Bruno was set to be released very shortly after Michael Jackson died on June 25. The problem was that Bruno featured a scene where La Toya Jackson was interviewed and Jacko’s phone number was stolen by the camp TV presenter.

This, rather inevitably, led to the scene being cut from the theatrical release of the movie. Not at the behest of the Jackson family but because Sacha Baron Cohen and the studio realized including the scene would be considered bad taste.

However, as expected, the scene has now been reinstated for the DVD release of the movie. Digital Spy reports that the last-minute edit from the film has been reversed for the DVD release, with the 90-second scene reinstated in its entirety.

I don’t see anything wrong with this as enough time has now passed since Michael Jackson’s passing that this scene is unlikely to cause offense to anyone. At least anyone who isn’t already offended by the nature of the film in the first place.

A year ago, a film version of Yogi Bear was announced. The film is set to be a mixture of CGI and live-action in the same style as Garfield and Alvin and The Chipmunks. Except it will hopefully be better than either of those two movie adaptations.

According to Variety, the cast is beginning to come together. Dan Aykroyd is being prepped to play the title character of Yogi Bear, with Justin Timberlake in talks to play his sidekick Boo-Boo. Anna Faris from The House Bunny is set to play a documentary filmmaker.

Yogi is the first of a number of Hanna-Barbera cartoons to be adapted for the big screen by Warner Bros. The others on their way to being made in the not-too-distant future are Scooby-Doo 4, Jonny Quest, and Hong Kong Phooey.

Eric Brevig is set to direct Yogi from a script written by Brad Copeland. Shooting is set to begin in New Zealand before Christmas. Casting sounds promising but knowing how the other cartoon-to-movie adaptations have turned out this is one I’ll wait to see before making judgment.

After winning the Oscar last year for “Slumdog Millionaire,” Danny Boyle can direct whatever he wants. Even a practically solo-actor movie about a one-armed mountain climber.

Variety reports that Danny Boyle has made a deal with Fox Searchlight to make “127 Hours,” the true-life story of mountaineer Aaron Ralston’s ordeal.

In 2003, while climbing a mountain in Utah, Ralston’s right forearm got pinned underneath a boulder. Ralston finally used a dull knife to amputate his arm, then climbed “a 65-foot sheer wall,” and hiked through the mountains until he finally found a family to help him. He was eventually airlifted out by helicopter.

Boyle wrote a treatment of the story and his “Slumdog Millionaire” collaborator, Simon Beaufoy is working on the script. They’re hoping to begin shooting sometime next year, with a late 2010 release in mind.

As I read Variety’s synopsis of the Ralston story, I immediately thought of “Castaway,” as this is obviously a film where an actor is going to be alone most of the time, carrying the story. Variety also thought of that and said that there have been rumors that Ryan Gosling is up for the part, but everyone involved apparently says there is no casting news. Gosling, however, would be a great choice. This is a rumor that you hope comes true.  

Peter Jackson and Guillermo del Toro: Getting in the Hobbit. Ha ha. 

The always shy and retiring Guillermo del Toro talked to TotalFilm about his plans for “The Hobbit” movies. It’s a pretty long interview, and while it’s frustrating that he constantly has to back off specifics as they would be “spoilers,” it still is a must-read for anyone who’s following the progress of the films. Some of the most interesting parts is where del Toro talks about how he is trying to put his own stamp on the creatures that populate the film, but also make sure that they relate to the aesthetic we saw in Peter Jackson’s own “Lord of the Rings” films. Here’s a quote:

The way I phrased it to Weta, I said we would keep the DNA in the same gene pool as the Rings trilogy, but that we would generate a different type of character. For example, in the trilogy most of the creatures are brutish or inarticulate.

In The Hobbit, the creatures speak: Smaug has beautiful lines of dialogue; the Great Goblin has beautiful lines of dialogue; many creatures do. So we had to design them with a different approach because you are not just designing things that are scary.

I also wanted some of the monsters in The Hobbit to be majestic.

I wanted the Wargs to have a certain beauty so that you don’t have a massively clear definition: what is beautiful is good and what is ugly is not. Some of the monsters are absolutely gorgeous.

