Cinema Hype

I’m not gonna lie: 2008 is looking like a banner year for summer movies. Whether you’re into explosions or brunch with the girlfriends (I personally like both), something should draw you to the theater before Labor Day. Just one question: where have all the original screenplays gone?

I can recite chronological release dates for three months’ worth of movies I can’t wait to see—and most of them are adaptations: Prince Caspian, Indiana Jones and the Kingdom of the Crystal Skull, Sex and the City, Get Smart, The Dark Knight, The Incredible Hulk, The X-Files: I Want to Believe, Mamma Mia!, Sisterhood of the Traveling Pants 2 (shut up, you). Even family films are getting in on the action, with Kit Kittredge: An American Girl (the inevitable foray of the American Girls empire into feature films) and City of Ember. Unless you’re Pixar or M. Night Shyamalan (whose new movie The Happening seems to be generating some excitement, despite the downward spiral of his last three projects), originality isn’t the name of the game.

This isn’t entirely true, of course. Reading between the lines of Coming Attractions shows that there are plenty of original (in the sense of not being adaptations, anyway) movies coming out, especially summer comedies in the vein of You Don’t Mess with the Zohan and The Love Guru. It’s just that the adaptations are what’s exciting this year. They’re what’s getting all the buzz, which leaves everything else—the unknown and unvetted—looking kind of crappy. And maybe they aren’t; maybe they’re just under-marketed. Maybe they’re great. But it’s hard to tell, which goes to show that summer audiences are a tough crowd. If I’m feeling lukewarm about the unfamiliar, maybe these movies need just a little extra boost, or just get out of the kitchen and wait until fall.

What do you think, readers? Are there any non-adaptation movies you’re looking forward to this summer?

Prince Caspian, Indiana Jones, Indiana Jones and the Kingdom of the Crystal Skull, Sex and the City, Get Smart, The Dark Knight, X-Files, X-Files: I Want to Believe, The Incredible Hulk, Mamma Mia!, Kit Kittredge: An American Girl, City of Ember, Pixar, Wall-E, WallE, M. Night Shyamalan, The Happening, Don’t Mess with the Zohan, The Love Guru, Love Guru, summer movies

Well, this is weird. A biopic of George W. Bush? While he’s still in office? That’s got to be some kind of a first. I dearly hope we get some kind of (minor) media coverage here. Please tell me we’ll get MST3K from the White House screening room. (”Heheheheh…gonna watch a movie. About me. Heheheheh.” [/Jon Stewart])

I guess the first question I have here—of many, obviously—is…this is a drama, right? (Or do biopics necessarily divide into the traditional comedy-or-drama bins in the first place? Could this be Dubya: The Dramedy?) The pointedness of the release date, just before the general election and just in time to remind the nation of exactly what’s gone on during this Administration, suggests that it could go either way, depending on Oliver Stone’s level of rage. Want to warn people away from four more Republican years? Denounce President Bush with a strongly worded political drama. Want to vent a carefully tended head of steam and inspire the admittedly already-convinced liberal voting base? Let loose with a scathing satire, Thank You For Smoking-style, only with better jokes. Either way, there’s no shortage of material.

And let’s discuss this nutty all-star cast, shall we? We’ve got Josh Brolin—Josh, not James, mind you—as the man himself, which makes a weird kind of Texas-y sense, except that Josh Brolin is badass cowboy Texas and George W. Bush is Southern Gentleman-meets-Skull-and-Bones Texas. Brolin was born in 1972, which indicates that much of the movie might be pre-Presidency (speaking of Skull and Bones…); also, Elizabeth Banks will play Laura Bush, which seems like an apt choice, considering neither of them has left much of an impression on my consciousness at all. The rest of Bush’s cabinet seem well cast (though disproportionally British), with one particularly hilarious choice standing out from the crowd: Rob Corddry as Ari Fleischer? That’s genius, plain and simple. He’ll make the movie; mark my words.

