinsons, a moderately successful Disney project at the end of March. The next animated project isn't until June 8. So at the time of release, it'll have had a month and a half of time to lie in wait for families and it's got three easy weeks afterwards.

It should do quite well.

But is it groundbreaking?

Well, there's the rub. Despite that Oscar, there's been a lot of valid second guessing of the first film, especially in comparison to MI. What's funny on the first viewing isn't quite true on the second or third, and while those Disney parodies are funny, the film missed the point and started aping Disney a bit too much at points. As for the second, $440 million aside, it was really just a bunch of pop culture references strung together that's quite flimsy upon repeated viewing.

Ultimately, the strength of the Shrek films is that they are enjoyable, for young and old, at least once. Families will go see them en masse, and that should count for a lot.

Opening: $95 million. Final: $310 million.

Also, some horror flick that nobody cares about.

May 25 - Pirates of the Caribbean: At World's End
During the holiday season of 2002, Pirates of the Caribbean seemed like a joke. Disney's summer of 2003 was going to rest on Pixar's first summer offering and a movie adaptation of a theme park ride. Better yet, a theme park ride made in the 1950s. Remember, if you can, that first trailer, which merely showed a rushing expanse of computer generated water and a series of names. Names which, to be fair, were good: Johnny Depp, Geoffery Rush, Kiera Knightly, and Legolas. But these weren't huge names. These weren't "I gotta go see it names."

Four and a half years later, pirates are the coolest thing ever. For now, at least, the war against the ninja is clear, and pirates dominate. The person to thank for it is Johnny Depp, whose portrayal of Captain Jack Sparrow has put the macho into metrosexual. The effect of Depp's role cannot be understated. While a few may have scoffed at his best actor nomination, if the first film hadn't had Depp, it wouldn't have cracked $200 million, much less $300 million. The sequel wouldn't have been the most anticipated movie of last year. It wouldn't have hit $55 million in one day, $100 million in two, and $135 million in three.

While the $730+ million for the first two films may lag behind Spider-Man's total tally so far, make no mistake, Pirates is the current juggernaut to behold. If Spidey can break Pirates 2's record, there's nothing to stop Pirates 3 from breaking the record again. And while Memorial Day Weekend has lost a bit of its pedigree as an opening weekend date in the past decade or so, that could all change. The holiday Monday should help keep the Sunday grosses from deflating too rapidly.

If there's concern here, it's due to the slight uneasyness in the second film. There is a bit of an un-grand tradition for back-to-back filming of sequels in Hollywood history. These come about because a film will suddenly do very, very well and the producers want to cash in on the craze as quickly as possible. However, lackluster performances, both in terms of quality and reception, invariably make these a bit of a black mark in terms of film. Remember Back to the Future 2 and 3? Or the Matrix sequels? Even while the second films were successful, the bad reception killed the franchises.

In Pirate's favor, the word isn't entirely negative. There's just a bit of uneasiness that seems to accompany a dark film sitting between two others. (Think Empire Strikes Back.)

The other concern is that while Memorial Day has been successful, the post-holiday weekend invariably means huge drops. The trade-off between large opening and lenghty run tends to fall a bit too far in favor of large opening. This is the reason films will preferrably open a weekend before a holiday, so that they get the effect of two holidays: first for the hyped opening, second for the holiday itself. While you'll see a large dropoff afterwards, it won't be quite as significant. That wasn't an option for Pirates, as the pre-holiday frame was staked out by Shrek ages ago. Also for long distance concerns is the May release date. Kids usually don't get out of school until mid-June, which means the landscape for those weekday totals is going to be significantly different than the cushy mid-July environment the previous two films have had.

Opening: $145 million. Final: $395 million.

Also, there's a film about bugs, and not the cute animated kind.

May overall
All in all, May is going to be gigantic. In 1994, it was amazing that a year could produce two different $300 million films. 2001 through 2004 brought us that feat again and again, but the past few years have been a bit light in the superblockbuster regard.

