Serving up this steaming pile of
Celebrity Gossip
Gay Politics
Gay News
and Pointless Bitchery
Since 1995

Box Office Poison Reese Witherspoon's Romantic Comedy Release Delayed

Because it's a stupid piece of shit. I mean, who other than a couple of blind guys would want to fight over this ugly, nasty bitch who is a good 5 years older than either of them?

"Fox is waving the white flag on what is supposed to be a worth-the-price-of-admission movie which in and of itself is a rarity these days. The studio was supposed to open its ‘romantic action comedy’ This Means War on Tuesday aka Valentine’s Day. But the studio hasn’t seen the pic’s poor tracking pick up at all in recent days, while Sony Pictures/Screen Gems’ The Vow is soaring in wannasee. So Fox has decided to get out of the way. In an unusual move this late in the game, the studio will sneak This Means War on Tuesday and then hope word of mouth spreads before its new release date of Friday, February 17th. I don’t get what the moviegoing public’s problem with this pic is: Chris Pine, Tom Hardy, and Reese Witherspoon are just as cool casting as Channing Tatum and Rachel McAdams (though apparently not as box office) and the trailers have been engaging (though thrust into a lot of clutter) and the film didn’t look dumb (and that’s is half the battle with this genre)."

by Anonymousreply 6002/11/2012

Too bad it can't be re-edited so that the guys dump her and go off with each other.

by Anonymousreply 102/07/2012

I never paid much attention to this bimbo, but I've recently seen a few interviews with her, and she really is a bitch.

by Anonymousreply 202/07/2012

But, but it co-stars Chelsea Handler, the hottest female comic around! Why, she has 1 billion facebook followers! Aren't her millions of fans going to rush out and see her latest turd?

by Anonymousreply 302/07/2012

Reese's collapse is complete!

by Anonymousreply 402/07/2012

I thought February was the month where all the bad films were relegated for release.

If she can't get released in the worst spot, then...

by Anonymousreply 502/07/2012

She's getting beat by Channing Tatum and Rachel McAdams!

by Anonymousreply 602/07/2012

She's one year older than Hardy and 4 years older than Chris Pine. BFD.

by Anonymousreply 702/07/2012

Box Office Poison Reese strikes again!!!!

by Anonymousreply 802/07/2012

"Ugly" Reese Witherspoon is probably better looking than 99% of the people posting here.

by Anonymousreply 902/07/2012

"Theater owners voted you box office poison."

by Anonymousreply 1002/07/2012

I personally want to see it. I want to see The Vow too, but I think its going to be too similar to The Notebook. I also hate the going back and forth in movies it just kills it for me.

As for one beating the other theyre obviously both different genres. Its just up to the people on what they want to see.

I think im going to like This Means War alot better than The Vow.

by Anonymousreply 1102/07/2012

Who would think Angela Channing would be a better draw than Reese?

by Anonymousreply 1202/07/2012

Happy Valentime's!

by Anonymousreply 1302/07/2012

"Chris Pine, Tom Hardy, and Reese Witherspoon are just as cool casting as Channing Tatum and Rachel McAdams"

Channing Tatum and Rachel McAdams look like they could be a real-life couple.

by Anonymousreply 1402/07/2012

You should see the money they are spending in the UK trying to fleece cinemagoers into seeing this one. I read some pathetic paid editorial in a UK mag that touted Reece "America's Comedy Sweetheart".

The couldn't even sum up the film in an enticing way.

It looks like utter shit.

by Anonymousreply 1502/07/2012

The trailers for it make it play to neither men or women.

Too much action to make it a big female draw (they'll go for the romance of The Vow) and too much romance to make it a male draw. It's trying to play to both men and women and in the end it's appealing to neither.

And really, the believability factor that 2 men are willing to fight to the death for REESE WITHERSPOON is preposterous. That just is the worst casting ever (though since she was a producer on it she pretty much cast herself). This *might* have worked with a more believable female lead.

