Mad Skills And A Cameo From Me

Check it out.

Against All Odds

Kuntz and Maguire's Onion film is finally getting released. Yep. On the 3rd of June, the film will be slipped out on R1 DVD. Will it live up tot heir music video work? Will it live up to The Onion itself? Two "No" answers there, most likely, but this is, in modern times, one of the most conspicuously absent films and we should celebrate this news.

Too Good Not To Share

I'm back, because this is too good not to share.

So... did you ever wonder what could be "the greatest lie that Satan ever told"?

Find out.

(Personally, I can't see much difference between his old life and the new, expect the absence of 7k worth of silly trinkets and toys)

A Scene From Where The Wild Things Are

Can somebody please tell me if this is a legitimate clip or not? It... certainly... looks like it. And that certainly sounds like Benicio... and... well, it was a nice surprise to find it in my e-mail, let me tell you.

Yeah, let's face it. It is real. At the very least it was a real test. I love the suit. Spread the word.

I'm still very busy, working away on a couple of BIG film projects and teaching, teaching, teaching. I'm thinking of bringing back film ick as a weekly podcast... sound like a good idea? Where should I host it?

And... I don't know what to say about Heath Ledger. Sorry. I don't know what to say at all. But I'm obviously incredibly pleased that The Imaginarium of Dr. Parnassus is going to be completed.

[EDIT: I'm now told this clip was a test shot in the summer of 2005 in Griffith Park. And that's not the final Max, but Griffin Armstorff who improvised everything you see him do here. Presumably, Benicio Del Toro was then given dialogue to match the improv lines, but it's also fairly clear that the basic scene outline was probably preplanned first of all. On top of everything else, I think we can expect the finished film to look even better than this does]

Heath Ledger, Swinger

Just Jared has on-set images from the shoot of The Imaginarium of Dr. Parnassus. See Heath Ledger hanging by the neck. It isn't a spoiler - it's the character's introduction in an early scene. But as to why he's doing this... that would be a spoiler.

Want to know why anyways? My age-old script review will tell you. Go into the archives for much, much more on this film.

Terry Gilliam's shooting a new film! It must be Christmas or something...

Look! It's The Imaginarium Of Dr. Parnassus

This was worth coming out of semi-retirement for, surely?

The pics, taken by James Hatts, originated at London SE1.

Look What I Made

Just to keep my eye in, I'm hopefully going to be doing the occasional review for Daily Information, a primarily listings-and-classifieds website based here in Oxford. My review of We Own the Night (out in the UK on December 14th) has just gone live there. Please go and have a look.

They're going to be far shorter reviews than you'd be used to from film ick, but hopefully still well worth reading. Well, I say they're. I haven't been called upon to do another yet.

Talking of Oxford, I saw The Golden Compass and, frankly, can't quite work out where the fuss about it being castrated is coming from. As far as I could tell, all of Pullman's subtext was intact - so, yah boo sucks, Donahue. It was at least as clear as in, say The Lion, the Witch and the Wardrobe - and that couldn't have been any more plain without putting the lion in sandals and giving him stigmata.

The subtext remaining, and readably so, was not what I expected, I have to admit - I thought this was going to be an utterly gutless, bloodless film without any kind of point of view or meaningful set of values - but it was definitely a pleasant surprise. Now, if only they'd made the onscreen version of the plotting a little cleaner and clearer and managed to relate Lyra's inner life more successfully. And tidied up some of the FX. And didn't end on a dull, drawn out pseudo-happy conclusion that rankled fans looking for the last few scenes and still failed to really create and closure for anybody else.

Gassner's production design was truly superb, though. And the blocking of the de-jawing shot was really rather clever. All in all, a six out of ten for Weitz' film, which is about four more than I anticipated it would rate. And a fairly respectable score for any film, I think.

[EDIT: A,N Wilson and Mark Lawson on the BBC's Front Row have agreed with me that, frankly, you'd have to be a bit dim to miss the subtext. Not a popular opinion - has everybody been so dim that in fact, they have missed it themselves?]

Oh, and quickly - before I vanish again for lord knows how long - a quick plug for the 5-Disc Blade Runner DVD set. I've spent hours and hours and hours with it and, frankly, it has proven to be the single best DVD set I have ever, ever encountered and not least because it includes The Final Cut, which is, ultimately, the best film of 2007. Here in the UK the price has been set at around the £22 mark, with several online deals undercutting that nicely. Come December 18th, US citizens will be shelling out a fat lot more, however, but all the same, it will be worth every last cent. Kudos to Charles de Lauzirika, Paul Prischman and the rest of the DVD team for all of the truly exemplary, engaging and entertaining supporting materials. These bonuses are a sweet heaven for movie lovers, even those as yet unswayed by Blade Runner itself.