The concept of a major Hollywood film hitting so close to the White House—in ways that feel so obviously politicized—carries with it, in my mind, a tiny twinge of wrongness, like there should be some kind of divide between Movies and State. Gross sense of national discontent or no, should Stone and Emperor, the company making the movie, interfere with the political process, especially for a profit? On the other hand, why shouldn’t they? Stripping moviemaking of its political clout and its potential as a personal vehicle for free speech—seems like the worst and most obvious kind of censorship, or at least like relegating films to some kind of cultural vacuum. And neither of those are good options, either. So I guess we’ll see what Stone comes up with: sharp, relevant critique (or, who knows? An enthusiastic pat on the back?), or two of the most tedious and hope-quenching theater hours of all time. As someone once said, History will tell.

W, W., George W. Bush, George W. Bush movie, Josh Brolin, biopic

So, here’s the thing: I love The Office. And along with everyone else, I love Dwight Schrute, weapon-hiding, beet-farming, Battlestar Galactica-and/or-bears-loving doof that he is. I mean, tell me: Did Dwight or did Dwight not steal the show last week, what with his “Five! Four! Three! Two! One! It’s gotta be now! Do it now! Do it! Do it! Do it!” trick? (Note: Remind me to try this technique in meetings at work from now on. I will rule the world in six months or less, or Dwight’s middle name isn’t Kurt.)

Anyway, I love Dwight, and I appreciate Rainn Wilson’s commitment to acting like a complete nutjob, but the trailer for The Rocker begs one pretty important question: Can Wilson carry a feature film?

We’ve seen him around before; he sneaks into the first few minutes of Juno, and then there was that movie last year with the kids and the aliens—you know what I mean?—but somehow holding that one against him seems downright cruel. Other than that he’s got a slew of TV guest-star stints (including a half-season of Six Feet Under), and….yeah. I’m trying not to have so many doubts, but it’s not working.

Maybe the problem is Dwight, the very outlandishness of him—maybe we can’t get beyond the aviator glasses and the tie with the short sleeves. Maybe it’s Wilson himself. Maybe his screen presence is too much; maybe he can’t contain the weird. It’s the kind of thing that’s either a great benefit (like when there’s a character like Dwight hanging around) or an ultimate career-killer (like when there are only characters like Dwight hanging around). Maybe he’s just too self-conscious onscreen to pull it off. Or maybe he’ll surprise me and blow us all out of the water. Maybe it’s just me. It’s hard to say.

Readers, what do you think?

(Also: Jason Sudeikis at a theater near me! Don’t ever leave me, Floydster.)

Rainn Wilson, The Rocker, Jason Sudeikis, The Last Mimzy, Juno, Battlestar Galactica, The Office

This just in: If your superhero movie does well, plan for sequels. (Who knew, right?) After a $99 million opening weekend for Iron Man, Marvel Studios has announced the greenlighting of Iron Man 2, set for release in 2010, in addition to Thor (as in, “by the hammer of”; how very Liz Lemon!) the same summer and both The Avengers and Captain America for 2011.

Surprise! Except…not. The bonus scene after the credits for Iron Man features Samuel L. Jackson as Nick Fury, leader of the Avengers, so it’s not like some studio exec just woke up this Monday morning with a yen for many, many sequels. In fact, the comic-book version of Ultimate Nick Fury (as opposed to just plain Nick Fury; it’s complicated) is intentionally modeled after, and looks just like, Samuel L. Jackson. How weird! How meta! How…obviously intended for film adaptation!

This kind of thing is, though, the very reason that I—in spite of/because of my complete ignorance about comic books—appreciate Marvel Studios and their attempt to seize their characters from the jaws of unaffiliated filmmakers. Adapting work they already own (and, ostensibly, respect) gives them the freedom to be as good and as accurate as they want to be, and even better, to build their movies as they have their comic books: as a continuous and self-referential universe. Continuity, the feeling that the events of a story matter somewhere outside of that story, win big points with me personally and doesn’t seem to hurt in terms of building a fan base, either. So although I have no nostalgia for Iron Man or any other Marvel character, I am wholly enthusiastic about getting to know their universe. Well played, Marvel Studios.

