Cinematical

Tim Burton has cast the title role in the new adaptation of Alice in Wonderland he's working on for Disney. It is not, as was rumored a couple weeks ago, Ryan Nikole Parker, but it's not anyone more well-known, either. The role has gone to Australian actress Mia Wasikowska -- and holy crap, I have nothing but respect for anyone who can break into Hollywood and retain a name like Mia Wasikowska. Up until now, her only high-profile credits have been as a regular on HBO's In Treatment and in the much-hyped but little-seen killer crocodile flick Rogue. But the 18-year-old has parts in the upcoming Defiance (Edward Zwick's latest pitch to AMPAS) and the Earhart biopic Amelia, so she should be recognizable by the time Alice in Wonderland surfaces.

The film will be a combination of live-action and motion-capture animation, and will be released in digital 3-D -- but what big new movie won't be, these days? It was written by Linda Woolverton, who worked on The Lion King, and it starts shooting in November for a 2010 release.

I'm as big a Tim Burton devotee as you'll find (don't believe me? Find me one other person who will admit to liking the Planet of the Apes remake), so I'll gladly swoon over a Burton version of the Lewis Carroll classic. In fact, this is such an on-the-nose project for Burton that I'm kind of surprised it took him this long to get to it. But I'll take it.

Robert Zemeckis's Beowulf took a lot of hits for its perceived silliness, a verdict I could never quite sign on to. First of all, silly compared to what? Have these people seen the 1999 space opera Beowulf starring Christopher Lambert? Compared to that, Zemeckis's Beowulf is a sober meditation on the human condition. Have they seen the Gerard Butler clunker Beowulf and Grendel? Come on, guys: considering what the movies have done to this story in the past, last year's high-tech effort seems like serious business to me.

What about the source material – the ancient Old English epic poem upon which these movies purport to be based? If you've ever read it (or tried to read it), the perversions of the adaptations shouldn't surprise you. It's both begging for action movie treatment and impossible to faithfully adapt into anything resembling a compelling action movie. The story is credited with generating many of the archetypes we see in our fiction, and indeed, it's so archetypical that by modern standards, it's a skeleton; there's nothing there.

Seriously – you know how people complain about movies whose plots can be fully described in one sentence? A faithful Beowulf would take this phenomenon to new heights. A synopsis would read something like this: Beowulf beats up Grendel, Grendel's mom, and a dragon, and dies. The end. Some complained that the Zemeckis version distorted Beowulf, but I'd have liked to see their reaction to an undistorted adaptation. Trust me, it wouldn't work. There's a reason that all these screenwriters have scrambled to add elements to the story.

I think Scott Weinberg's getting set for Comic-Con as I write this, so I'll briefly fill in on the gorehound beat. Mirrors director Alexandre Aja has released what he calls "a new tasty visual from one of my favorite scenes" in the film. Per Aja's penchant for extravagant gross-outs, the picture is -- how do you say? -- aggressive. I'm putting it under the jump. It's gruesome -- watch out.

It's also -- and some of you may petition to have me committed for this -- strangely beautiful, albeit in a way only a horror freak could love. Unlike, say, the work of Eli Roth, who's like a giddy kid in a candy store when it comes to gore, Aja's imagery has been kind of artful in its grandiosity. Of the Splat Pack membership, I think he's the most concerned with the egghead aspects of horror movie aesthetics: shot composition, the color palette, symmetry, etc. That's a large part of the reason I'm looking forward to Mirrors, which otherwise looks pretty standard-issue. A truly great-looking horror film might be able to get away with not having much of a concept.

Anyway, Aja will be at Comic-Con promoting Mirrors, and I'm sure Scott, Eric or Elisabeth will have something for you from there. Meanwhile, click through for the photo -- if you dare. Not Safe for Work.