Well, we love gorgeous monsters! Make sure you go to TotalFilm to read the whole interview.

I loved the first Transformers movie. In fact, I absolutely adored it and still watch it regularly on DVD. Then I went to see Transformers 2 and knew from about halfway in that I hated it. And I don’t ever want to see it again.

The big difference between the first and second Transformers movies was the amount of action. In the first, there was a storyline, a plot, characterization, and some kick-ass action to go with it. Whereas the second eschewed all the good things and concentrated purely on the action.

Michael Bay isn’t the biggest fan of criticism, usually either ignoring it or facing it head-on. But it seems he has at least taken it on board when it comes to Transformers: Revenge Of The Fallen. According to Digital Spy, he speaks about Transformers 3 in the ‘All Spark Experiment’ feature on the DVD, saying:

“It can’t get bigger, we have to figure out to go sideways and I’m wondering where to start. What I’m doing is having Hasbro send me tons of lore and stuff like that, things that we can draw from, and I just got to let it simmer. Definitely more has to be made of Bumblebee in the third one, that’s a relationship you want to explore more. And I think we’re definitely going to get more into the robot characters.”

“The third one definitely doesn’t have to be as big, we could go darker. It definitely has to be more emotional, it’s not going to be just about action, action, action. And that’s where I think T3 might potentially go, where things are more undercover and not as exposed.”

I’m pleased to hear this because I was afraid that Bay would continue his effort to sap the series of all life in favor of more action and more CGI effects. Whether “sideways” is going to be enough to please I and the millions of other people disappointed by Transformers 2 remains to be seen. But Transformers 3 will likely to be a huge hit regardless of how it turns out.

Ghost Rider was a strange film. Not a wonderful strange film but a strange film in the sense that it was stuck somewhere in the middle. It was by no means terrible but it also wasn’t good enough to become the new Spider-Man or Batman series.

Regardless of this, or maybe because of it, Ghost Rider 2 was announced a few months ago, complete with Nicolas Cage taking on the title role for a second time. He could certainly do with the money if the rumors of him being broke are to be believed.

The nature of Ghost Rider 2 was unclear. Would it be a direct sequel? Or would it be a reboot and obvious attempt at positioning the series for more mainstream success? Although the rating aim is being toned down from an R to a PG-13, that doesn’t necessarily mean it’s going back to the beginning.

David Goyer explained to MTV Splash Page how Ghost Rider 2 will work:

“It’s not exactly a reboot. I hate to say it’s more realistic, because he’s got a flaming skull for a head, but it’s a bit more stripped down and darker. It’s definitely changing tone. What ‘Casino Royale’ was to the Bond movies, hopefully this will be to ‘Ghost Rider.’”

“This story picks up eight years after the first film. You don’t have to have seen the first film. It doesn’t contradict anything that happened in the first film, but we’re pretending that our audience hasn’t seen the first film. It’s as if you took that same character where things ended in the first film and then picked it up eight years later—he’s just in a much darker, existential place.”

“My script is out there on the Internet. We’re not changing much from it. It’ll be significantly the same script.”

So, not only is it a sequel rather than a reboot, you won’t have had to see the original movie to enjoy the sequel. Plus, the script is already out there on the Web for those interested and determined enough to locate it.

Man of the hour Zach Galifianakis. 

Some people may think of 2009 as the year of the ox on the Chinese calendar. Or they may think of it as the centennial of the birth of Abraham Lincoln and Edgar Allan Poe. Or they may think of it as the Year of Zach Galifianakis.

Galifianakis had been kicking around for a while, but it was his role in this summer’s surprise, bargain-priced hit “The Hangover” that maded him one of Hollywood’s Most Wanted. Today The Hollywood Reporter says that Galifianakis is in talks to join Shrek spin-off “Puss in Boots” as the voice of Humpty Dumpty.

The Puss in Boots character, voiced by Antonio Banderas, will appear in this summer’s “Shrek Forever After.” “Puss,” set to open on November 4, 2011, is actually a prequel that will detail the events that lead up to Puss’s arrival on the Shrek scene. Chris Miller is directing; Salma Hayek is also in the cast.