Iron Man, Ironman, Thor, Captain America, Nick Fury, Ultimate Nick Fury, Samuel L. Jackson, Marvel Comics, Marvel Universe, Iron Man 2

Let’s face it: spring hasn’t been much of a theatrical-release season. Each weekend I’ve been checking the listings, and…well, you can see how few new movies I’ve written about lately. The
last movie I saw in the theater was Leatherheads, which was an eon and a half ago, and it’s not like much has been slipping through the cracks. It’s like the Death Valley of release schedules out there.

But it looks like we’re finally getting somewhere. Barstow, or Twenty-Nine Palms, at least. The next three weekends—count ‘em, three!—mark the releases of movies I’m planning to see, or at least pretending to plan to see.

April 25: Baby Mama

I’ve accepted the sad fact that Baby Mama may, in fact, be terrible. But I so want it to be good, and I have a such a hard time saying no to the Fey/Poehler one-two punch, that I think I have to see it. It’s either that or The Life of Emile Zola for Project 501. Which would you choose? (Don’t answer that.)

May 2: Iron Man

I’m sorry. Did you think I wasn’t a geek? (…she says, hopefully…) Because I’m pretty sure my absurd love for this trailer—and my hyperventilating about the movie, and about Robert Downey, Jr. as anti-hero hero—proves otherwise. I just think it’s going to be so good. Even the trailer has great comic timing, plus general bad-assery. There can only be fun ahead.

May 9: Speed Racer

…I know, right? Keep repeating to yourself (as I do to myself), “It’s based on 1960s anime. What can you do?” and maybe you’ll feel better. And maybe the Wachowski brothers like their overblown identity/emotional angst, but they also like ridiculous car chases, and I like Matthew Fox’s face, and there you have it. (Note: I reserve the right to change my mind now that Lost is back on my TV. Why buy the ticket when you can have the Fox for free?)

Who’s with me?

Baby Mama, Tina Fey, Amy Poehler, Speed Racer, anime, Matthew Fox, Mach GoGoGo, Iron Man, Robert Downey Jr.

We’ve talked a little about how I feel about the upcoming Sex and the City movie. This is a show that has ended, and ended well. Everything’s tied up; everyone’s happy in ways we could never have imagined at the beginning of the series. So isn’t a movie tacked onto the end kind of unnecessary? I tell myself this…until I hear the first notes of the theme song, and I give a goofy little squeal and grin all the way through, and I can’t remember what my problem was.

I’ve thus far failed to mention another movie that’s been causing the same kind of reaction in these parts, only worse: I Want to Believe, the second X-Files movie, due out this summer. Like SatC, The X-Files is long over. Unlike SatC, X-Files didn’t end well—it overstayed its welcome by a good two seasons, guided by an executive producer who didn’t know how to end his own story but didn’t have the good sense to get out. There is a considerable amount of Chris Carter-related bitterness swirling around out there (I myself saw him recently at WonderCon, and was surprised at the wave of resentment I aimed towards his 20-foot face on the screens and his tiny self up on stage). Both of the actors involved have moved on to successful-ish careers. Isn’t second movie so long after the fact too little, too late? I am prepared to hold a grudge.

…And then I hear Mark Snow’s eerie, ethereal synthesizer, and I can’t keep up the act. I’m 22 and my roommate and I have just turned out the lights to watch another episode. Moose and Squirrel, back for one more adventure! Sure, we’ve missed six years, and nobody seems to have much faith in Carter’s abilities or his accountability to his own characters, but look how long Scully’s hair is, and is that Amanda Peet? (it is), and ooh, they’d better not be broken up now! Or if they are broken up, expect rotten tomatoes if we don’t get to see the reconciliation. And oh, man, Krycek had better show up, or heads. will. roll. How can I not love this movie, even though I want so badly to ignore it? I just can’t.

Wait a minute. Is this a conspiracy? Carter, I’m watching you.