This time around, we're looking at three of them within the same month. The combined gross for the three films should cross $1 billion. It's entirely possible that we're looking at a trio of $400 million dollar films, all in release at the same time. It's also entirely possible that they'll cannibalize eachother and die horribly when June hits. In that case, we'll see really good, but not spectacular grosses. Even so, these are some exciting times.

June

June 1
Following Pirates' opening frame is a slightly unenviable task. Somewhat wisely, the three films offered cover a wide range and stay rather strongly outside of the "event film" category.

A few years ago, a release like Knocked Up would have been a fringe film. It's got some cult pedigree in a star and a director known for some quirky and hilarious TV work, but nothing really screams "Must see!" The difference between then and now is Steve Carell. He's not in this, but he was in The 40 Year Old Virgin, and Knocked Up is from the same writer/director in Judd Apatow. Ads have not been keeping this secret, either. Despite a lack of bankable stars, the advertising is good and a lack of bankalbe stars didn't stop Virgin from doing wonders of business.

The only question is if Seth Rogan can be nearly as funny as Steve Carell.

Opening: $35 million. Final: $ 90 million.

Kevin Costner has been all over the place in his career. At times he's been among the most successful actors in Hollywood, at others he's been the butt of every lame late-night joke. The early 90s were very good for him. The late 90s were very bad. More recently, he's made a bit of a name doing well regarded dramatic work. Not always incredibly high quality, but hardly groan-worthy fare that casual movie-goers can appreciate, often on the small screen of their own home.

Even so, Mr. Brooks is a bit of a departure for him. He plays a serial killer in this psychological thriller. The jump alone may cause some people to see it for curiosity's sake. In some ways, his lack of bankability may be an advantage, since he's not likely to turn off any fans here. Even so, this isn't going to make any headlines.

Opening: $20 million. Final: 60 million.

Gracie is a feel-good sports drama. It's about a girl in the late 70s who fought to play competitive soccer. I'd like to say the prospects were good, since a sports film that highlights feminist causes is something to appreciate. But it's a sports drama and it isn't about scrappy American men fighting it out against some bruiser international country. For better or worse, the best Gracie can really hope for is to be successful counter programming against all the competition.

Opening: $10 million. Final: $35 million.

June 8
Our fourth threequel hits, and Danny Ocean takes the band back to Vegas. The first film in the series was a rather strong success and made George Clooney a name to headline films. Despite a few plot holes, it was enjoyable throughout and despite the name managed to keep the focus on a few choice characters enough so that the audience wouldn't get too confused. The second film in the series was a step backwards. It was a moderately fun film and had the added bonus of a sexy Catherin Zeta-Jones to the cast, but it wasn't really a caper and often want wandering on weird tangents.

Thirteen seems to be an attempt to take the series back to its roots. A group of guys pulling off a heist with some snappy dialogue throughout. Zeta-Jones and Julia Roberts are gone. The lone female presence is Ellen Barkin. More importantly is new antagonist Al Pachino, who should bring plenty of charisma opposite Clooney's Ocean. I expect that Matt Damon will have an even larger part in this film and I hope that Don Cheadle will as well.

Still, it's not easy following up a dud. The memories of the second are likely to keep this one from getting to the lofty heights of the first.

Opening: $45 million. Final: $155 million.

All that said, I'm not too sure Thirteen is going to be the biggest film that weekend. The reason is simple. Penguins are a license to print money. The jailbreak foursome made the otherwise forgettable Madegascar a blockbuster. March of the Penguins became a huge documentary, the second biggest of all time. And last year's Happy Feet stopped just short of $200 million and also won an Oscar.

Surf's Up is likely little more than cashing in on the penguin craze, but it's still early enough that people should buy into it. There's even a fair chance that it'll be good. It also marks the next chance Shia LeBeouf has for starring in a #1 movie. Not that anyone really cares.

Opening: $40 million. Final: $160 million.

There's also Hostel 2. Like any moderately successful horror film, it's now a franchise. While it's amazingly difficult to lose money in horror films, it's nearly impossible to have one break out, as well. For any given film, you can pencil in a final tally between $40 and $80 million, write everything in black ink, and call it a day.