But for men to go see Reese Witherspoon as an object of desire...and Chelsea Handler (who men HATE) as her best friend, not going to happen. No straight guy will want to go near this. And no girl will waste her time nagging her boyfriend to go with her. Girls will nag their boyfriends to go to The Vow cause it's more romantic.

by Anonymousreply 1602/07/2012

Yes, that should have been Reese not Reece. I must be thinking of the peanut butter cups which are a far more pleasing prospect than watching Reese on screen.

by Anonymousreply 1702/07/2012

They're just surrending a few days which makes sense. Why create the perception that the film flopped on Valentine's Day when it can post better numbers. I mean, my gawd, that Katie Heigl movie took $10 M a few weeks ago - surely Reese can do better than that.

It's also a way of improving its tracking by connecting it to The Vow, a film which, frankly, I would've though most people would feel they've seen. I mean aren't the careers of Tatum Channing and Sharon McAdams worthy of their own spoof comedy by now, like Dear John Step Up Your Letters To Juliet Are In The Notebook Signed The Time Traveller's Wife?

by Anonymousreply 1802/07/2012

And it just looks like a piece of shit movie too. Maybe that's it? Plus, Chelsea Handler is in it. She really is wearing our her welcome.

by Anonymousreply 1902/07/2012

"The Vow" reminds me of that old 70's movie "The Promise".

by Anonymousreply 2002/07/2012

Reese doesn't bother me much, but she is not a beauty, so the premise of this movie is ridiculous. Suspension of disbelief is out the window with this one; the producers are asking us to be downright delusional.

by Anonymousreply 2102/07/2012

[quote]Reese doesn't bother me much, but she is not a beauty, so the premise of this movie is ridiculous.

Same problem with her last movie, Water for Elephants. She was supposed to be some kind of Depression era circus beauty who both Christoph Waltz and Robert Pattinson were madly in love with. I remember in the trailers there was one shot where Reese is sitting on a horse, all wind swept and (supposedly) glowing in the sun, and Pattinson is "awe struck" by her "beauty." But all I see was that pinched face and pointy chin. It was laughable.

by Anonymousreply 2202/07/2012

"But for men to go see Reese Witherspoon as an object of desire"

You realize 99% of straight men would have sex with her, right? She was married to gorgeous Ryan Philippe, for chrissakes. Some people are just too jealous to be objective.

by Anonymousreply 2302/07/2012

[quote]You realize 99% of straight men would have sex with her, right? She was married to gorgeous Ryan Philippe, for chrissakes. Some people are just too jealous to be objective

Yes, if they met a Reese Witherspoon in a bar, they'd fuck her. But she's a movie star, she's being held to a different standard. In sex appeal, she's compared to other hot actresses, and she's definitely lacking. The problem isn't that Reese is ugly, but she's not a sex pot. Straight men won't pay 13 bucks for her stupid rom coms. Women are bored with her.

by Anonymousreply 2402/07/2012

I thought she and Ryan Phillipe got married because she was pregnant.

by Anonymousreply 2502/07/2012

"She was married to gorgeous Ryan Philippe, for chrissakes. Some people are just too jealous to be objective"

Umm, he knocked her up so he HAD to marry her. They were super young and she's morally upright so as soon as she found out she was pregnant they got married.

Ryan NEVER would have committed to a cold, ambitious hyper-driven woman woman like her. He dates pretty but unknown 20 year-old LA wannabes these days. That's his speed.

Reese is married to a high profile CAA agent now. Much more her type.

by Anonymousreply 2602/07/2012

Who would want to go and see that?

by Anonymousreply 2702/07/2012

This is a star out of control. She and SJP have similar, self-propelled careers, but Witchy has the smarts to not make herself an irresistible babe fought over by two hotties.

by Anonymousreply 2802/07/2012

Looks like they moved for nothing. The Vow is at 32% rotten (24% rotten for major reviewers).

by Anonymousreply 2902/10/2012

Be that as it may, The Vow is tracking very strongly and will probably do quite well.

This Means War is getting massacred by critics AND nobody wants to see it.

by Anonymousreply 3002/10/2012

I can't see who TMW appeals to.