X-Files, The X-Files, Chris Carter, Mark Snow, I Want to Believe, Amanda Peet

The 2000s, or the ’00s, or the aughts, or whatever we’re calling this decade, have been something, as far as nonsensical franchise titles go, don’t you think? Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows, for one. And then there’s Indiana Jones and the Unnecessarily Complicated Title Indiana Jones and the Kingdom of the Crystal Skull, which we talked about yesterday. But here’s a new one: the next James Bond film, previously referred to as “Bond 22,” is now officially called Quantum of Solace.

Yeah.

What does that even mean? “Shaken, not stirred, and don’t forget the quantum of solace”?
“Excuse me for a moment; I’m just going to step into my quantum of solace and collect myself”? Is this supposed to somehow compete with the Cone of Silence and the Fortress of Solitude? After all, one of those doesn’t actually work, and the other is top-secret and located in the Arctic, and I’m pretty sure the guy who lives there doesn’t like visitors all that much. So, you know, as much as I liked Casino Royale, and as pleased as I am with Daniel Craig as James Bond, Depressive, I’m not sure this whole thing’s going to work out. Did Bond 22 fail as a working title? It’s correct chronologically, and while I’d think a .22 is a tad on the dainty side for Craig’s particular brand of Bond-ness (Pierce Brosnan, on the other hand, having asked for his with a pretty pearly handle), it’s kind of a cute little firearms joke. A little NRA humor, if you will.

Man. So confusing.

On an unrelated note, I’m headed out of town for the rest of the week; I’ll be back after the weekend. See a movie for me, will you?

James Bond, Quantum of Solace, Bond 22, Daniel Craig

I was at the movies this weekend and finally got a good look at the trailer for Indiana Jones and the Kingdom of the Crystal Skull:

Cool trailer, no? Maybe it runs a little long, but the beginning is so perfect: the whip, the shadow, the self-deprecating “not as easy as it used to be.” This trailer does what a good trailer should do: sets a mood, makes me laugh, and makes me want to chuck good old Harrison on the shoulder…while sitting down to watch his movie. It also makes me think, for whatever reason, that maybe this “resurrecting Indiana Jones” thing isn’t the worst idea George Lucas has ever had (which is kind of a post in its own right, don’t you think?). This is probably the point.

So, readers, here’s my question: What is the correlation between trailer quality and movie quality? I’m thinking here of Harry Potter and the Sorcerer’s Stone vs. The Golden Compass, one of which was eerie and iconic, and the other of which was just scatterbrained. Is quality a one-to-one thing, or do we get sucked in by good trailers for bad movies? Do bad trailers happen to good movies, and if so, would anybody know about it? Trailers are made by trailer-production houses, meaning they don’t necessarily come with the vision of the director, but does the trailer-friendliness of a film mean it’s somehow more watchable? Inquiring minds (uh, like mine) want to know. Give me your best trailer stories.

And in the mean time, let’s ponder: Crystal Skull. Mysteriously valuable, or simply breakable?

Indiana Jones, Indiana Jones and the Kingdom of the Crystal Skull, Harrison Ford, George Lucas, trailers, youtube

I was talking the other day to a friend about the movie Baby Mama. The conversation went something like this:

Me: So, Tina Fey and Amy Poehler have a new movie coming out.

Her: Oh, I heard about that. I wonder if it’ll be any good?

Me: I’m sorry. Did you hear what I said? Tina FEY and Amy POEHLER have a new movie coming out.

Her: Yeah, I heard. I said, I wonder if it’ll be any good.

Me: LISTEN TO YOURSELF. Have we met?

You see, the tendency around CHHQ is to lose the thread of the conversation somewhere after “Tina Fey and Amy Poehler.” Rule #4 of the CHHQ Constitution states clearly, and I quote, that “all movies written by and/or starring Tina Fey must be of higher-than-average quality and may, in fact, be cultural touchstones for girl nerds everywhere.” Combined with statute 7c of the same document (”Amy Poehler is like our crazy, not-right, bottle-blonde cousin, and we love her, so there”), things are looking up for Baby Mama, as far as Cinema Hype is concerned, sight unseen. Also, John Hodgman! He makes us giggle just by showing up. Wait ’til he actually has lines!

