If you’re not so thrilled with the peeks of Hilary Swank as Amelia Earhart, or her collection of more recent comedic fare, read on — the Oscar-winning actress is taking another trip into the realm of the serious. Variety reports that Swank is going to star in a new film called Betty Anne Waters.

Based on a true story, Swank gets to be a high school dropout who is convinced that her brother has been wrongfully convicted of murder. Rather than just whipping up buzz for her family member, she decides to take action. “In between raising kids and waiting tables, she worked her way through college and law school so she could represent her brother after he’d used up his attempts to appeal his conviction through public defenders.” That’s certainly one way to help!

While Swank’s more recent interests haven’t proved all that exciting, this project is sounding pretty intriguing. Added bonus: Tony Goldwyn, who’s been busy lately directing TV episodes for shows like The L Word and Dexter, is directing the film. In fact, he’s been working to get this made ever since the real story wrapped up in 2001 (on, of all days, September 11). At one point, Naomi Watts was attached, but now we get Swank.

Could this bring the actress Oscar #3?

source

Wait, stop — don’t throw yourself out that window just yet! It may or may not be as bad as it looks/sounds. According to Slashfilm, one of their readers attended a Q&A session with one of the writers of Eagle Eye, which was hosted by Creative Screenwriting magazine. During said Q&A, the writer, Travis Wright, said that he and his partner John Glenn were working through “various treatments for a Blade Runner sequel over the last couple years.” Apparently, they’ve been working alongside Blade Runner co-executive producer Bud Yorkin, and all of this has been done outside the studio system — meaning this is in no way a done deal, only that these writers are trying to put together their best package in the hopes a studio will bite.

As of right now, Ridley Scott is nowhere near the project (although both guys are working on a Warriors remake for Tony Scott), and given the somewhat negative reaction to Eagle Eye, I imagine most fans will take a similar approach. In my opinion, Blade Runner is a film you don’t touch and you don’t sequel-ize, but perhaps I’m in the minority. Maybe there’s a very cool way of doing it — maybe I’m wrong, and maybe this is a project fans can get behind. What do you think? Blade Runner 2? Could it happen? Would you watch it?

Update: Eagle Eye co-writer John Glenn responded via email to this. Here’s part of what he said: “There was a point where Travis and I were working with Bud Yorkin on a sequel to Blade Runner, but that was years back. It never got too far off the ground because the movie is so perfect, so the more we thought about it, the more uneasy we became with the idea. Anyway, just an note to clear the air.” More over at Slashfilm.

source

Happy New Year to all my brothers and sisters. May 5769 kick a whole lot more ass than 5768. While over 98% of Hollywood takes the day off, here’s what’s happening:

Variety reports that Michael Bay has taken a page from Christopher Nolan and will shoot “at least three action set pieces” using IMAX cameras during Transformers: Revenge of the Fallen. Usually I’d reserve this spot for a Bay joke, but I truly think this is a great thing for a film like Transformers. The action scenes in the last one felt claustrophobic (especially toward the end), and so utilizing IMAX would allow Bay and Co. to open it up and really have fun with the thing. Visually, this could add a lot to the film. Hopefully they’ll use it for some massive robot battle. Other films also mentioned in the article as possible contenders for a similar IMAX approach include Iron Man 2 and Y: The Last Man.

Looks like the old gang is making a play for Spider-Man 4 (and 5?), as Kirsten Dunst told MTV that she’s “in” when asked whether she’d be returning to the mega-franchise as Peter Parker’s old lady, Mary Jane. However, she did follow that up with “I’m not saying anything. I know there’s rumors …” — which, in actor-speak, means “We’re still negotiating and I’m not really allowed to open my big mouth.” I’d expect a big announcement soon stating the return of Sam Raimi, Tobey Maguire and Kirsten Dunst for a back-to-back shoot of Spider-Man 4 and 5.

Thomas Dekker (aka that dude who stars in Terminator: The Sarah Connor Chronicles) is in talks to snag a lead role in MGM’s remake of Fame, so says The Hollywood Reporter. The original 1980 film, which was nominated for six Oscars, follows several aspiring young performers and teachers at the prestigious New York Academy of Performing Arts. Considering the times we live in, I envision this update to feel like a mix between Step Up, You Got Served and American Idol: The Movie.

Much more after the jump … Next >>

In Religulous, stand-up social commentator Bill Maher doesn’t just assert how he believes in one less god than many of us, and he doesn’t just craft bold, bizarre and hilarious moments of comedy and discussion with the help of director Larry Charles (Borat). More importantly, and more intriguingly, Maher states the film’s thesis in an introduction filmed at Megiddo, the prophesied location of the final battle of Armageddon as written in Revelation; Maher, much like author Sam Harris does in his excellent (if dry) book The End of Faith, proposes that religious belief, in an age of chemical, biological and nuclear weapons, actively endangers humanity through encouraging conflict, promising rewards for irrational behavior, justifying artificial divisions and enabling other unfounded and unkind forms of thinking. Or, as Maher succinctly puts it early on, “When Revelations was written, only God had the power to destroy the world. …”

And then the opening titles kick in, a montage of Maher globe-trotting in search of people to talk to, and as the guitar riffs of The Who’s “The Seeker” ring out, we recognize that we’re going to get plenty of sizzle along with the steak in Religulous, lots of showbusiness to liven up the soul-searching. Like most documentaries dealing with weighty matters, though, the concern in Religulous isn’t that there’ll be no sizzle with the steak but rather if there’ll be steak to go with the sizzle; does Religulous have the right ratio of factual points to funny punch lines, a balanced mix of context and comedy? Next>>