Here’s what Galifianakis has booked since ”The Hangover” opened:  the Jay Roach-directed  comedy “Dinner for Schmucks”; Todd Phillips comedy ”Due Date,” opposite Robert Downey Jr.; and the Ryan Fleck-Anna Boden-directed drama “It’s Kind of a Funny Story” from Focus Features. Oh, there’s also a sequel to “The Hangover,” planned for summer 2011. And then there’s “Bored to Death,” Galifianakis’s HBO series. That just got renewed for a second season.

If you’re lucky in Hollywood, you have that moment where after years of struggling and just getting by, of no one noticing what you do, you land that one role that makes everyone sit up and take notice. Then suddenly you’re the flavor of the minute, and boy, you better make sure you’re make the most of it, because you probably won’t get a second chance. Galifianakis seems to be doing a good job of making sure his moment doesn’t pass him by.
 

Johnny Depp looks ready for some international intrigue here.

Variety reports that Johnny Depp is in talks to join the cast of “The Tourist.” Angelina Jolie is set to star.

This is a movie where you need a scorecard to keep track of all the comings and goings. Here’s the rundown:

Once upon a time there was a French thriller called “Anthony Zimmer.” An English language remake was planned.

Tom Cruise was set to star in the remake, now called “The Tourist.” In it Cruise would play an Interpol agent who draws an American tourist into a web of intrigue while attempting to locate a criminal who was once her lover. Bharat Nalluri was set to direct. Charlize Theron was thinking of joining the cast.

Cruise dropped out to make “Wichita,” now called “Knight and Day,” with Cameron Diaz.

Angelina Jolie was interested, though, so the script was rejiggered to be about a female interpol agent who drags an American tourist into her troubles while searching for a criminal/ex-lover. That bumped Theron out of the picture; Nalluri also got kicked to the curb. Then Sam Worthington was supposed to co-star, and just a week or two ago, Florian von Donnersmarck was announced as a new director.

Now Worthington and von Donnersmarck have left the project, citing “creative differences.”

Which leads us to today’s revision, the news about Depp’s interest. On the director front, top of the list names are surfacing, for example Alfonso Cuaron.

The pairing of Depp and Jolie would seem like box office gold, but more importantly, I think Depp would be a good foil for Jolie. The interesting thing about Depp signing on is that it must mean that “Pirates of the Caribbean 4″ and “The Lone Ranger,” projects Depp has planned at Disney, must be a long way away from happening.

“The Tourist” is supposed to start filming in February. We’ll see. Stay tuned for more changes to this one.

The red and green people battle over world domination!

ComingSoon says that Sony Pictures has acquired the film rights to the board game Risk. Toymaker Hasbro’s Brian Goldner and Bennett Schneir and Overbrook Entertainment’s James Lassiter will develop and produce the film. Of course there isn’t any director or stars attached yet.

Risk is the game of world domination. It was created in 1957 by French filmmaker Albert Lamorisse and introduced in the US in 1959. It quickly became one of the best-selling board games in the world.

ComingSoon says that Risk was the first board game to offer nonlinear movement. Boardgamecentral calls it “the game of world domination” (which is also how Kramer and Newman describe it in the “Seinfeld” episode where they become obsessed with the game):

“…where the object is to conquer the world. To win, you must attack and defend – attacking to acquire territory, and defending to keep it from your opponents.

The game board features a map of six continents divided into 42 territories. It’s a game of strategy as you battle to win by launching daring attacks, defending your territory, and moving across continents with your cunning plan! Play three variations: World Domination, Capital Risk, and Secret Mission Risk. This game will engage and challenge any player to join the ranks of world leaders!

Needless to say, there’s also a video game version, as well as numerous versions set in alternate worlds: the Star Wars universe, Middle Earth, Narnia, etc.

Board games are indeed the latest hot source material in Hollywood; news about adaptations of board games have been outpacing news about graphic novel rights’ purchases, which was huge last year. As you can tell from the description, Risk has the setup that naturally fits the big screen. In fact, it’s so natural, that one would wonder what would make it any different from any other large scale, war, action movie? Probably not much–what Sony paid for is the familiarity that comes with the name, and studios always hope that familiarity will buy them an audience.