If You're Still Out There, Reading This...

...and you're in the UK, then please, do me a favour and take a look at this. This is our attempt to use our excess capacity (our skills, video gear and weekends, essentially) to generate some work. Basically, Rachael and I are now a Videography business.

I'm particularly pleased with the second clip on the site - the christening one - but maybe that's because the wedding video is so heavily cut down in this excerpt.

Please share the link with anybody you know that might desire our services.

And thanks.

Once more.

Here's The Big Mad Max 4 News...

...there is none. It isn't happening. At all. Several details of the film that again won't be are coming out.

I've not been happy with my posts over the last week, so I've decided to call it a day here at film ick. I wanted the site to be something that I simply don't have the time or money to make it into. Maybe, one day, when I have the money, time and necessary support I'll come back with something slicker, but equally passionate and created with the same feelings.

So, now then. I'm outa here. Gone, sure, but hopefully not forgotten.

Thanks very much for you support. Antonello, Paul, Don, Mark... I could go on and on and on and on. You've been great to me over the months. I've enjoyed being in touch with you. I've loved hearing what you have to say. It's been my pleasure to simply get into the back and forth with you.

Goodbye. And thanks again.

Last thought: I saw Diary of the Dead last night. It's quite brilliant indeed - despite a few obvious problems with the overall concept. An angry, passionate, beautiful film that asks a lot of the right questions but doesn't pretend to have all the right answers. The US release is in February; there's no UK date yet; despite the AFM pre-sales hullaballoo, Romero claims to have no ideas for the next one yet and wouldn't want us to hold our breath for it.

I'd like to thank George Romero for being so committed to actually making films worth caring about, thinking about and, actually, loving. Diary repays your love. And it will join you when you stand up against the corruption, hypocrisy and greed.

Pinch Punch, First Day Of The Month

Following on from the last post: Stylus Magazine has closed it's doors this week also, I have learned. Not as much of a blow to me as DavisDVD, but a loss all the same.

I was having a lesson about 'Negotiated Meanings' this morning, with my student James. We came around to talking primarily about two films - Blade Runner and The Matrix. One he loved and one he didn't like at all. Much to my dismay, it was The Matrix he loved. After we went back and forth about it for ten or fifteen minutes, with me pulling up all kinds of issues with the film, or all manner of defenses or new avenues of understanding Blade Runner, we finally got to the heart of what the lesson was supposed to be about, just not in the way I anticipated. James was now accepting that the plot of The Matrix appeared to make little or no sense, but still asked "Maybe we're missing something. I don't believe they'd make a film that makes no sense at all".

Well, they did. And they will continue to make such films. And people will continue to passively sit back and have them shovelled into their open mouths. But I hope James has come one step closer to believing that he shouldn't simply assume the filmmakers know better than he does. Thinking that the Wachowskis actually know entirely what they're talking about might be sweetly naive but it's just one example of why we're constantly peddled half-conceived, tangled and ludicrous guff.

Definitely not talking of which: the production of The Imaginarium of Dr. Parnassus is now officially official in a mentioned-in-Variety kind of way. They have no new information to share, sadly, but at least word of a new Gilliam film is spreading.

Other Variety stories from today tell us that the comic book Hyperactive is to become a film courtesy of MTV and Benmderspink; Jim Jarmusch's The Limits of Control is to star Isaach de Bankole and will film in Spain next spring with an 'internationally appealing' cast; Clive Owen and Julia Roberts are reteaming in Tony Gilroy's corporate caper-flick Duplicity, which sounds to me like a cross between The Water Engine and The Spanish Prisoner though, most likely, will be very little like either; Meryl Streep is to play julia Child for Nora Ephron, with Amy Adams in a supporting role; Richard Curtis has described The Boat That Rocks like this: Eight of the most extreme disc jockeys you've ever imagined having to live in a corridor, and a corridor that moved. And with no girls." I can't wait to hear the casting for this one.

I know there's a huge amount of fuss across the web at the moment because Spaced is to get remade for US TV. Here's the bad news: neither Edgar Wrigtht or Simon Pegg have been consulted which is, at the very least, rude; that Adam Barr, the scriptwriter hardly has a sterling resume with Will and Grace being his highest profile gig; that it's being remade for Fox, who are likely to be less willing tot ake risks or field esoteric material than the UK's Channel 4, home of the original.

