If January is not the weakest month of the film year, it's certainly in the bottom three. It's rare that you find something of true quality within its confines, though I'm hoping that 2008's first month will be a damn sight better than 2007's. To clarify, I saw eight movies that were released this past January, and I wish I could un-see seven of them (the exception being Freedom Writers). With the exception of the upcoming monster Cloverfield and (perhaps) Rambo, I'm really not setting the bar too high as far as having truly fulfilling cinematic experiences this particular month. Still, we gotta fill the gap between winter and summer with something, after all, so soldier on we must.

Can One Missed Call (Jan. 4) succeed where horror clunkers Primeval, Blood and Chocolate and The Hitcher all failed one year ago? Highly doubtful. Even though previous remakes of Japanese horror flicks have turned into big bucks in the past (most notably with The Ring and The Grudge), this American adaptation of the frightfully popular Chakushin ari will, more than likely, be met with little more than indifference. Here's the synopsis: Beth (Shannyn Sossamon) witnesses two of her best friends die mere days apart, events made even more traumatic (or dramatic) by the fact that they received messages on their cell phones giving the exact date, time and circumstances of their deaths. She eventually teams up with a rugged detective (Edward Burns), whose own sister met a similar end, and they work together to try to unravel the mystery behind the mysterious phone calls.

Sounds plausible enough for a viable horror story, I guess ... one that may even be worth watching if you are truly, truly bored. But there is no way, at all, that this film is going to be a commercial success. Put it in the same boat as Awake which, like One Missed Call, had an entire weekend all to itself but still only managed one Top 5 point and lukewarm reviews. Difference is, Awake at least had a cast that most people recognize. Fantasy Moguls predicts four Top 5 points, which ... is not going to happen. Any or all of the films that I've outlined in the last two weeks could still be going strong, and this film will be fortunate to pull in much more than $5 million on its opening weekend. Two PTA points? Don't hold your breath, and if Call pulls in half of the estimated $33 million Fantasy Moguls has forecast, I'd be surprised. In no conceivable way is it worth $11 (or $10) in your December leagues.

As a columnist, it is my job to try to critique upcoming films with an unbiased eye, but there are few things that get my Irish up more than than the prospect of dealing with a film directed by Uwe Boll. The mere fact that the film industry in Germany is funded by the government makes me weep, for it means that a hack like Boll has carte blanche to churn out unbelievable dreck en masse. But oh, it doesn't stop there. He not only makes bad movies, he makes sequels to bad movies (Alone in the Dark 2 and Bloodrayne 2 are on his short list of upcoming projects). This man, who, if he ever had a project earn a User Rating of 5.0, it would be an all-time high. (His lifetime average is just over 2.0).

Never were a director and the month of January more made for each other, is all I'm saying. Which is why In the Name of the King: A Dungeon Siege Tale (Jan. 11) is not worth two hours of your life. I don't care that it has Jason Statham, Ray Liotta, Lord of the Rings's John Rhys-Davis, Hellboy's Ron Perlman, Burt Reynolds, Matthew Lillard, Leelee Sobieski, Claire Forlani and Kristanna Lokken. I really don't. It is the most impressive cast he's ever assembled, I will give him that. But it doesn't matter. Boll could shanghai the cast of The Departed for his next flick, and it would still be crap. Paul W.S. Anderson is friggin' Scorsese by comparison.

This is the quintessential $2 movie. Only pick this film in Box Office, because picking it in Ultimate will send your User Ratings into a downward spiral from which you are unlikely to recover. Its box office prospects are superior to just about everything else in the $2 range, and that, folks, is truly the nicest thing that I will ever say about an Uwe Boll film. And with Postal but a short distance away, I'm severely inclined to stock my medicine cabinet full of antacid tablets.

From the worst of the worst, we go to ... something that actually might be worth a look. When Katherine Heigl left the tremendously popular Grey's Anatomy to pursue a movie career, few realized that she'd take off so quickly, but with the help of Judd Apatow, she made this past summer's Knocked Up the highest-grossing comedy of 2007 ($148.7 million). Now, she's back with 27 Dresses (Jan. 11), which should continue to see her star rise.

Directed by Anne Fletcher (Step Up) and written by the same team that scripted The Devil Wears Prada, this film centers on Jane (Heigl), who seems to be the go-to girl when it comes to planning a girlfriend's wedding. As you can probably discern from the title (and the trailer), Jane has performed this function 27 times, preferring to concentrate on the happiness of others rather than her own. But when Jane's sister (The Heartbreak Kid's Malin Akerman) becomes engaged to the man that she has long been carrying a torch for (Edward Burns), Jane must overcome her low-key nature in order to win his heart away. James Marsden, Melora Hardin and Judy Greer make up the supporting cast.

Yes, this premise is nothing Earth-shatteringly new, but even so, being two weeks removed from the Christmas rush, I figure 27 Dresses has by far the best chance to take No. 1 on its opening weekend, and hold on in the Top 5 for perhaps two additional weekends. Three PTA points (which are what Fantasy Moguls predicts) are dicey, but with some positive reviews and a wide enough release (say, 2,500-3,000 screens), I'd wager that $50 million in total output is well within its reach. It is, after all, the only true romantic comedy for the entire month, which means it might not suffer a substantial dip the following week when Cloverfield slams into theaters. For $17 (in Ultimate) or $15 (in Box Office), this is a second-tier pick worth examining.