A year ago, in November 2008, rumors abounded of a new sequel in the Three Men and A… series. We’ve already had Three Men and A Baby and Three Men and A Little Lady, and now Three Men and A Bride is on its way. Allegedly.

Strangely, the rumors disappeared for a full year only to be rekindled by Contact Music, which is now repeating the story. The film is still thought to be Three Men and A Bride and Tom Selleck, Steve Guttenberg, and Ted Danson are all thought to have signed up to appear. However, Disney hasn’t yet commented on the speculation, let alone announced such a project.

Steve Guttenberg is the man allegedly in the know, and on top of prematurely announcing Three Men and A Bride, he also spoke of his desire to see sequels to Police Academy and Cocoon. I’m sure it’s merely a coincedence that these were his biggest hits as an actor back in the day.

“Disney’s developing Three Men and a Bride. That’s going to be a smash. A smash hit. They’re bringing everybody back for that. Nobody knows about it. I’m the first to talk about it.”

“It’s definitely time for another Police Academy. And I think they could make another Cocoon. They’re surefire hits and I think they’re good for the world. They make the world a better place and that’s what it’s all about.”

When these rumors first appeared last year I described Three Men and A Bride as “the most unnecessary sequel ever.” And my feelings haven’t changed on this subject. The three leads are all too old now and it’s not a film I have ever wished to be made. There are so many more sequels I spend time wishing for than this.

The new performance capture, CGI animated version of A Christmas Carol had its world premiere in London on Tuesday. The stars of the film, Jim Carrey, Colin Firth, and Bob Hoskins were in attendance and switched on the London Christmas lights beforehand.

Digital Spy spoke to director Robert Zemeckis about the new movie, yet another version of the Charles Dickens tale which has already been transferred to celluloid many times before. Is this one different enough to make it worthwhile? He said:

“The idea was to do it as a new approach. I never considered adapting it as a film, but when I realized the potential of the tools we have now in digital cinema, it started to look like a really exciting project, something that would really lend itself to these new tools. I thought we could do it in a way that had never been done before and really present the story in the really stylized way that Dickens wrote it. I haven’t seen every other version of this story; I’ve seen the Alastair Sim version [Scrooge, 1951] and I’ve seen pieces of the other ones, but I’m really a fan of the original book. I’ve read it many times and that’s where my heart was with this.”

Zemeckis has already bought us Beowulf and The Polar Express, both of which used the amazing performance capture technology which quite literally turns real actors into animated characters. And now we have A Christmas Carol following the same methodology.

The full interview is definitely worth a read as Zemeckis also discusses the technology involved, Jim Carrey taking on multiple roles, and the future of film-making.

A Christmas Carol goes on general release on Nov. 6 and looks like being a must-see for both adults and kids alike.

Just a few weeks ago Ian McKellen spoke a little about the upcoming movie version of The Hobbit. At that moment he said he was expecting the scripts for the two films to be delivered very soon. He’s now got them, read them, and is ready to comment on them. Except he can’t.

He recently told Sci-Fi Wire about his pleasure at having the part of Gandalf written especially for him in The Hobbit. Which wasn’t the case with the Lord Of The Rings movies. Unfortunately, it seems Bilbo still hasn’t been cast and McKellen cannot reveal any actual details about the scripts.

He said:

“As Peter [Jackson] has said, they loved writing Gandalf [for ‘The Hobbit’] because they knew who they were writing for. There are a lot of characters in ‘The Hobbit,’ including, crucially, Bilbo, and they don’t know who’s going to play Bilbo. So it’s extremely attractive that this part has been written for me. The other Gandalf was written for, well, just as Gandalf. There’s lots for me to enjoy, in all sorts of ways. And I couldn’t be happier. But I’m sworn to secrecy. I’m not to say anything at all about the script.”