Doesn't matter the reviews for the vow. I'm sure the Notebook got scathing ones too but it's Valentine's Day and a weeper chick flick. It's bulletproof towards bad reviews.

by Anonymousreply 3102/10/2012

Four Reasons Why Opening This Means War on Valentine’s Day Was a Bad Idea

[quote]Try as Fox might to sell it as a Valentine’s date movie, there's nothing about a McG slow-motion-packed trailer full of two guys shooting guns and blowing things up that screams "snuggly romance." “For the past month, they’ve been telling people that this was going to be the Valentine’s Day movie of the season, in an effort to thwart The Vow,” says one Sony exec. “The problem with that is, it’s not a romance: Conceptually, it’s a balls-out action movie — admittedly starring two of the sexiest young leading men around, but it’s still a ‘guy’ movie. And what you’re left with is, you’re trying to sell a male movie to women. They severely miscalculated what this movie is. I believe the truth is, had they released this at any other time of year as a guy movie, it would do a lot better.” War was written by Simon Kinberg, a prolific writer-producer who is a favorite of Fox's: He did uncredited script doctor work on the studio's like-minded killing-machine-distracted-by-love spy comedy Knight and Day, and was also the screenwriter of Mr. and Mrs. Smith. Both of those were summer releases and marketed as action-comedies.

[quote]"[The male leads Chris Pine and Tom Hardy] are sex symbols,” says one marketing consultant at a rival studio. “They should be the object of desire, not her. And so with the focal point on the two guys, with her in the middle, it suggests she has them on a string. [But] she’s not that type of girl. Reese Witherspoon is the modern Doris Day: She’s the girl you marry after the hot chick has moved on to the next guy.” So while Witherspoon has great credibility in romantic comedies, Angelina Jolie she’s not. More, Witherspoon's last two films — Water for Elephants and How Do You Know (also a romantic comedy; an abysmally reviewed one, sure, but nevertheless cause for alarm) — didn't open, either. Then there’s the matter of Pine’s and Hardy’s own star appeal: It’s an open question if Pine is destined to be a Daniel Craig–type star: beloved and great in his definitional character (Captain James T. Kirk), but less effective in non-franchise roles. (With a $167.8 million worldwide gross, last year's Unstoppable did okay, but that was likely largely thanks to Denzel Washington's appeal.) It’s also unclear if the talented and appealing Tom Hardy, who is only slowly becoming a household name, can actually draw audiences. His unintelligible and unrecognizable appearance in the Dark Knight Rises trailer probably didn't do much to help cement his profile.

by Anonymousreply 3202/10/2012

Reese is attractive enough. But attractive as in pretty, not as in sexy.

Casting her as the object of simultaneous obsessive lust by younger leading men just doesn't ring true.

by Anonymousreply 3302/10/2012

[quote]Some films have certain scenes that need to be redone, but on This Means War the whole picture should have been sent back for a reshoot. This perfectly dreadful romantic action comedy manages to embarrass its three eminently attractive leading players in every scene, making this an automatic candidate for whatever raspberries or golden turkeys or other dubious awards may be given in future for the films of 2012. It's an eye-roller from start to finish, although the promise of a sexy competition between two CIA hunks for the attention of a man-starved honey might attract some misguided souls. Originally set to open on Valentine's Day, which falls on a Tuesday this year, the Fox release has been hastily rescheduled simply to sneak on Feb. 14 and legitimately bow three days later.

by Anonymousreply 3402/10/2012

"she’s not that type of girl. Reese Witherspoon is the modern Doris Day: She’s the girl you marry after the hot chick has moved on to the next guy.” So while Witherspoon has great credibility in romantic comedies, Angelina Jolie she’s not."

Bingo. Reese is too goody-goody to be juggling 2 hot guys.

She's pretty but not sexy in any way, let alone the object of desire for 2 hot assassins.

by Anonymousreply 3502/10/2012

Nice....

by Anonymousreply 3602/10/2012

The problem, OP, is that the public would rather see Chris Pine and Tom Hardy fucking each other than see either of them with Grease Witherspoon.

by Anonymousreply 3702/10/2012

The ads are creepy because she looks so much older than the two guys. Didn't they realize that when they cast this thing.

by Anonymousreply 3802/10/2012

She really is starting to look a little overdone.