Except for one detail: neither Fey nor Poehler wrote Baby Mama. That honor goes to one Michael McCullers, the pen behind Undercover Brother and Austin Powers in Goldmember; he also wrote for SNL a decade ago. This all, frankly, gives us pause. We want to believe that anything starring Fey and Poehler must be sprinkled with the dust of smart, funny fairies. Still: Undercover Brother.

Judge for yourselves, CH readers.

Baby Mama, Tina Fey, Amy Poehler, John Hodgman, Michael McCullers, Undercover Brother, Austin Powers, movie trailers, Youtube

For the two months or so, I plan to wake up every morning and think how glad I am that my name isn’t Sarah Marshall. Have you seen the ads? I’m not talking commercials; these are print ads, and they’re everywhere: “I’m SO over you Sarah Marshall,” “My mom always hated you Sarah Marshall,” “You DO look fat in those jeans Sarah Marshall,” etc. (they’re also badly punctuated, but that’s another post for another day). This must be a weird kind of faux-nightmare for the real Sarah Marshalls of the world, waking up one day to find ads maligning them all over town. How would you feel? “Cinema Hype sucks!” on the side of every building? Eerie, I’m telling you.

So that you don’t fall for the admittedly clever marketing campaign and devote too many brain cells to Sarah Marshall in the month before her April 18th theatrical debut, here’s the deal: Sarah Marshall is the starring-ish role, played by Kristen Bell, in the upcoming romantic(?) comedy Forgetting Sarah Marshall (surprise!). This is one of those movies that, in ten years, will either be a two-star blurb in the back of TV Guide OR the defining youth-culture movie of 2008. The plot? A guy who’s been dumped runs off to a tropical resort to lick his wounds, only to find that his ex and her new boyfriend are staying at the same resort (presumably for different reasons, and yes, I am leaving that “lick” joke right where it is). Which, hasn’t Ben Stiller already made that movie? Or am I making that up? But it’s hard to count this cast out: Bell, who nobody doesn’t like, much like Sara Lee; How I Met Your Mother’s Jason Segel, who also wrote the screenplay, for better or for worse; Jonah Hill; and Paul Rudd, who makes everything better. It’s like an epic battle of Mediocre Movie Idea vs. Awesome Cast. Who wins? Just check your TV Guide.

Forgetting Sarah Marshall, Kristen Bell, Jason Segel, Jonah Hill, Paul Rudd, How I Met Your Mother, TV Guide, Ben Stiller, Sara Lee

“This is the story of a wealthy family and the one son who had no choice but to keep them all together.”

It’s Arrested Development. THE MOVIE.

And it sounds like it’s really going to happen—back in December, Keith Olbermann practically peed his pants when Jason Bateman mentioned the possibility of a post-writers’-strike Arrested Development movie, and suddenly it’s up on IMDB, with a cast and directors and all those things that point to movies being made. And since, you know, IMDB is the source of all things true and just in the universe, I think we’re safe to assume. The Bluths certainly would (only to have it blow up spectacularly in their faces, but we’ll ignore that part of the story and just practice our Mexican chicken dance instead).

Where the movie will pick up is unclear, and troubling only for those of us who love George Michael (though, really, does anybody not love George Michael?). Michael Cera isn’t eighteen going on puberty anymore. Do we now have George Michael Bluth, College Man? And what about Maeby Funke? Now she can go around saying “Marry me!” and mean it. We at CH aren’t too worried. Have the AD writers steered us wrong yet? Mrs. Featherbottom says, “No, dearies!”

So, readers, let’s hear it: What’s your favorite Arrested Development moment? Feed us the lines that make you shake with helpless laughter in the middle of meetings at work (just me?). Let’s see the videos of your GOB magician dance (again, just me?). Share the appallingly hilarious love.