At least not any time soon. That's from this article in The Independent, which quotes author Phillip Pullman as saying that following the disappointing box office returns for The Golden Compass, no one has talked to him about adapting The Amber Spyglass (or, obviously, The Subtle Knife). Director Chris Weitz, who had been determined to make a sequel happen, is staying mum, as is New Line, now part of Warner Bros. At this point, the age of star Dakota Blue Richards -- already 14 -- is going to be a problem for any big plans to continue the franchise.

The Independent article is a little annoying, since it insists on blaming (crediting?) the Christian protests against The Golden Compass for the film's commercial failure in the US. That seems a little facile, though even Pullman seems to believe it. The source material didn't turn out to be much of a brand name, the marketing was a bit generic, and I think the movie just never caught on as a must-see holiday blockbuster. I'm not sure the protests had that much pull.

No regrets here, since I think the first film was a bit generic, not doing justice to the book. Though I guess now I really wish Weitz hadn't decided to move the first book's ending to the then-envisioned sequel. Oh well.

At first blush, this has all the marks of the sort of tepid, respectful, boring prestige picture that's normally a huge turn-off. Director Gary Ross (Pleasantville, Seabiscuit) will reteam with Tobey Maguire for The Crusaders, a film about the lawyers who litigated the landmark 1954 Supreme Court case Brown v. Board of Education (of Topeka, but who keeps track?). That, of course, was when the Court unanimously held that racial segregation in public schools was unconstitutional.

Maguire will play idealistic young lawyer Jack Greenberg, who teamed with the NAACP Legal Defense Fund and future Supreme Court justice Thurgood Marshall (Terrence Howard was rumored for that role, but that seems to have gone away) to fight the segregationists. This project has been kicking around for a while, and Topher Grace was previously attached to star in what is now Maguire's role.

Ross and Maguire's Seabiscuit, which I thought was precisely the sort of unimaginative, tediously reverent historical Oscar-bait that the Academy loves but anyone with any taste can't stand, bored the pants off me. This sounds like a similar sort of project -- though on the other hand, having spent significant time venerating Brown v. Board in law school, I'm curious to see what Hollywood will do with this story. Sort of in the same way a geologist might be fascinated with The Core, y'know?

Not to be a snake in everyone's boot, but the all-time opening weekend record is not in the bag for The Dark Knight just yet. The $155.3 million weekend estimate is just that -- a studio estimate -- and when the final numbers come out later this afternoon, Spider-Man 3's $151.1 million may still be on top of the heap. So everyone should chill for a few more hours.

Still -- $150 million! In one weekend! For a movie that's dark and scary and complicated and dead serious! That's pretty amazing, though my hopes for this wonderful film's box office staying power were dampened somewhat when I saw it a second time yesterday and heard the banter of the couple next to me, which consisted of statements like "Do you know what's going on? I don't know what's going on," and "I don't even understand who the bad guy is." (?!??) I guess you can't please everyone.

Anyway. $150 million +. First person to call it a disappointment because it's not the world's first $200 million opening weekend gets a kick in the crotch.

The weekend's counterprogramming saw mixed results. Mamma Mia!'s $27.6 million is an undeniable victory, though I think the market was begging for something not action- or family-oriented. I'm not sure what to say about Space Chimps' $7.4 million, seventh-place bow. I don't think anyone could have expected much more from a movie called Space Chimps.

The Dark Knight did a number on the superhero-themed holdovers, kicking Hellboy II down to the tune of 71%, and Hancock a somewhat gentler 57%. Hancock should see $200 million by the end of the week; Hellboy II probably won't get to $70 million domestic, though it should beat its predecessor's $60 million take.

The full top 10 estimates after the jump.

Why, an enormous Austrian bodybuilder. Obviously. Did you have to ask? What's wrong with you?

More specifically, it's Roland Kickinger, a really big dude who actually played a young Schwarzenegger in the 2005 TV movie biopic See Arnold Run. He's guest-starred on a slew of sitcoms, and had a part in Lethal Weapon 4. He will also play the Hulk in the anxiously awaited (by which I mean dreaded) parody Disaster Movie this Labor Day.