Enough with the 2 younger guys fighting over Reese movies. I don't understand why she keeps on insisting on these types of roles when it's obvious nobody is buying.

by Anonymousreply 3902/10/2012

I said this way back but this movie would have been much better if Hardy and Pine just went full frontal and ran off with each other.

by Anonymousreply 4002/10/2012

i used to dog walk in brentwood's mandeville canyon, and I would see Reese hiking and she was ghost pale rail thin and had such a cold persona. I was afraid of her!! nOT pretty at all

by Anonymousreply 4102/10/2012

True, Reese is pretty and not sexy, and yes, she's "older" than Hardy and Pine (but by only 1 year and 4 years respectively, which shouldn't be considered a big deal). Why do people get so bent out of shape about things like that when it happens plenty of times the other way around in movies, and usually in a much more ludicrous manner? Take last year's typically ridiculous "Zookeeper", which starred 45-year-old fatso Kevin James as an object of lust for competing younger hotties Rosario Dawson and Leslie Bibb, a preposterous premise which I never heard even one peep of protest about. Most Hollywood movies are straight male fantasy, but it should be ok for females to have theirs every once in a while.

by Anonymousreply 4202/10/2012

A Valentine's movie has to appeal to women. Most guys aren't calling the shots that day. Women want to see straight up romance, not some movie that tries to be so many things, it isn't sure what it is. I don't think the shitty reception is a statement on Reese the actress, but just a bad career choice for her. And those are starting to pile up.

by Anonymousreply 4302/11/2012

I've seen it and it's quite good. Very funny and the guys are both gorgeous. It's a chick flick for guys. I loved it

by Anonymousreply 4402/11/2012

That was supposed to say it's a chick flicks the guys won't mind seeing LOL

by Anonymousreply 4502/11/2012

Ouch, not a great day to be Chelsea Handler if you're reading The Hollywood Reporter:

"...but Handler has been photographed to look practically like Lauren's mom and appears entirely at a loss; the “actress” barely even makes eye contact with Witherspoon and has no sense of creating a character."

by Anonymousreply 4602/11/2012

Will this be the end of the Witherspoon/Handler friendship?

by Anonymousreply 4702/11/2012

The Hollywood Reporter is full of shit. Chelsea does just fine and is laugh out loud funny. She and Reese have some great moments together. The 'mom' thing is one of the gags so maybe that reporter only saw the trailer. The movie will do well.

by Anonymousreply 4802/11/2012

I'm not a Reese fan, OK? She's irrelevant, IMO. I liked Election, and Pleasantville, and Legally Blonde I. After that she bored me.

A Johnny Cash bio-pic should be made one day, but Walk the Line wasn't it. She was awful in an awful movie. It was a TV movie.

The premise of her movies is always the same. Two guys fight over her, or she plays a woman who has to find her inner strength. Shes over. There is nothing interesting, or exciting, or new about her. She's an attractive, middle-aged, very well to do, suburban housewife. That's her image.

But my biggest irritant, is this box office appeal nonsense. Hollywood grinds out these formulaic movies over and over, and they usually flop.

I'm a gay man. I like romantic comedies. Honestly, I'll probably see TMW because I like Hardy & Pine. Action romantic comedies (Mr. & Mrs. Smith) can work with the right cast. Reese is the clinker.

Sure The Vow is crap. But it's based on a true story, and people will see it. Not only is Channing Tatum hot, he comes across on talk shows as a very likeable guy. Rachel McAdams is the same. Likeable. Reese isn't.

Reese comes across as phoney on TV. Plus, other younger actresses are in that genre now, who Reese can't compete with. Yet Reese is in our faces, marketing herself and her image, and for what? No one cares.

Her audience moved on to other actresses. She married a boring business executive. She should produce movies, do charity work and fashion, and forget asking for $15 million for the garbage she grinds out.

by Anonymousreply 4902/11/2012

I think she has to be the least interesting oscar winner of all time. And thats saying something. Sure as hell didnt deserve to win for walk the line. She cant even pull off a rom com and has no dramatic ability whatsoever.

by Anonymousreply 5002/11/2012

The Vow is projected to make around $39 million this weekend. Reese can't compete with that.

by Anonymousreply 5102/11/2012

"Middle-aged"? That seems kinda harsh, and well, inaccurate, since the average life span for American women is around 80. Kinda funny, since her co-stars are around her age, and they're referred to as "young."