Arrested Development, Arrested Development movie, Jason Bateman, Michael Cera, Will Arnett, Jessica Walter, Keith Olbermann

See? SEE? I knew that as soon as the Oscar rush subsided, we’d get movies. And not just good movies, good funny movies. Am I wrong about this? Since Thanksgiving, it’s been Ellen Page or a bunch of quivering, tense cowboys stalking around in the desert. And here we are, two weeks past the ceremony, and already things are starting to lighten up. All hail…other movies!

I’m a bit biased, though. My most-anticipated movie of 2008 (so far) sweeps into theaters on Friday. Miss Pettigrew Lives for a Day looks like it’s my kind of people, and I can’t wait.

Let me tell you why I’m so excited (not necessarily in this order):

1. Screwball comedy:
We’ve talked a little about my obsession with penchant for dialogue: I want lines and delivery that snap like an overtaxed rubber band. I want to think I’m back with Cary Grant and Rosalind Russell. I want the movie to threaten to move along without me; I want to have to actually listen for jokes. And I loved No Country for Old Men as much as anybody (and probably more than most), but after all that stare-y silence, I think we’re all ready for a little bit of yammer.

2. Academy Award Winner/Nominee Death Match!:
Frances McDormand hasn’t made a movie in two years. Amy Adams has made enough for herself and McDormand combined. Both are great, funny actors, and we’re so happy to have them on the same team. Also, it’s like Nanny McPhee in reverse! Whatever that means.

3. Lee Pace. British. In a tux. Playing the piano.
*shrug* I cannot tell a lie.

Miss Pettigrew, Miss Pettigrew Lives for a Day, Amy Adams, Frances McDormand, Lee Pace, screwball comedy, Cary Grant, Rosalind Russell

When you’re a little kid, people like to tell you that two wrongs don’t make a right. They’re right, I suppose, if we’re doing moral math. I can’t think of a time when a wrong plus another wrong yielded a right, though I admit I don’t really go around classifying events as “wrongs” and “rights.” Sadly, now that I’m all grown up (heh), I’m also finding that I may have been lied to. Turns out that two rights may not add up to a right, either. For example:

Right #1: Julie and Julia, by Julie Powell. This is one of my favorite books of the past few years, something I picked up as light reading that somehow managed to attach itself to my psyche. It’s nonfiction: sometime around the turn of the century, a melodramatic, vegetarian executive assistant named Julie Powell decided, for no real reason, to cook all of the recipes in Julia Child’s Mastering the Art of French Cooking in a year, and keep a blog about it. The book deal came later, and what we get includes snippets of the blog, but mostly behind-the-scenes commentary from Powell’s tiny Brooklyn apartment. It’s funny and snarky, and there’s a whole chapter about aspic (which, when you think about it, is an endlessly hilarious word, not to mention concept), and it’s just…well, it’s great. It’s a Right.

Right #2: Amy Adams. I’m not sure whether I’ve given proper space to my recent affection for Adams. I loved her commitment to adorability in Enchanted—she might well have won the Golden Globe for her performance, had the show, you know, gone on—but I mostly like her because I look at her filmography and think that anyone who starts out with Drop Dead Gorgeous and gets broken up with on a booze cruise on The Office must be the kind of girl I’d like to hang out with. She is also a Right.

So why am I so wary about the recent news that Amy Adams is set to play Julie Powell in the film of Julie and Julia? I think it’s because, in my mind, Julie Powell may actually be the Anti-Adams. Or, rather, she’s the Anti-Adams-on-screen. She’s nerdy and moody and she and her husband like to eat pizza with jalapeno and bacon while watching Buffy. Her biggest celebrity crush is David Strathairn. Sometimes, she’s not very nice. Other times, she’s downright awful. She’s the kind of girl some of us turn out to be, once we realize that we won’t be making a profession of looking like a Disney princess, and so it stings a little to see the role played by someone who has made a profession of looking like a Disney princess. It’s the kind of casting that makes me excited for Adams, who could probably stand a job where she gets to be something other than 100% adorable (and, frankly, it kind of makes me like her even more), but it makes me a little sad for the rest of us, who hold out hope that sometimes just writing, or cooking, or writing about cooking, or doing whatever it is that we do, makes us a little bit of a supermodel/rockstar, even if we’re doing it in some tiny kitchen somewhere.