The great big spoilsport. McKellen also gives a little of his opinion on Peter Jackson and Guillermo del Toro, the directors bringing the Tolkien classic to the big screen. he said:

“They are the same person. They were separated at birth. They’re twins. They have the same attitude. Neither likes working in Hollywood. They’re both fascinated by fantasy and violence on the screen, and gore, and things that frighten you. They like going into the psyche. They’re both brilliant storytellers in very much the same way. And I think the script, because I have read it, plays very much to Guillermo’s strengths, as I’ve seen them. I have seen his other movies, and people act very well in them. So I think it’s all fine. And Peter will always be there.”

Even those little tidbits of information are enough to intrigue me and want the first of The Hobbit movies to appear sooner rather than later. Unfortunately, the start of shooting is still a while away and it’s then going to take over a year to film anyway. So there’s a little while to wait yet.

Marmaduke is a comic strip created in 1954 by Brad Anderson and Phil Leeming. It follows the adventures of a Great Dane called Marmaduke, who creates chaos wherever he goes.

Fresh off the back of starring in Marley & Me alongside Jennifer Anniston and a dog Owen Wilson is set to star in the new live-action/CGI movie version of Marmaduke. It seems he isn’t content with merely starring alongside dogs he’s now going to be one.

The Hollywood Reporter is reporting that Wilson is taking the lead role, with Judy Greer, Lee Pace and William H. Macy playing the human characters, and Fergie, Emma Stone, George Lopez, Christopher Mintz-Plasse, Steve Coogan, Damon Wayans, and Marlon Wayans supplying the voices for the other characters.

Wilson seems inspired casting, and the rest of the cast looks interesting to say the least. Unfortunately, I can’t see Marmaduke faring any better than Alvin & The Chipmunks or Garfield, which both feature talking critters and were made combining live-action and CGI elements.

Robert Downey Jr. can wear a tux, yet he still turned down the Oscar hosting job.

The MTV Movies Blog reports that the Oscar hosting gig was offered to Robert Downey Jr. and Ben Stiller–as a pair, apparently, rather than individually–and they turned it down. Last year’s host, Hugh Jackman, also turned down a repeat performance (I know not everyone loved his turn, but I did–any failures were more of the material than the man). Soooo…step right up–someone? Anyone? Ricky Gervais is booked for the Golden Globes. Neil Patrick Harris has proved his hosting chops at the Emmys and Tonys, but his presence on the big screen has been next to nonexistent.

MTV offers these suggestions:

Billy Crystal - He made the job a hard act to follow with his nominee song parodies, but he’s turned it down a number of times this decade. I think he feels like it’s too hard and he’d rather go out on top.

Larry David - Funny guy, but a) he’s a bit too TV for me (yes, I know he’s made movies, but they haven’t been exactly memorable) and b) there’s something about his humor that I don’t think fits the hosting gig thing. He’s really situational rather than presentational, if that makes any sense.

Stephen Colbert - I like this one. I know he’s not film at all, but he’s at least nationally known for hosting something.

Vince Vaughn & Owen Wilson - They’re comic actors, not comedians; they’re not hosts; and while they have appeared in a lot of movies that make money, there’s a kind of lack of “wow” factor when I say, “…and now your hosts for the Academy Awards…Vince Vaughn & Owen Wilson!!”

Robert Pattinson - Okay, I know they have to suggest it because it’s MTV and they’re required to make a certain number of “Twilight” references per day, but ummmm…no. He’s an actor (sort of), not a comedian, not a host, and doesn’t have a big enough offscreen personality to carry a show.

Who else? I wonder if Steve Carell could pull it off, or would take it. He’s been successful in both TV and movies, and he’s a comic. Hey, you could reunite Carell and Colbert, like their old “Daily Show” days. Or…I’m trying to think…another big star who has a big offscreen personality, has wit, has at least some comic ability…

Okay: George Clooney. I bet he would turn it down, but I also think he’d be great–he’s smooth and excels at the quick ad lib. Come on, George. Please?

(*****UPDATE****)

Well, never mind, George. It appears that Steve Martin and Alec Baldwin will be working the Oscars together. Again, there’s a little bit of an “Okay…” rather than “Wow!” feeling, but they’re both experienced comics, so it could work…

Scream more. 