As for her supposed "unlikeability," I've never disliked her, and I have never seen any concrete examples or evidence as to why I should dislike her. I think she's ambitious and wants to do well in her chosen field, yes, but I don't see that as a terrible thing - especially when you consider that Reese is a child star who has managed not to implode like most of them do. Perhaps she developed an "ambitious," type A personality in order to help her cope with Hollywood and it has worked. I've never heard any stories about her drinking or drugging, developing eating disorders, trips in and out of rehab, stupid comments on Twitter, pics of her getting out of limos flashing her coochie, falling down in nightclubs drunk, etc. On the contrary, she seems very disciplined, yet it seems that's exactly what some people dislike her for.

by Anonymousreply 5202/11/2012

Movie Lines had confirmed that "This Means War" has been postponed.

by Anonymousreply 5302/11/2012

Wel, R52 that's a pretty low bar. I mean good for her for doing what most people do every day, except she has a whole army of people behind her. Managing her.

Look. Reese is canned. She is obvious about being canned. Other actors in her genre are less canned, more spontaneous. She's all image, no substance. I just don't like her, OK? She is soulless to me. If we worked in the same office she and I would definitely not be friends.

by Anonymousreply 5402/11/2012

R52 she may be sane and well adjusted by hollywood standards. But her clock is ticking. I think her and meg ryan are a lot alike. Meg excelled at rom coms and i think reese found a when harry met sally type script she would do well. But meg had a better flare at drama than reese has. And the bottom still fell out on megs career. Reese can only play the 20 something blonde for so long. She has to start thinking about characters that are closer to her age and approaching 40.

by Anonymousreply 5502/11/2012

She needs to stop with being the white hot piece of ass that every man in the world can't turn down. That type of shit turns women off. It's a romantic comedy. The target audience likes the Meg Ryan-Sandra Bullock self-depreciating type of everyday women. People they can relate to and sympathize with. Reese has become too cold and "above it all" to be relatable to middle aged fraus.

SJP is another one who needs to get a clue regarding this.

by Anonymousreply 5602/11/2012

Agree with R54 and R55.

by Anonymousreply 5702/11/2012

R55, Meg Ryan, whom I despised, was sexy. She wasn't particularly funny or dramatic. She was sexy in an unintimidating way.

It was the maturity of her performance in Walk The Line that was so impressive. I know people here don't acknowledge that but I suppose that's the price you pay for being able to squeeze Ryan Phillipe's ass while he thrusts his cock in your vagina and pumps his seed into you: the basement dwelling queens at DL will hate you.

by Anonymousreply 5802/11/2012

"Basement dwelling queens": hahahahaha! That's hilarious, r58, and so original.

by Anonymousreply 5902/11/2012

TBy Jeannette Walls msnbc.com updated 4/27/2005 2:24:45 AM ET

Reese Witherspoon’s former director has confirmed what unnamed sources have long been buzzing: the “Legally Blonde” star was not a lot of fun to work with.

Robert Luketic, who’s currently directing the movie version of "Dallas," said that he wouldn’t want Witherspoon to be in the flick. When asked if he would cast Witherspoon in “Dallas,” he replied, “Er, no. Moviemaking is supposed to be fun.”

Luketic also directed Jane Fonda and Jennifer Lopez in "Monster in Law," and despite the latter’s reputation for being a diva, he got along with both. Not so for Witherspoon. “I did not bond with her like I bonded with J-Lo and J-Fo,” Luketic said, according to the London Express. “There is something impenetrable about that woman.”

He claimed that Witherspoon was humorless on the set of the comedy. “She would come out of her trailer and ask: ‘Why are you all laughing?’” he says. “She would want to know why we all had smiles on our faces. Moviemaking to her is a deadly serious business.”

by Anonymousreply 6002/11/2012
Loading
Need more help? Click Here.