June 15 - Silver Surfer
True, the film is called Fantastic Four 2: Rise of the Silver Surfer, but the star here is the shiny guy on the board. If all goes well, it'll spawn its own franchise that can depart from planet earth entirely. The reasoning here is simple. The first Fantastic Four was bad. Its getting a sequel because of two things: Jessica Alba is really hot in a skintight suit, so guys of all ages managed to propel the first film past $150 million, and when it opened it was the first weekend in 2005 that managed to gross more than the equivalent weekend in 2004.

(Okay, the latter isn't true, but given the media airplay the story got at the time, it may as well have been.) While the run of the first film was so similar to the original X-Men that it could have been Fox copying the numbers, the reception was strongly different. There were a lot of pretty faces and special effects, but the lackluster acting, writing, and adaptation of the Marvel mythos turned a lot of people cold.

Still... $150 million buys you a sequel nowadays, so they're attempting to fix it by bringing in the Silver Surfer. Expect the story to take a grimmer turn by exploring the internal conflicts of Norin Radd and the attempts to save Earth from becoming Galactus' next midday snack. Also expect the effects to be really, really spectacular. Whether or not the FF will see a threequel of their own and Silver Surfer gets his own film depends a lot on the reception. It's got a shot, but a number of blockbusters in the past got unwanted sequels.

Opening: $45 million. Final: $130 million.

There's also Nancy Drew. This won't be a huge film, but there's a successful genre of films targetting the teenage female set. Expect this to do the same. If it's really good, it could get past $100 million.

June 22 - Evan Almighty
Despite continued success and repeated attempts, neither Adam Sandler nor Will Ferrel have been able to quite take that blockbuster comedy crown from Jim Carrey. This is despite Carrey pretty much giving up comedy the past few years and trying to have a go as a successful dramatic actor. And why wouldn't he? He got to be God in 2003's Bruce Almighty. And even while he's not reached such heights since, he has gotten some critical acclaim and had a few moderately strong films in the holiday seasons. Still, to not see anything come to even half of Almighty's gross in four years would probably worry some actors. Such are the things that get them into sequels.

But Carrey doesn't do sequels.

Clearly something needed to be done. $242 million pretty much requires a sequel nowadays. It's in the rules somewhere.

Enter Steve Carell. For the past few years, everything he's done has been touched with gold. I've already mentioned The 40 Year Old Virgin, which probaby earned at least double what anyone expected. He's also got his successful (and hilarious) TV series: The Office. Last summer he provided the voice for hyperactive Hammy in Over The Hedge, and he even got critical kudos for Little Miss Sunshine. Looking back a bit further, and we'll note that it was Carell, not Ferrel, who made Anchorman a success. And Carell who provided the antagonist foil for Carrey in Bruce Almighty.

Connection. A slightly tangental sequel, with a hit concept, bankable comedy star, and excellent trailers, and we could be looking at some serious coin. Perhaps, finally, someone besides Carrey can claim to be the comedy king.

Opening: $60 million. Final: $210 million.

The only other film of note this weekend is DoA: Dead or Alive, a somewhat loose adaptation of the fighting game series. The movie was finished and released elsewhere in the world last year, and its US release isn't likely to do a whole lot. But director Corey Yuen can do enjoyable action sequences and the girls are pretty cute, if nothing else. Even so, if this hits $30 million, I'll be amazed.

June 29 - Ratatoille
In the world of movies, no production studio has a name for consistency like Pixar. Since the release of Toy Story in 2005, there's a string of 7 straight films that've grossed more than $150 million. The last five films the studio's done have all passed $200 million with ease. And even though last summer's Cars is the lowest grossing of those five and didn't garner quite the same warm reception as is typical, it still hit $244 million and was an enjoyably good movie.

Ratatoille shouldn't deviate strongly from the formula. The advertising has been somewhat light, but Disney's seemed to learn over the past few years that there can be too much of a good thing and overexposure is too much of a risk on the final line. Expect things to gear up in the last few weeks before the release and it to hit huge. After all, Surf's Up is just a minor film between Shrek 3 and this.