The “Scream” movies were a big hit in the late ’90s because of their affectionate teasing of the horror genre. Now after a long layoff, Kevin Williamson, the director and writer of the original “Scream,” is ready to make a fourth film. He told MTV about his plans for “Scream 4.”

“The fourth one is an ensemble,” Williamson said of his “Scream 4″ script, which is being concurrently written with a fifth script as well. “It’ll take place right now, 10 years later, and it’s going to take place in [Sidney Prescott’s hometown of] Woodsboro. We’ll have our three main characters, and we’ll be introducing several more.”

He means that while the film has booked some actors from the original–Neve Campbell, Courteney Cox, and David Arquette–but will also include a new, presumably younger group, who Williamson says “will take us through the next three.” 

The snarky, self-referential bit that made the original “Scream” a success is now so common that it would barely raise an ironic eyebrow. So how will Williamson deal with that?

“I guess I’ll just have to be very aware of the fact that we’re a ‘4′ and that we’re beating a dead dog. I’m going to make that very apparent in the dialogue…Come on. It’s the age of the remake! And 3-D and all that [other horror fad material], can you imagine what [’Scream’ movie-within-a-movie] ‘Stab 10′ is like?”

I was never a huge fan of the “Scream” movies. I’d rather just have a flat out scary horror movie. So I’m not exactly giddy about the return of the franchise. I’m sure others are, though. Here is my favorite line from the MTV article:

“The series made box-office stars out of Neve Campbell, Jamie Kennedy and Skeet Ulrich…”

Really? Excuse me while I go count the box-office smashes those three have starred in outside of “Scream.” Okay, that would be none.

Alexander Payne’s “The Descendants” is going to shoot in Hawaii. Is that why George Clooney is interested?

Variety reports that George Clooney is in talks to star in “The Descendants.” Alexander Payne is directing Nat Faxon and Jim Rash’s adaptation of Kaui Hart Hemmings novel. This will be Payne’s first film since his 2004 indie hit “Sideways.”

“The Descendants” is about “a wealthy landowner who takes his two daughters on a search for his wife’s lover in the hopes of keeping his family together.” Wow, that sounds like one wacky plan!

Clooney would, of course, play the wealthy landowner. He’s currently shooting “The American” (how weird is that? He IS American!), and has three movies coming out this fall: “Men Who Stare At Goats,” in theaters on Friday, and “Up in the Air” and “The Fantastic Mr. Fox” soon after (Clooney is voice only in “Mr. Fox”).

Payne directed one of my favorite high school movies, “Election,” so he’ll always get a free pass from me for that. I would assume that this “The Descendants” thing is a comedy. At least I hope so. Clooney can do a variety of things onscreen, but one of his greatest skills is his willingness to look foolish or make fun of himself and not care what others think. Soooo…yeah. Get this thing done. Start signing the contracts.  

Yes, this can be yours! 

Say, kid, got some money lying around? Have you been saving up from your paper route? Or did you go to one of those houses that hands out change instead of candy on Halloween? If so, why not put it into reviving a recently revived action film franchise that needs another revival already?

ComingSoon (via the Financial Times, which requires registration, so I’m not linking) reports that the rights to the “Terminator” franchise will be auctioned off later this month. This would NOT be the rights to the original films, but the rights to make more sequels, TV shows, etc. Halcyon, the company that had picked up the rights a year or so ago and made this summer’s “Terminator Salvation,” is in Chapter 11, and selling off its properties.

“Terminator Salvation” sure felt like a failure here, a movie hated by critics and fans which faded into the dust as “Star Trek,” the “Transformers” sequel, the “Harry Potter” installment, and even “The Hangover” dominated the summer box office. But Nikki Finke, in Deadline Hollywood Daily notes that the film ended up making $380 million worldwide, so there’s still some value left in the “Terminator” name.

Because of that, all of the big studios are checking out the auction and considering leaping in. Even up-and-comer Summit Entertainment, bolstered by “Twilight” money is interested. But is there an auteur who can really turn the franchise around from a “well, it made money overseas because it has lots of robots and explosions” kind of movie into a true phenomenon, a la Christopher Nolan’s revival of the Batman franchise?

