If you’re me, and, chances are, you probably aren’t, you’re wondering what happened.  I’ve been racking my brain since I heard the predictions on Friday, predictions which did not bode well at all.  Under ten million?  For God’s sakes, When a Stranger Calls pulled in just under $50 million, and, by all accounts, it blew.  Hard.

Why aren’t people seeing Slither?

This modern model of Hollywood is harsh.  A movie like Slither can’t thrive on word of mouth, after such puny numbers.  It’ll make a mild DVD splash, but that’s it.  Writing on the wall.  Grab your coat and pay your tab.  You don’t have to go home but you can’t stay here.  James Gunn must be staring at those numbers, wondering what they mean.  His production team must be wondering what happened.  His actors must be wondering what happened.  I sure as hell am wondering that.

Look, I saw the film back during the Chicago Weekend of Horrors.  Enjoyed it.  I found it a clever amalgamation of dozens of horror films, fused together by Gunn’s exuberance for the silliness of it all.  It’s telling that most moments of fright were punctuated by the audience laughing their collective ass off.  The film is nothing amazing, but it succeeds, damn it, and it refuses to compromise.

The big winner of the weekend, instead, was the family-pandering Ice Age: the Meltdown.  Is there any doubt that the film, while cute, will be relegated to a footnote in cinematic history?  Whereas Slither, upon release, gained immediate comparison to genre classics like Gremlins, Tremors, and The Blob.

Slither is the second-most favorably reviewed film in current release – the top honor goes to Inside Man, a film that happens to star Jodie Foster, Clive Owen, and Denzel Washington.  A film directed by Spike Lee.  That is one hell of a pedigree.  I consider Slither the true victor when you remember that a movie full of Oscar nominees got serious critical competition from a movie where a space slug crawls towards a naked woman in a bathtub.

But is it even worth it to complain in a public forum three days after release?  Most people know within five seconds of seeing a preview whether or not they’re interested in a film.  Failure to Launch was a success before it was even released.  Hot stars, romantic comedy, nothing up against it.  Does the criticism even matter?  I got into an argument with online critic James Berardinelli because he spoiled parts of Kill Bill.  His reply was that people shouldn’t read reviews before seeing a film.  Huh?

For studios, movies are business first and art second.  Again, a fact I understand.  A thousand people can be involved in making a movie, and each person needs some form of compensation.  Additionally, a return on investment is ideal, so that the studio can continue to fund more projects.

That’s why we have all the remakes, sequels, and adaptations.  People are attracted to name properties.  That’s why we have two versions of The Hills Have Eyes.  That’s why Scary Movie 4 is coming out soon.  That’s why Dracula adaptations are still on the way.  I understand it from the business end.  Hell, I even admire it when someone pulls off a Scream 2 or Dawn of the Dead.  But when did people become so damned passive?

I suppose all of this is a long-winded way of saying that Slither deserves a shit-ton more credit than the public gave it.  Am I biased because I’m a horror junkie?  No.  I’m biased because it’s a good movie.  I know I’m not alone – just about every critic I’ve read enjoyed it, and everyone who saw it with me loved the hell out of it.  And I know that I’m right.  Let’s face it – while opinion has its place in movie criticism, some things are just plain  fact.  Gothika is awful.  Halloween is great.  Leprechaun 4: In Space is awfully great.

And Slither deserved more.  How much do I think it deserved?  Well, let’s see.  If X = Y x A, where X is the total amount of money, Y is the quality of the film, and A is the ratio of X/Y, then, oh I don’t know, how about more than four million dollars?