And now here's the good news: Adam Barr is untested enough that, actually, he might have the right stuff. Who saw Buffy the Vampire Slayer lurking in the scripts Joss Whedon wrote for Roseanne? Nobody. And Greg Garcia's Yes, Dear fell far, far short of My Name is Earl - at least the good episodes of My Name is Earl. There's no way I'm coming down on McG, either - I think the Charlies Angels films are just fine, thankyou. Indeed, they're really rather good examples of their subgenre and show a wide bunch of capabilities, skills and sensitivities that get overlooked. And, in many ways, he shows a failry suitable outlook for a project like Spaced.

The original Spaced isn't going to go away and a remake can't actually taint it in any real way. What it could do, however, is be its own thing, a new series that takes Edgar, Simon and Jessica Hynes' work as a starting point before developing an identity of it's own. Let's wait and see how good or bad it is before we deem it (as some online voices have) the worst UK-to-US sitcom transfer ever. Surely it has every chance of being much better than Damon Wayans in Some Mothers Do 'Ave 'Em? Of course, that one isn't geek treasure, is it? Frank Spencer isn't going to get the spod army up in arms.

Despite being one of the best sitcoms of all time Spaced was nowhere nearly as good as people pretend, having several cop-outs, weak jokes and indulgent passages scattered amongst all of the really great stuff; Shaun of the Dead is probably even better than its reputation; Hot Fuzz was very good but had enough frustrating loose ends, distancing stylistic tics and confused elements to disappoint hugely. My point is: reamking Spaced should be considerably less controversial than remaking, say, Halloween. More controversial than remaking ET, perhaps - but that doesn't mean it shouldn't be allowed.

Edgar Wright and Simon Pegg are two of the best writers at work today and Edgar is one of the better directors but neither of them is so unfathomably masterful that I can't conceive of their work being untouchable. Like Whedon, Tarantino and Rodriguez before them, it seems like they have been elevated to godly status by a horde of geeks desperate for representation and identification, irrrespective of the quality of their work. When the backlash comes, I fear it is going to be cruel and harsh and utterly without rationale - but it is going to come, for sure. Just like it came for the others.

And, while we're still sort of on the subject, the US version of The Office is much, much better than the often tiresome UK original and I'll never back down over that argument.

This whole fuss reminds me of the age-old tussle about cover versions. For my money, I'd like the cover to be markedly different from the original - otherwise, why bother in the first place? A straight-up rehash is only one step away from overdubbing a foreign language film, in truth - it only gets done to serve up a castrated version to the lazy, ignorant or bigoted folk who won't bother with or are frightened of the different cultural phasing of the first version. Actually remaking something is like creating a sibling, a side version, a new beastie with new cultural roots of its own and while this often fails spectacularly, or is often an utterly pointless enterprise to begin with (*cough* Rob Zombie *cough*) , it certainly doesn't deny anybody a chance to see the original.

And before you complain that Spaced isn't available on R1 DVD, let me remind you that there's no excuse for not owning a multi-region player.

Postscript: I'd love to remake ET.

I'm Not Alone

DavisDVD was always one of my favourite sites. Head on over there now for a sad Goodbye statement.

Thanks for all of your hard work over the years, Patrick. I look forward to whatever you do next.

Tell Me What I've Missed

Assume that I've been on Mars for the last fourteen days. What's gone on in Filmland? Please do stop by the comments and tell me what you know, what interests you in particular, what you think I may be most intrigued by.

It's Halloween, Isn't It?

Last night, Rachael and I watched quite a bit of Signs, which (like hundreds of the discs piled up behind me right now) I hadn't seen since I first bought the DVD. Not that I want this observation to reflect badly on the film, mind, because there's some brilliant, brilliant stuff in there. The scene in which Graham and Merrill run around the house shouting is particularly great, and if I'd have written and directed as much stuff like that as Shyamalan has I'd probably suffer from ego problems myself. (Come back in a few years to check on my progress in this regard).

We didn't make it to the end of Signs, however - perhaps it would have been more appropriate for tonight, the one night of the year Rachael seems more susceptible to scary fare. I even got her two thirds of the way through Dawn of the Dead a couple of years back (but how she ended up watching Hostel with me on Valentine's day, not to mention walking out of it before it was over, is another story altogether).

So, today being what it is, and all, the horror films are out in force. 30 Days of Night hits the UK today; Saw IV has been around since last weekend and is doing very well, it seems; the BBC are trotting out Carpenter's Halloween once again tonight - though I bet they ingratiously crop it down to 16:9, so don't bother - put the DVD on instead; and there's even a new, splattery clip from Aliens vs. Predator Requiem up for grabs. If you want to download it directly, I can offer you a WMV version, or my preferred Quicktime encode. Exploding heads and acid spurts to the face abound - and this version doesn't have th annoying IGN badge.