(On another note, though: Residual sadness aside, such a dream team! Adams, Meryl Streep, and Stanley Tucci; written by Nora Ephron! The heart, it pounds!)

Julie and Julia, Julie/Julia Project, Amy Adams, Julie Powell, Meryl Streep, Stanley Tucci, Nora Ephron

Check out the trailer here.

1. Somehow graphic novels tend to be—how can we put this politely?—altered by the Hollywood Machine. Diluted, maybe. One could say butchered, in some cases. Persepolis was written and directed by the author of the graphic novels, Marjane Satrapi.

2. There might be a better time for the American people to brush up on their Iranian history and culture, but I’m not sure when. Not to, you know, give anything away for the future. I’m just saying.

3. Persepolis is a graphic novel for people who don’t like graphic novels: not a super-power, sidekick, or busty heroine in sight. Instead, we get an outspoken adolescent in 1979 Tehran and her family and friends. That doesn’t sound so bad, does it? Try it! You’ll like it! Even Barnes & Noble shelves it under Biography. With pictures!

4. Catherine Deneuve and Chiara Mastroianni as Marjane and Mrs. Satrapi

5. It won the Jury Prize at Cannes last year, and most of Europe’s already seen it. Thousands of Belgians can’t be wrong!

See Persepolis today at your local art-house theater!

Persepolis, Persepolis movie, Marjane Satrapi

Happy New Year, CHers! The confetti’s been tossed, the champagne’s dripped all over the floor, and we’re looking at a stormy, gray January as we stare down our lists of resolutions (or in my case, “suggestions”). But never fear: with a new year comes a whole new crop of movies to anticipate, and things are looking positively spring-like for 2008.

Here, to start things off, is the Cinema Hype Top Five Most-Anticipated Movies of 2008:

1. Leatherheads

There is no way, in my humble but accurate opinion, that this movie can be anything but awesome. Intern George directing and starring! Renee Zellweger unscrunching her face for the first time since “you had me at hello!” And look how dreamy John Krasinski is. In the uniform, with his hair all slicked? Also, uh, football. Sure. We like sports movies. Count us in.

2. The Time Traveler’s Wife (No trailer available)

If this movie isn’t good, expect an uprising: cranky bookworms of the world, unite! On the other hand, how can it be bad? This story about a man who time-travels involuntarily and the woman he falls in love with feels like a good movie. Kleenex required, though.

3. Miss Pettigrew Lives for a Day

Why does this trailer make me feel all fluttery inside? I’m not gonna lie: it might be Lee Pace with a tux and a British accent. But doesn’t it just look like fun? Snappy dialogue-ish, big-band, Amy Adams-as-ingenue fun? I want to hang out with this movie.

4. The Curious Case of Benjamin Button (no trailer available)

Another chrono-ambulatory love story, this time based on the F. Scott Fitzgerald story of the same title. Brad Pitt stars as Benjamin Button, who’s born an old man and ages backwards. Unfortunately for everyone, he falls in love with a 30-year-old woman (Cate Blanchett). Sounds cool, no? And if all else fails, sign us up for a theme-DVD night (with The Time Traveler’s Wife and, I don’t know, Somewhere in Time? Oh, you know you love it. Don’t lie).

5. Get Smart

AHAHAHAHA. I’m so looking forward to this, to the point where I’m considering liking Anne Hathaway (as Agent 99). Strong words, no?

So that’s where we stand. What are your top movies for 2008?

Leatherheads, George Clooney, Renee Zellweger, John Krasinski, Miss Pettigrew Lives for a Day, Frances McDormand, Amy Adams, Lee Pace, The Time Traveler’s Wife, The Curious Case of Benjamin Button, Brad Pitt, Cate Blanchett, Get Smart, Steve Carell, Anne Hathaway, Top 5s, upcoming movies, trailers