Kickinger will take over Schwarzenegger's T-800 character, an early model cyborg that was sent back in time in all three Terminator films -- first as the villain and then as a hero after being reprogrammed by the resistance. In the latter two films, he bonded with his human charges and sort of became the heart of the franchise, as well as its comic relief. It was definitely Schwarzenegger's greatest achievement as an actor, such as it was. I doubt they'll be trying to recreate that in Salvation, not least because the characters encounter the robot 20 years before the events of the earlier films. (Damn time travel.)

Some slightly spoilerish quotes from the Clinton News-Record article announcing Kickinger's involvement, after the jump.

The poster for How to Lose Friends and Alienate People uses that horrible big red font you're no doubt familiar with -- that ubiquitous "goofy family comedy" lettering suggesting that it features Eddie Murphy in a fat suit and is terrible. God knows why. The movie stars Simon Pegg, not Eddie Murphy, and -- not surprisingly -- looks pretty funny. I actually didn't go nuts over Shaun of the Dead and Hot Fuzz, though I liked both a lot; on the other hand, I also enjoyed Run Fatboy Run, which seemed to leave most people cold. Maybe the answer is that I think Pegg is the genius and not (necessarily) Edgar Wright.

Friends, based on Toby Young's memoir about being a British nobody who finds himself among New York's high society, working at a prestigious magazine, is another Wright-less Simon Pegg affair. Most of the laughs in the new trailer, which you can watch at the top of this post (it's considerably longer and better than the British teaser from a while ago), come courtesy of Pegg's unassuming physical comedy; I love that he never forces it or tries too hard, so that the slapstick seems to be a natural part of whatever character he's playing. The little dance he does about 40 seconds in might justify the film's existence all on its own. And I like that the dog gag at the end doesn't go quite where you'd expect.

The movie also stars Kirsten Dunst, Jeff Bridges, Danny Huston, Gillian Anderson, and Megan Fox (probably not naked the whole time). It's supposed to come out October 3rd.

Sometimes a movie's concept tells you everything you need to know about it. Other times you hear one and go "well, that's kind of weird -- I wonder what they'll make of this." Surprisingly, Will Ferrell's latest project fits into the latter category. It's a dramedy called Two Face, written by X-Files vet Vince Gilligan, who also had a hand in the Hancock screenplay. The pitch: Ferrell will play a virulent racist who develops a split personality after an accident, and his alter ego turns out to be a bleeding-heart liberal.

I think the success of this concept depends on how frankly they're willing to approach the racism angle. Obviously there are certain things you're not supposed to say even in unflattering portrayals of racist characters, and certain things that Will Ferrell probably doesn't want to say for the sake of his career. (Side note: I find it a bit curious that period movies can get away with patently offensive displays of racism while movies set in the present tend to shy away, as if we're all pretending that we've solved the racism problem. Any counterexamples? Monster's Ball, maybe.) There's a lot of potential for trenchant satire in something like this, and a lot of potential to make something anodyne and boring, too.

No word on what comes first, this or Sherlock Holmes.

I think that everyone who loves Michael Cera's comedy – and that should be practically everyone – is a little worried about Michael Cera. Because even as Arrested Development becomes legend, Superbad wins over every twentysomething in sight, and Juno charms the pants off the entire nation, the hushed, often unspoken question is: how long can he milk this? Cera's shtick is killer, but it's also ultra-specific – he's the shy, unprepossessing, painfully awkward adolescent, a nice guy who's self-aware enough to get embarrassed but not confident enough to avoid it.

Cera is so good at playing this part in a way that's both touching and hysterical that it's propelled him to stardom. For me to say that I haven't enjoyed any of the incarnations of George Michael Bluth that he's given us over the past couple years would be a bald-faced lie. Indeed, I think the character he's crafted is one of the most impressive comic achievements of my adult lifetime. But even as I relish it, I start to fidget, because I can sense exasperation and annoyance threatening from just around the bend. Oh, maybe not mine – I could watch Cera do this forever, I tell myself – but certainly other people will soon lose patience and turn on the guy. One-trick pony, they'll yell. Do something else.