Yes! Ms. Finke has posted a letter from Joss Whedon, in which he offers Halcyon a scorching $10,000–yes, that’s ten thousand– for the franchise, and then lists some of his ideas. I’ll give you one:

1) Terminator… of the Rings! Yeah, what if he time-travelled TOO far… back to when there was dragons and wizards? (I think it was the Dark Ages.) Hasta La Vista, Boramir! Cool, huh? “Now you gonna be Gandalf the Red!” RRRRIP! But then he totally helps, because he’s a cyborg and he doesn’t give a s#&% about the ring — it has no power over him! And he can carry it AND Frodo AND Sam AND f@%& up some orcs while he’s doing it. This stuff just comes to me. I mean it. (I will also offer $10,000 for the Lord of the Rings franchise).

 I think you get the idea. You can go read the rest here.

Ouija boards can answer those big life questions.

ComingSoon reports that Edward Kitsis and Adam Horowitz have been chosen to turn the Ouija board game into a movie. Kitsis and Horowitz wrote “Tron Legacy,” the “Tron” sequel (duh) which hits theaters in December 2010.

This is part of a deal game and toy maker Hasbro has made with Universal pictures to turn a number of its properties into films. Most of the games to films in progress (”Battleship,” “Candyland”) have seemed like naturals for the big screen, but Ouija is almost ridiculously perfect. In case you don’t know, a Ouija board has letters and numbers on it, a person puts their hand on the planchet (a small, flat object), and asks a question. A “spirit” then guides the planchet to spell out the answer to the question. Many people use it to try to communicate with the dead. It’s been a staple of junior high sleepovers for decades. It’s also been a staple of films for decades. Look up “ouija” on IMDb and you’ll get a number of hits, including a 1920 animated short directed by Max Fleischer.

Kitsis and Horowitz have lots of room to have fun here, with the only question being whether it will be a light horror movie or a serious horror movie. I’m sure Universal has a plan in mind, as in which type will bring in the biggest audiences.

US audiences liked “This Is It,” but worldwide audiences loooooooooved it. 

And the numbers (courtesy of Variety):

1. This Is It $21,300,000

2. Paranormal Activity $16,540,000

3. Law-Abiding Citizen $7,303,000

4. Couples Retreat $6,097,390

5. Saw VI $5,560,000

“This Is It” finished a solid number one in the US, but worldwide it took in a more impressive $101 million. Unsurprisingly, Sony is extending the original two week run for another week.

“Paranormal Activity” could have made $5 this weekend and still be ridiculously profitable. So the $16 million and change as the film expanded is all just rainbow sprinkles on the “Paranormal” cupcake. “Law-Abiding Citizen” continues to be the solid “what else is there?” choice for undecided movie goers. And “Where the Wild Things Are,” one of the most talked about movies of the year, continues its quiet fade. It’s a cruel world.  

I bet a Zemeckis sequel to Roger Rabbit would replace live actors with motion capture versions. 

In an interview with MTV, director Robert Zemeckis again stated that there is movement on a sequel to his groundbreaking film “Who Framed Roger Rabbit?”

Zemeckis had hinted at the possibility earlier this year, but now revealed that Jeffrey Price and Peter Seaman, who wrote the original film, are writing a follow-up film. He explained that after the earlier film’s success, Disney had floated around some sequel possibilities, but they were going to involve other writers and directors (Zemeckis says this was because Disney was at a time in its business life when it only wanted to go on the cheap for sequels to successful films). 

Zemeckis didn’t say whether anyone was willing to make this movie, or if he was set to direct. One would assume that it would all depend on whether he liked the script; he’s powerful enough to find backing if he wanted to make it. I would think he would want to, though, if the script is decent. An article in the NY Times this weekend details how much Zemeckis loves motion-capture films, and I could see him wanting to revisit the world of Toontown using the new technology.  Toontown decades later–could it be about strife between 2D and 3D characters? Between CGI and hand-drawn? Hmmm, could be interesting…

By the way, Zemeckis was talking to MTV because of course, he is doing publicity for his version of “A Christmas Carol,” starring Jim Carrey (or the motion-capture Carrey), which opens this week. Which is way too early for a Christmas movie for me.