Despite my prediction, if this is really good and catches hold, it could do what Monsters, Inc. and The Incredibles failed at: beating a Shrek film the same year.

Opening: $65 million. Final: $280 million.

Oh, yeah. There's also Live Free or Die Hard

Enough said.
Opening: $40 million. Final: $130 million

June Overall
It's not the blockbuster month that May is going to be, but a number of films here have a strong shot at earning upwards of $60 million opening weekend with a share of others that could see openings in the $30-$50 million range. It could be close to as successful a month as May is, just with the wealth spread around a bit. Also, despite the larger number of releases, there isn't a lot of direct competition, especially on specific weekends.

This could be the strongest June lineup we've seen in a number of years.

July

July 4 (weekend of July 6) - Transformers
A few years ago, when Transformers was first announced in the "This film is going to happen" context, box office forums everywhere started pondering how successful it would be. Since I tend to have about five to ten years on many such posters, I was somewhat surprised to see a lot of questions about the validity here. $100 million, if its good and such. Comparisons were made to TMNT, another 80s toy craze which (somewhat coincidentally), saw a recent revival and theatrical movie.

I considered this and shook my head. I remember TMNT, of course, and was really into it 15-20 years ago. But it wasn't Transformers. When I posted, I made the comparison, instead, to Star Wars.

Consider, if you will, a hot franchise that engendered fond memories which fermented for two decades before coming back to the theatrical screen. Consider the anticipation and hype that would generate. Transformers isn't a TMNT-esque film. It's much more in line with Star Wars.

Now, I didn't expect Transformers to break $300 million. I said $200-$250 would be a possibility if it's good. Others considered this, a few agreed, and we all waited to see what would come of it.

Unfortunately, the questions have remained. Despite some marquee names that originally floated about the project, the director who ultimately got the chair is Michael Bay. Bay is no stranger to directing summer blockbusters, with the Bad Boys films, Pearl Harbor, and Armageddon all to his credit, but he's also never done anything that could be considered good. The special effects should be in good hands, but what about the story? As production continued, more questions arose. The decision to change the familiar vehicles and even the familiar faces of the Transformers was met with some fan skepticism.

More recently, things have settled a bit, largely spurred on by the decision to have Peter Cullen reprise his role as Optimus Prime. Also, Stan Bush, who provided some classic cheese for the animated movie, is composing a song. Unfortunately, Frank Welker won't be providing the familiar voice of Megatron. Instead we'll be treated to Hugo Weaving. There will be plenty of "Mr. Andersen" jokes after the release.

It's still got potential, but is it enough? Also, can it overcome the relatively bad release date?

Opening: $50 million. Final: $170 million.

There's also a romantic comedy. Even without knowing anything about the film, I'm immediately more confident in it. Counter-programming over July 4 tends to be quite successful in the long run.

July 11 - Harry Potter and the Order of the Phoenix
When Harry Potter opened in 2001 to $90 million, it sent an immediate shock wave. The prediction's for a final gross were through the roof. "It's going to beat Titanic!" echoed, and everyone felt good. Of course, it didn't beat Titanic, and while it did claim the yearly crown, the series has settled into more realistic environs. To be sure, Harry Potter is a very successful series, but it's also a nearly textbook example of each film being sold by its predecessor.

Part of the problem with the first film was that it wasn't very good. It wasn't very bad, either, but it seemed a bit too much of a lockstep adaptation of the book to really shine. As such, the second in the series experienced a downturn across the board. Likewise, it's rote following of the book's text led to no suprises and fewer accolades. Despite bringing in a new director, a summer release date, and a really good production, Harry Potter 3 saw the series' fortunes degrade yet again, falling below $250 million. Much further, and there'd be little to differentiate it from any other blockbuster.

Of course, the third film was exceptionally good, and it made the fourth film very successful, almost, but not quite, getting back to $300 million again.