Paul W.S Anderson's involvement in this film has probably put most people off, and indeed, I'm epxecting little or nothing from the film. I certainly didn't think much of the first. I've gone into some detail about my feelings for Anderson already, and they haven't changed: he's a pretty capable hack who sets fairly easy targets and hits them sort-of-squarely most of the time. And that's not a bad thing, really - it just isn't a particularly good thing. While I haven't seen There Will Be Blood, I've seen all of PT Anderson's other features and I'll stick with his schlockier namesake, if I may - a fraction less ambition, a great deal less botchery.

I saw the third Resident Evil a week or so ago, and I did enjoy most of it, if only at a pretty low register. The odd bit here and there was even very interesting - the opening sequence that sets an Alice clone loose into a recreation of the first film's opening riffs quite enjoyably on the videogame mechanic of multiple lives/continues and repeatable levels (things we take for granted, they're so commonplace in games - but they didn't have to be). I liked the wireframe transitions from location to location again, which reminded me of nothing so much as negotating the map screen on a latter-day Metroid game. And the end of the film, which saw multiple Alices, ready to awaken and each try to defeat the evil Umbrella Corporation across the world seemed resonant with the myriad players of the games, globally controlling their identical avatars in identical missions.

Probably the film that best speaks to my experience of playing videogames in eXistenz, though this Resident Evil run a fairly close second (though, obviously, in this one respect only - I'm definitely not comparing Anderson to Cronenberg on any other terms).

So, I briefly mentioned the box office success of Saw IV. Looking at those opening weekend grosses, I'd say that every dollar over 20 million was worth another hearty laugh at Nikki Finke and her delusions of having halted the commercial success of so-called torture porn. That's over 11 million laughs, and I'll join you in every one.

On the other hand, each of those dollars is also worth a tear. How can a spiritless film like a Saw be so massively outgrossing Hostel Part 2? It was the angriest, smartest, most worthwhile horrror film since... er... well, at least Hostel Part 1 and it's getting trumped by the latest repetition of boring, witless carnival show.

And here's my prize Halloween link: The living horror of the looming strikes has studio execs and producers running hither and thither trying to put together their slates and sharpish. Variety's round-up does a good enough job of explaining which studio pictures are set to roll in time, so I won't paraphrase it here. Of specific interest to long time film ick readers, however, might be that Wolverine is getting a rewrite from Jamie Vanderbilt and Scott Silver. I say good. Very good. David Benioff's original script was as bad a script as I've ever read. I was concerned about this one because I've really been enjoying Gavin Hood's work so far - Tsotsi and Rendition - and now I'm just glad he looked past Benioff's, ill-structured, cliche stricken, senseless draft in order to sign on to a basic set-up that could so easily soar.

And..er... that's that. That being my first attempt at finding a new way to do this.

The Future: If You Only Read One film ick Post, Make It This One

Let me tell you a secret.

I don't want to do this anymore. Not the way I've been doing it in the past.

I've spent the last week trying to find ways to make this enterprise fit in with the rest of my life. Ways in which I can collect, collate, read and pass on film news; ways in which I can see films, write reviews and publish them; ways in which I can strip download links from trailers and post them for your enjoyment.

And, the bottom line is, I can't make it any more efficient, really, than it ever was.

For the best part of a year, film ick has taken an average of three hours out of my day. Each and every day. For a year before that, it was taking maybe one to two hours per day - but I improved things, became more serious, and that cost me the extra time.

I can't go on giving up 21 hours a week for this. There are all sorts of things that have suffered.

I'm very busy teaching, at the moment with several students needing up to four hours of personal tuition a week each; I'm working on the script for one feature film, one short film and - while we're revealing all of our secrets - I'm deep into development on another feature film that should be shooting before the year's end. And that, of course, takes even more of my time - and of course, it deserves it. And it deserves my energies.

And I have a personal life to attend to too, of course. A partner, parents, siblings, friends and a splendid dog and I'm glad for my time with all of them, and I don't want to miss out on so much any longer.

To be blunt, film ick has become something of a thorn in my side.

For the longest time, I felt like running this site was an almost painless endeavour. I was reading all of this information anyway, so what harm was there in passing it on? But then I actually started looking at the clock, seeing how much time was vanishing. When I was ill a few weeks ago it became incredibly obvious how much of my life film ick was chewing up.

So I don't want to do it anymore.

Sorry. Some readers here really seem to appreciate my work, which is touching and very much appreciated in return, while some others act as though they think they're entitled to it - as though they're paying me for this. There aren't even any ads on the page - and, in fact, it costs me to keep this place afloat. To you people I say: come here if you want, don't if you don't, but don't whinge at me for not providing the exact service you'd prefer. Instead, you can simply suggest some improvements, maybe? You never know - they might come to pass.

