Man of Steel
The title "Man of Steel" tells you what you're in for when you buy a ticket to this immense summer blockbuster: a radical break from…
The title "Man of Steel" tells you what you're in for when you buy a ticket to this immense summer blockbuster: a radical break from…
Claustrophobia isn't often considered a cinematic asset beyond tales of suspense and horror. But "Fill the Void," an award-winning Israeli drama about a naive 18-year-old…
"The Ballad of Narayama" is a Japanese film of great beauty and elegant artifice, telling a story of startling cruelty. What a space it opens…
Patrice Leconte's "Monsieur Hire" is a tragedy about loneliness and erotomania, told about two solitary people who have nothing else in common. It involves a…
Here are some ways to celebrate Roger's birthday (a birthday shared by Sir Paul McCartney).
A remembrance by Roger Ebert's book editor Donna Martin: "I had never even seen "Siskel & Ebert" on television when I knew I wanted to…
Suicide glamour and magazine-shaming; how American textbooks dumb down Vietnam; remembering the late investigative journalist Michael Hastings; why sex on the first date is not…
Here are some ways to celebrate Roger's birthday (a birthday shared by Sir Paul McCartney).
Kevin B. Lee reports on the film series at MoMA that he co-curated.
Katherine Tulich talks to Julie Delpy, Ethan Hawke and Richard Linklater about returning once again to the characters from "Before Sunrise" and "Before Sunset" for…
This summer's Millennium Park screenings kick off with a dedication to Roger Ebert.
Craig D. Lindsey is on the warpath against jerk cinema, in which arrogant heroes trample all over everybody and the film celebrates them as righteously…
Named after the David Cronenberg film, this is the blog of RogerEbert.com founding editor Jim Emerson, where he has chronicled his enthusiasms and indulged his whims since 2005. Favorite subjects include evidence-based movie criticism, cinematic form and style, comedy, logical reasoning, language, journalism, technology, epistemology and fun. No topic is off-limits, but critical thinking is required.

Bad snake! Bad, bad snake!
I think I was in college before I ever became aware of, or paid the slightest bit of attention to, box office grosses. Until "Entertainment Tonight" came along in the early 1980s, you had to subscribe to Daily Variety in order to find out how much money a particular picture was taking in, and I couldn't have cared less. I was thrilled when I would go into a theater to watch a movie and there would be lots of seats. This was long before I became an exhibitor myself, and suddenly saw things from the other side. I'd never thought of movies as a lowly business before, but it didn't take long to figure out the economic repercussions: The fewer people in the theater for a particular picture, the fewer movies like it we'd be probably get the chance to see, or (later) show. Somebody's got to buy the overpriced concessions, pay the film and theater rentals, the salaries, the heat and electricity bills, etc.
I'm only sporadically interested in ticket sales or advertising campaigns -- but in the case of "Snakes on a Plane," where the movie itself was always irrelevant, I confess I'm a bit perplexed that, despite all the hype and supposedly feverish anticipation, its opening weekend numbers were so blah. Critics were mostly removed from the equation (although some went to see the movie at late-night shows Thursday night, which meant reviews landed in Friday and Saturday papers). But if you level the track and don't count those extra grosses from Thursday night, "Snakes on a Plane" barely squeaked by three-week-old "Ricky Bobby" for the three-day weekend.
I was at a party with a whole buncha film critics Saturday, and everybody who had seen "Snakes on a Plane" had liked it. They all agreed it was a serviceable B-movie and a pretty fun time -- indeed, a pre-fab "Rocky Horror"-like audience-participation experience from the very first showings. So, my question to you, Scanners readers, is: What happened? Did the hype turn people off -- or was it just overexaggerated among a limited Internet-savvy crowd, while mainstream audiences just weren't all that interested? Or could there have been more people like me out there than anticipated -- people who felt it wasn't so much that we didn't want to see a movie called "Snakes on a Plane," we just felt -- long before it actually arrived -- like we already had? I'd like to get your theories on it. If you saw the movie, what did you think? What do you make of the box-office and audience response? Or would you rather just forget about the whole thing?
Next Article: Preview of Coming Attractions Previous Article: E-mail from Roger
As we mourn Abrams’ macho Star Trek obliteration, it’s a good time to revisit that most Star Trek-ian of accomplishme...
I cried yesterday at a retreat while listening to Michael Buble's rendition of "Smile." The tears came from out of no...
Please help me welcome the new Editor-in-chief for Rogerebert.com, Matt Zoller Seitz. What Roger and I found refresh...
Before he died, Roger was working on science fiction story about space exploration set in part at his beloved Univers...