So what about number 5? Depending on who you ask, HP4 was either better or worse than the third. The series sees its fourth director, and given his resume, there's not a lot we can assume about David Yates. Like HP4, we can expect much of the book to be removed. This could be a good thing, as the fifth book in the series was the one in most need of an editor to clear out the junk. Plotwise there should be some juicy stuff, with Umbridge and the internal school politics vying for time against the growing dark forces and all that.

The release date is also good, as the post July 4 weekend has shown itself to be fairly consistent in holding up big films. The two previous Pirates films have resided there, after all.

Opening: $110 million. Final: $300 million.

Also, there's 1408, a horror film starring John Cusack. Don't expect this to be huge, but accounting for the genre, it's likely to be quite good.

July 20 - I Now Pronounce You Chuck and Larry
In the past ten years, Adam Sandler has been remarkably successful. Even though he's not the comedy king, he's had a fairly strong run of hits dating back to The Wedding Singer, which was the first successful film to be released in the wake of Titanic. Since then he's had seven films cross $100 million and only two (arguably one) real miss. He's even dabbled at more dramatic fare which has been well regarded if not ultimately successful.

Partnering up with him this time around is Kevin James, star of the sitcom The King of Queens and (perhaps more importantly) co-star of Hitch, which paired him up with Will Smith and earned almost $180 million.

The two actors can bring significant laughs. The question, really, is if Americans will accept the subject matter. A few years ago, gay men (or the suggestion of gay men), were a good comedy staple. In the past few years, the political climate's changed a bit, so it's unclear whether that's socially acceptable. Hopefully, Chuck and Larry can provide some good laughs and garner success while it tackles a bit of a heavy issue. Don't expect any great answers, but it should see some return.

Opening: $45 million. Final: $130 million.

Also, Hairspray gets the movie musical treatment.

July 27 - The Simpsons
Awesome, a Simpsons movie! But... isn't it about 5-10 years too late?

On one hand, we've got a TV franchise which is still going fairly strong after nearly two decades on the tube. The shows might not be quite as original nor the laughs quite as loud as they were during the mid 90s, but the Simpsons are still probably America's favorite family.

Of course, even if you ignore the possibility that this is too late, and accept that the Simpsons are hugely popular and marketable, there's a huge question of crossover. People tune in weekly for the Simpsons antics but are they willing to make the transition to the screen? Transitions from TV to screen aren't foolproof by any means, even if the property is currently popular. There's a lot of risk, especially for a comedy show like this, for a theatrical film to be little more than an extended episode with a bigger pictures.

An even bigger risk here is the dreaded 2D. The last not CGI animated film to do well in theaters was Lilo & Stitch. That was five years ago. In the realm of TV cartoons which have made the transition, there are mostly only moderate successes. The Rugrats films have done well, as have other related Nicktoon properties such as The Wild Thornberry's or Spongebob Squarepants, but only one of these has even cracked $100 million: the first Rugrats film in the holiday season of '98.

Among more mature animated fare, you have Beavis & Butthead ($63 million in '96) and South Park ($52 million in '99). Or we could look at Aqua Teen Hunger Force, which after an unenthralling opening of $3 million earlier this month is likely going to see over half its entire theatrical business come from the first three days of release.

This isn't an inspiring trend. It's even worse on the live action side, which has seen a few shows try to make the transition from small to big screen. Star Trek is argubly the most successful in this regard, but even there it's not been huge. If we consider a recent example like Serenity, it paints an ugly, ugly picture.

Of course, The Simpsons is a different property. It's got wide recognition and popularity, which toilet humor and sci-fi don't really mirror well. Still, the quesions are out wide in the open. It could be something special and break the trends, or it could be yet another middling performance.

Opening: $25 million. Final: $70 million.

Also there's another horror film!

July overall
For the first year in quite a while, July looks like a weaker month than June. There's going to be success, Harry Potter will be huge, and some other films could break out, but the questions are bigger here.