Now, I'm going to look for ways to make the process of creating the posts here more efficient for me, I swear. Any suggestions will be most gratefully received. If I can get the time required down to an average of 75 minutes or so a day, then I'll dive back in head first. You can have ten hours of my week for free - why not?

Until then... abnormal service is resumed. Irregular updates, of indeterminate size and content. Think of them like columns in a weekly magazine, perhaps. They won't be as rare as weekly, may sometimes be as regular as daily - or more frequent, even, when required or inspired.

I've had intermittent help from a good number of contributors, and I'd like to thank them all once again , but nobody became capable enough that they could hold the fort alone for two or three days a week (though Rachael did learn a lot of my techniques and secrets and, if she had the time, I'd trust her implicitly - but she absolutely doesn't, so it's moot). For better and worse, this has been pretty much a one man outfit pretty much all of the time.

I hope all of this gives you some context and helps you understand what you can expect from me in the future. Any possible solutions you can offer, please do. In the meantime, I'd suggest you sign up to film ick with an RSS reader or the e-mail subscription widget in the right hand column - that way the sporadic, unpredictable posting schedule to follow won't prevent you from getting the latest in a timely fashion.

Thanks again for all of your support and I hope you can hold on and stick with me. I'm back, at last - but the site is just going to have to share me.

Wait For It...

...I'll be back later today.

[EDIT: This is taking longer than expected. And I have a lot to catch up on. My apologies. But I will be back. And in a matter of hours, not days. Not minutes, admittedly, but hours]

Hiatus

film ick is going on hiatus. We will return on Monday 29th October with... some new ideas and new ways of doing things. Most of these will be behind the scenes, so up front, it'll still be the devil you know. More or less.

And, no - I'm not going on holiday.

And once these wrinkles are ironed out, we'll be back in business 24/7. Yep - all film ick, all the time.

Repo! The Genetic Opera - First Look

Some footage from Repo! was premiered at the Scream Awards last night and has now, as was inevitable, made its way online. Unfortunately, it's shaky-cam style; even more unfortunately, it looks like dull, cliched stuff with predictable lyrics and, in the song here showcased, a flat melody. The necessary imagination seems almost entirely absent.

A real shame because this was one of the most intriguing casts in a very long time and a full-on horror musical is definitely a novelty, if nothing more.

Daily Update - Saturday 20th October - Volume 2

Let's do this again, shall we?

- This confused me just a little. Aaron Jeffery has apparently auditioned for the role of Logan's brother in Wolverine. Shooting on the film is scheduled to take place from this December, with the release scheduled for May 1 2009.

- A slowly waning candle in a creepy Jack O'Lantern on the Dark Knight tie-in site WhySoSerious appears to be counting down to Halloween. What's going to happen?

- Stewart Lee is making a pilot for BBC2. It will feature sketches and stand-up and will probably be about ten times funnier than any other show to feature either sketches or stand-up.

- All UK readers, pay attention to this: Some Mothers Do 'Ave 'Em is being remade for the US. And who will be in the Michael Crawford role of Frank Spencer? Damon Wayans. Dear heavens above. I bet he won't be half as good at roller-skate based stunts but I can't wait to hear him say "Oooh Betty".

- Common has described Timur Bekmambetov as somewhat more open to improvisation than Joe Carnahan.

- If Darren Aranofsky is really directing The Wrestler in the new year, what has happened to The Fighter? I think wires may be crossed? Maybe?

- The next two Saw films may be filmed back-to-back. Why not?

- Martin Campbell is being wooed to direct a remake of The Birds. We don't really need it, but I'm sure he'll do a more than workmanlike job. I'd rather him than, say, Marc Forster anyway. And I definitely like the set-to-star Naomi Watts plenty enough.

- Dave Eggers is writing an 'adult novel' based upon Where the Wild Things Are. In case you've forgotten, Eggers co-scripted the upcoming Spike Jonze film - the screenplay of which, by the way, has been reviewed. I saw the links at BigScreenLittleScreen.

I'm still laughing about Damon Wayans as Frank Spencer. For non-UK readers, please check out a clip of the original from YouTube. Doesn't Michelle Dotrice have a vague whiff of PJ Soles about her?

Not enough? There's plenty more. Plenty.

Daily Update - Saturday 20th October

Here's a new way to get your film ick - daily bulletins that give you the best stories and links. Yes, I'm aware of the similarity to the now-defunct Movie Minesweeper.

[VARIETY] Aisling Walsh is to direct the supernatural drama The Daisy Chain. Samantha Morton is to star alongside Steven Mackintosh as grieving parents who take in an autistic child. I'm imagining something slightly more Don't Look Now than Godsend.