Let me say this right up front: I am not Christian. I am not, and never have been, a fan of the Veggie Tales series of direct-to-DVD stories. I do understand what they represent, though: for the most part, they are Bible-related stories, where the characters are recast as talking produce. Either that, or they are straight-up spoofs of other things, which is why many (erroneously) believe that The Pirates Who Don't Do Anything: A Veggie Tales Movie (Jan. 11) is a parody of the Pirates of the Caribbean series, when the truth is, this story was written by Phil Vischer way back in 2002, before the enormously popular Depp/Verbinski series even got started. The reason for the five-year delay was actually quite simple: Big Idea Productions, the company that owned the rights to the Veggie Tales series, went bankrupt ... or  got "squashed," if you prefer. (Come on, this is a punster's playground here!)

According to Mr. Vischer's blog, this film is not a Bible story, but rather a "distinctly Christian parable, an illustration of how God calls us into adventure — to be 'heroes', if you will — and then equips us for the tasks he has given us and supplies us with the strength to finish the job." All well and good, but one IMDb reviewer who saw an advance screening (which was pretty much complete except for the score) says, "The movie did not have many similarities to the (series of) tapes; I'm no expert on Christianity but I'd be hard-pressed to identify any Christian themes or lessons ... there were certainly no references to God or any Biblical connections." Sounds like the movie didn't "produce" according to his expectations. (Flinching.)

Obviously, Universal is trying to market the Veggie Tales series to a broader audience, but therein lies the problem. Any fans of the series might find the changes unwelcome, and filmgoers not familiar with the premise will probably not be falling over themselves to recommend it in great numbers. Of course, Jonah: A Veggie Tales Movie did reasonably well five years ago, all things considered, bringing in $25.5 million and a rating of 6.4. That's a sweet pile of cabbage, and a 6.4 is no small potatoes in the IMDb department. (Dodging.)

It's not Pixar, Dreamworks or Sony Animation were talking about here, which is probably why this film is available for the bargain-basement price of $2 in the December Ultimate leagues ($5 for Box Office). This past January's Happily N'Ever After tanked with $15 million and a 3.5 User Rating, but 2006's Hoodwinked fared much better, bringing in over $51 million and scoring a 6.7. I predict Pirates will end up somewhere in the middle ... say, $20-$25 million and a rating of around 5.7, which, if you need a title to round out your lineup, make this a 24-carrot (grin) steal. Now, lettuce move on. (Ducking ...)

How many of you were around early enough to have Norbit on your roster? Seriously, that film is just about the best example there is for the screwball "African-American" comedy: to wit, a whopping $95 million in revenues and a grisly 3.6 User Rating. So it shouldn't come as any surprise, especially in the wake of films like Are We Done Yet?, Tyler Perry's Why Did I Get Married?, I Think I Love My Wife and the recent This Christmas, that I give you the following advice regarding First Sunday (Jan. 11): buy at your own risk. Yes, this film is only worth $8 in both Ultimate and Box Office, but if you've been reading my columns for the past few weeks/months, then you already know what I'm going to say.

This story, about a pair of hoodlums (Ice Cube, Tracy Morgan) who decide to rob their neighborhood church so they can pay off a $17,000 debt, will no doubt bring in the same kind of crowd that enjoys the kind of comedies that I just named, among others. With the Cube backed by players like Katt Williams, Chi McBride, Regina Hall, Loretta Devine and Clifton Powell along for the ride (what, Queen Latifah wasn't available?), this movie may have just enough muscle in its roster to make a small splash, or at least a considerably larger one than Daddy Day Camp or Who's Your Caddy? did.

Fantasy Moguls has First Sunday earning three Top 5 points (definitely possible), one PTA point (stranger things have happened), a User Rating of 5.5 (optimistic at best), and $27 million in total box office, which, for the aforementioned $8, makes it much, MUCH more desirable in Box Office leagues than in Ultimate. Unless you're already front-loaded with PTA monsters, in which case, go nuts. Or, you can hold off until ... let's see, four weeks later, when Martin Lawrence brings Welcome Home Roscoe Jenkins to screens.  Joy.

Announcement: As of right now, we have almost 70 entries in the Upcoming Super Ultimate leagues, and just over 50 in the Super Box Office leagues. Several others have e-mailed me, but I was unable to accommodate them because they failed to send me all of the following information: 1) WHICH leagues you want to be in, be it one, the other, or both, 2) your username, and 3) the e-mail address you wish for me to send the league(s) password(s) to. Without all of this information, I cannot include you. So, if you are unsure whether or not you are currently on the list, please go to the FM Message Boards and click on the thread titled "Super Leagues Roster," and check out the last page of the thread. If your username is not on the list (or, not on all the lists you want to be on), please e-mail me again with the above information. By the time you read this column, I figure we will be about a week (or possibly less) away from my being able to create the Leagues, at which point I will be doing all the e-mailing. Even though the Leagues will start with the movies coming out on January 4th, you have until January 15th to get in before the door slams shut. Time is running out, fellow Moguls, so if you're the kind who likes to wait until the last minute, well, we're not far off!

And that will wrap it up for me for another week. Please return next week, when I will be turning my watchful eye back to the year that was, and shall always be, 2007. I'll be running down the highlights (or, rather, the lowlights) by talking about the worst that the last twelve months had to offer: the films that SHOULD have done much better, the films that found success despite, you know, royally sucking, and the films that should never have even seen the light of day, much less the darkness of a theater.

Merry Christmas to all!

Shrykespeare just stays at home and lies around. And if you ask him, perhaps by sending e-mail to shrykespeare@gmail.com, to do anything, he'll just tell you, "I don't do anything."