August

August 3 - The Bourne Ultimatum
Five years ago, few people would have considered the phrase "Matt Damon - Action Star" to be much more than a punchline. He's always been well regarded, but at that point in his career he had more indie and dramatic cred than belief that he could draw in the kinetic crowd. Things are a bit different, now, and while he still works on his indie cred, he's inextricably linked with Jason Bourne.

The first film in the series was smart, gripping, and fun. The second amped things up and while it might have been a bit too frenetic under Paul Greenglass's hand, it didn't disappoint in keeping up the feel for a thinking person's action film.

So here we are at Ultimatum. Our fifth threequel of the summer. The release date paints a rosy picture, since the previous two frames will have had comedies at the lead and before that would be Harry Potter and Transformers. Pretty much a full month for fans of pure action films to sit and wait in anticipation. Even if Live Free or Die Hard is awesome, it's not going to be a competitive point after over a month in release.

There aren't really any concerns here, except one. How will they bring Bourne back a fourth time, when there aren't any more Ludlum novels to adapt?

Opening: $60 million. Final: $170 million.

Also, it's Underdog! Basically the competition story's the same. After over a month, Ratatoille will be mostly played out.

August 10 - Rush Hour 3
Yet ANOTHER threequel. And the riskiest one of the bunch. Which is strange, because the first two combined for over $350 million. The second was one of a number of films in the summer of '01 which came very close (but did not quite) break the opening weekend record. The combination of Jackie Chan and Chris Tucker was about the best possible for an action comedy. Truth be told, there's very little to have concern here. All the principles are back yet again.

So what's the problem?

2001. That was six years ago. Among our collection of threequel series this summer, there's only one film out of all of them that predates Rush Hour 2. That's the first Shrek, which was the same year. The landscape has clearly changed. This isn't so much a long awaited release as "what, finally?" For the most part, the people involved didn't fight the project. Jackie Chan's forays following Rush Hour 2 ranged for mediocre success to outright bombs. He hasn't had anything domestic since 2004.

And Chris Tucker? Well, there's the problem. He's not had anything since Rush Hour 2. For some reason, he's had a pressing need to avoid making Rush Hour 3 and collect the $25 million due to him for it. So production waited, and waited, and waited. Once it got rolling, the movie spotlight had passed elsewhere.

There's not really reason to worry. It should deliver on its action comedy promise just fine. The people who do go see it will laugh it up. But it's about 3 years too late to be a behemoth.

Opening: $45 million. Final: $140 million.

Also this weekend is Stardust, an adaptation of a Neil Gaiman novel. I'm expecting the film to be wonderful and successful, but still be a bit niche. Still, as an alternative fantasy, late summer offering a month after Harry Potter, it could do favorably. If the advertising grabs people closer to the release date it might break out.

August 17 - The Invasion
Were it not for some idle curiosity over Invasion of the Body Snatchers a few weeks back, I'd likely not know about this film at all. To be fair, it's a late summer flick, so there's time enough for it to get some coverage, and the onslaught of advertising for stuff in May is near deafening already.

This isn't so much a remake as a loose adaptation of Body Snatchers, which is fine, since the original's been remade a number of times already. But it retains the sci-fi thriller mood and the alien invasion plotline. In both cases, it could do quite favorably. While a bit of a conflicted genre, the recent releases of this vein have been quite successful. Both War of the Worlds and Signs earned over $200 million.

That's a bit bullish for Invasion, but a final tally north of $100 million is likely. $150 million is certainly possible.

Also, it's the first of two films this year starring the new Mr. Bond, Daniel Craig. Oddly, his costar in both of them is Nicole Kidman. (The other is The Golden Compass, due out December 7.)

Opening: $35 million. Final: $115 million.

August 24/August 31
Truthfully? You're in the dog days of summer here. Go outside and play. There's not anything worth watching in the theaters anyway. Unless you like Mr. Bean. Or horror films by Rob Zombie.

August overall
A lot more question marks here than in July, but Bourne Ultimatum should deliver something spectacular before the end of summer peters out.


Ultimately? The summer's going to start off awesome and while there's enough high points there's a definite downward trend as it goes on. Even so, the possibilty of four films hitting $300 million or more is exciting.