[VARIETY] Killer secretary comedy Miss Nobody is to be the debut film of Tim Cox. The cast will feature Adam Goldberg, film ick fave Missy Pyle, Kathy Baker and co-producer Leslie Bibb.

[VARIETY] I don't really have a sense of smell so the scent-centric Mistral is bound to go over my head a little (if that hasn't wound up a twisted metaphor that means nothing at all). Matt Williams is to direct the 'romantic fable'.

[VARIETY] The Film Department have snapped up Jason Graham and Haley Gilbert Fisher's script The Pre-Nup.

[VARIETY] Bruce Dern is keeping it in the family by casting daughter Laura and wife Diane Ladd in Hart's Location, his directorial debut. Ashley Reed specifically wrote the script with an eye to uniting the family for the project.

Listen, I'm not liking these square bracketed links - are you? Let's give this a rest for a short while as I work this out...

Direct Download Link For Hitman Origins Animatic-Style Video Comic Strip

Download a Hitman prologue in animatic-ish form, courtesy of IGN.

Five Paramount Vantage Scripts, Straight To You

Paramount Vantage are offering free downloads of five of their scripts - The Kite Runner, A Mighty Heart, Into the Wild, There Will Be Blood and Margot at the Wedding.

Unfortunately, they're keeping the script for Son of Rambow off the table, not least because it isn't getting a release until May next year and these scripts aren't just a free gift - they're being used as an awards-season lobbying device.

Direct Download Links For The Trailer For And The First Five Minutes Of Chrysalis

Chrysalis is a stylish French sci-fi action thriller and film ick fave Albert Dupontel is in it. Intrigued? The trailer - with a fair amount of French dialogue - and the first five minutes - with very little dialogue in any language - can be yours for the downloading now.

Direct Download Link For Nightmare Before Christmas 3D Featurette

Want to know more about the whys and wherefores of The Nightmare Before Christmas' new 3D incarnation? There's a handy downloadable featurette that will fill you in.

The film is on release now in many places - including the US and the UK - and I strongly advise you to make the effort to see it.

Direct Download Link For Alternative Sweeney Todd Trailer

Mike Markus sent me a link to a different cut of the Sweeney Todd trailer. This one contains even less singing - that is to say, none at all - but does, in many ways, present a much more attractive looking film.

Enjoy.

Bye-Bye-Rella: Has Rose McGowan Crashed Robert Rodriguez' Career?

Dino De Laurentiis and Universal have dropped their Barbarella remake from Robert Rodriguez, and there are two reasons cited as why.

The New York Observer claim that Universal balked because Rodriguez insisted on casting McGowan in the title role. They quote a source (unnamed, of course) as saying "No one thinks Rose can carry the movie, but Robert won’t listen."

Rodriguez reportedly pins the issue on a budget dispute, and is quoted as saying "Universal had initially signed on for $60 million, but then when we were done with the script it wound up at closer to $82 million, and they had just financed a Will Ferrell movie that was a $130 million and they even cut that down to $100.”

That would be Land of the Lost, a Will Ferrell movie that, for a while, Rodriguez was apparently attached to direct. Is there a general whiff of sour grapes in the background? Maybe - but only maybe.

It is a money issue, of course, I'm sure it is - all decisions in industry are, at heart - but that doesn't exclude Rose McGowan's suitability, or lack thereof, from the discussion. Maybe a Barbarella starring McGowan is worth no more that $60 million to the stuido; maybe they see a different lead, a starrier one, as a more reasonable gamble and worth a heftier punt.

I can't say I'd blame them for reading the odds this way. In purely financial terms, I think McGowan would hurt the film in comparison to, say, an Angelina Jolie figure - a pin-up People-magazine regular with wide awareness. Rose McGowan's homebreaking antics couldn't even make front covers in the way that even the most minor comings, goings and hair stylings of, say, Jennifer Aniston, could.

I say all of this absolutely irrespective of who would be right for the role - and without having read the script, I don't feel qualified to make a judgment call on that, though I definitely don't think McGowan is necessarily, definitely 'wrong'.

Curiously, Rodriguez also claimed that Universal were wowed by McGowan's screen test - "blown over", apparently. This I find a little harder to believe. I think it would take a lot for a screen test to genuinely "blow over" a studio exec, if indeed it could ever be possible at all. Is it safe for execs to engage with films on that level? Surely being excited by the quality of a film, even the potential of a screen test, is kind of counter-productive to their job? I thought they were supposed to function like stone hearted actuaries. If 'Barbarella=Rose McGowan' doesn't add up to them on paper, why would execs expect it to add up in the marketing, the buzz, the imaginations of the least imaginative?

I'm sure Rodriguez will bounce back, though I doubt he'll ever again have the pull he once exercised with the Weinsteins, not anywhere, not with anyone. All the same, I know he's got plenty more wonderful films in him and whichever ones we do get to see, I'll be grateful for them.

Trailer Direct Download Catch-Up

Meet the Spartans is one of any number of 300 spoofs we will have to endure over the coming months. The trailer can be nabbed from MySpace.

There's an international FLV trailer, now, for Youth Without Youth - not to mention 480p, 720p and 1080p versions of the US cut. Right-click to save these hi-def versions and rename the file rememberjack.mov or similar to ensure they work.

The first trailer for Step Up 2 The Streets comes in hi-res lo-def, 480p, 720p and 1080p flavours.

A new I'm Not There trailer is here - and in hi-res, 480p, 720p and 1080p too.

I Do now has a UK trailer.

And last, but definitely not least, The Diving Bell and the Butterfly now has a US trailer online too, but sadly only in FLV format.

Oh, and, okay... one more thing then, but not quite a trailer... you may wish to download Abe Sapien's address to the Hellboy fans of this and other worlds. I miss David Hyde Pierce already.

Justice League Smokescreen

There's a fresh-ish piece on AintItCool about the Justice League auditions. According to Quint, a 'source buried deep in the production' has said that a number of the auditioning actors 'were only reading for two characters: The Flash and Wonder Woman'.

The way it's put, we are essentially having it suggested that none of the young folk called in to see George Miller recently were up for any of the other parts. Closer inspection, of course, reveals this not likely to be the case at all.

Quint only names a handful of the actors on the original list, for one thing; for another, some of those he hasn't named simply don't look anything like a reasonable choice for, oftentimes aren't even the same race as the characters under discussion, for example The Flash.

There's no doubt that Miller is looking at young actors for other roles too. This hasn't been a popular fact, but there's still no denying it. Snarky references to the Teen Titans abound, but, frankly, I could care less. If Miller wants a young cast, then let him. Surely he has his reasons? He's not just some dumb hack, or a studio pawn. Miller's vision might not be yours, but it is a vision and I believe, after all, that he's capable of getting the film right.

Or at least fairly right. And that's better than a lot of high-profile directors of high-profile comic book franchise films.

Direct Download Link For Stop Loss

I like Ryan Phillippe a lot, and the subject matter of Stop Loss interests me very much. Throw in Joseph Gordon Levitt and I'm completely sold.

Download the trailer from MTV.

Direct Download Link For New I Am Legend Promo Piece

Awakening is a 'digital comic book' to promote I Am Legend. It's like a fairly slick animatic, in effect. The scenes portrayed detail the original outbreak of badness that will, by the time Will Smith laces his sneakers and heads out onto the lonely streets, have wiped out almost everybody on Earth.

Download Awakening in hi-def lo-res Quicktime, or 480p, 720p or 1080p hi-def options.

The New Future

Sorry for the lack of udpates for a while, but some important changes are afoot behind the scenes. There won't be any more Movie Minesweepers but instead, a single daily, dated update that performs a similar job, rounding up small bites of info and hordes of links.

Updates throughout the day will be shorter, and specific to one story, film, idea or review.

The first daily update will be published to the site in time for the next daily e-mail, but there's more to come today including a piece on Rendition that also gets into Control and, of course, some trailer links.

Thanks for your patience.

The Ice Storm From Criterion

Of all of Ang Lee's films, the one I like best is The Ice Storm, without a doubt - there's a great cast, a top drawer score, some astonishingly clever lighting courtesy of Frederick Elmes and... er... well... a great cast, a top drawer score and some astonishingly clever lighting. It can live alongside Sense and Sensibility and Crouching Tiger in my small Ang Lee DVD collection quite happily - and, I'm happy to report, this will be as a Criterion edition of the film

How do I know? Well, technically, I don't. Technically I'm just guessing - but the latest Criterion newsletter included the above image of keys and slogan and, frankly, I don't think they could possibly be referring to anything else.

Zombie Drew may have other ideas. He correctly identified the last Criterion clue as indicating Cornel Wilde's The Naked Prey for which I am now awarding him an imaginary gold star (which may, or may not, look just like Claire Danes, the star of David or the bath mat in Ozzy Osbourne's en suite depending on which Zombie Drew would prefer).

Hellboy 2 Site Is Live

Mike Markus dropped me a line to let me know the Hellboy 2 site is now live. I had a quick look and found lots of good stuff. Go, enjoy.

I'll be back tomorrow with a replacement for Movie Minesweeper and the beginning of a new era for film ick.

Stardust

What follows is my critical reaction to Stardust, centred largely on the success of its plotting. It isn't a typical review, not by any means, but it does draw attention to what I think is the most interesting element of the film, not to mention its most bizarrely underappreciated in any number of pieces by unfairly caustic critics.

On a scriptwriter's corkboard, Stardust would look like a pretty much perfect film. That is to say, stripped down to a series of events, one after the other, there's not really anything to fault it for at all. Everything follows in a logical sequence, at a well-controlled pace, there's a good share of surprises, cliche is kept in its place, the characters' motivations read clearly and the rules of this odd fantasy universe are set up, exploited and subverted in nice, bold steps. Everything is, above all else, perfectly coherent. And don't underestimate this evaluation - surprisingly few films are so well structured. Kudos, then, to Jane Goldman and Matthew Vaughn, the credited scriptwriters, and also to Neil Gaiman who not only wrote the original novel but provided some uncredited alterations to the script.

I think, in designing a film, the principal concern of the writers, directors and actors should be to make sense. The audience's understanding is not just some barren bedrock for their appreciation, it's planted with the seeds of investment, of caring, of being interested. If you can understand every step of the way what the hero wants, say, what will happen if he is denied it, why he wants it now and what might prevent him from having it, then you can truly and honestly empathise with him (though not necessarily sympathise - that's a question of what it is he wants and why, or perhaps simply why he hasn't got it already). It's when your film works perfectly on the corkboard - no matter how many index cards you break it down to, no matter how sophisticated a level of minutiae you zoom in to - that you, filmmaker, can move on to make your next layer of decisions.

Somewhere between this first layer and the next, Stardust lost its way a little. As further layers were added on, the meandering became even more erratic.

I'd say that this second set of filmmaking decisions appear to be the most glamourous ones because this is where the dressing up begins. This is where mood and atmosphere and style and tone and cinematic grandeur all get slathered on. The story - because that's what the corkboard contains - already has subtext, already digs into themes, already explains character (because, after all, we are what we do and we only do what we do because of who we are). It even already creates atmosphere and mood. On top of story, almost everything else is superfluous, no matter how glamourous.

The job, really, when styling up; when layering on top; when taking your corkboard covered in index cards and expanding it to a screenplay; when taking this screenplay and shaking a shot list out of it; when having these shots drawn as storyboards; when scheduling the shooting, when turning up on set and actually shooting; when taking this footage and slipping and sliding its colour scheme around, or putting in CG monsters and mountains and other magical things; when cutting everything together; and when you're putting music, voices, creaking doors, heavy footsteps and all manner of weirder noises on top is always the same thing. The job is to protect those original little 3 inch by five inch cards, those little windows onto your story.

Filmmaking is damage control - you've heard that before. The damage you need to control is damage to the story, those bare bones that come before there's even a full screenplay. To Matthew Vaughn's credit, he managed to deflect at least half of the shots that would otherwise have been on target.

But what of the other shots? The ones that hit? What damage did they do?

The real question, I suppose, is how do you damage a story? The first way (worst way?) is to distract from it. The key asset of the corkboard, as we were saying, is coherence. So incoherence is the enemy, of course, and even doubts, those moments of partial incoherence, or threatened incoherence, can be a serious problem if they persist.

In accepting a narrative, at least a narrative based in something like a real universe (and this includes everything from The Wizard of Oz to Mulholland Drive to Star Wars to The Bourne Ultimatum to Pandora's Box and pretty much any other film you could ever name - the exceptions being things like Mothlight or Bop-Scotch, with Meshes of the Afternoon being an example of a contentious film, though one that I would just about put in the former category) the audience will automatically perceive this narrative's universe as being rather like their own in some basic, fundamental ways. So basic and fundamental that it almost sounds a bit crazy to note some of them as examples but here you go: gravity has an effect; visible objects are also visible to the characters on screen; the characters have something like relatable psychology - and so on. It is (in part) because of these assumptions that we are able to happily suspend disbelief, lose focus on the illusion of the 2D rectangle flickering before us and start to perceive reality in the characters and events we see cast upon it. This is the glue that holds the engine of the film together while the clarity of cause and effect, as present on that corkboard, is the fuel, and if a filmmaker wants the film to make it to the finish line without breaking down into a disinteresting, maybe even frustrating wreck, then they don't want too many pieces of the engine to rattle free.

Now, we can argue all day about what shatters the suspension of disbelief (or perhaps more properly put, halts the suspension of a new belief) but I sincerely believe injudicious use of zooms, jump cuts, unmotivated camera movement, obtuse stylisation - in short, the visibility of an author's hand - will do the trick every time. To protect the immaculate story he had at his disposal, Matthew Vaughn was required to keep his touch light, his choices apt and subtle, his shot designs and cutting fluid, inobtrusive and articulate (in a film grammar