After the unpleasantness that was You, Me and Dupree, Anthony and Joe Russo are looking to explore a different kind of darkness -- the gritty and corrupt city of Ciudad del Este. According to Variety, they're set to direct Ciudad, which will be based on a graphic novel they're writing for Oni Press.

The story will follow a battered hostage negotiator, who travels to Paraguay and the above mentioned city to rescue a kidnap victim. They've been researching the story for years, traveling to crime-infested cities across the world to flesh it out more. Ciudad del Este is next on the travel agenda, a city labeled by the U.S. government as "a threat to national security" that shelters terrorists, drug runners, and all manner of scary people. So stay safe, you two.

The brothers are said to be aiming for a return to their indie roots with this one -- they were formerly behind Pieces, and the seedy George Clooney outing Welcome to Collinwood. (That's a bit of a lost film, isn't it? Weren't those the days when people were still screaming he should have stayed on ER? How things change.) I wish I could say more, but the graphic novel won't be out until 2009, and there's nary a preview on Oni's website. All we can do at this point is give them props for their research, wonder if George Clooney liked them enough to play the weary hostage negotiator, and make glib comparisons to Proof of Life or even Man on Fire.

We all know that David Fincher is an uncompromising director (and why shouldn't he be? The guy is one of the best working today). But, even if you don't like the man, you have to admire someone who is truly willing to put his money where his mouth is. In an interview unearthed by The Playlist, Heavy Metal publisher (and Fincher's collaborator on the Metal reboot), Kevin Eastman, confirmed that the reason for the project's move from Paramount to Sony was not because of problems with the sex and violence (as earlier reported), but because of another film altogether. When Metal first jumped studios, there was speculation that Fincher was having trouble getting the green light because of Metal's risqué subject matter. But, it wasn't Metal they were fighting about, it was Fincher's upcoming fantasy tale, The Curious Case of Benjamin Button.

According to Eastman, "We developed it [Heavy Metal] for Paramount in January... And it was time for them to make a decision [about going forward with the project] and they were at odds with Fincher over another project, 'The Curious Case of Benjamin Button,' [because] they wanted him to reduce the running time... and so they said, 'Until you step up to do what we want you to do with Benjamin, we're not going to green light any other of [your] movies.' And David said, 'Fine, f**k you, I'm going to set up [Heavy Metal] somewhere else,' so we jumped over to Sony and set it up there." You can't help but wonder what Paramount was thinking? Maybe the likely answer is that they were not prepared for Fincher to call their bluff.

After the jump ... guess who's directing Heavy Metal???

Despite being seemingly obligated by demographic alone to enjoy it, I didn't particularly care for Michael Bay's Transformers, even after a recent second look on the small screen. Regardless, the people have spoken with their wallets, and Transformers 2: Revenge of the Ka-Ching is well underway for its release next summer.

Embedded above is the first of several behind-the-scenes videos that Wal-Mart will be providing in the coming months, and right from the get-go, the visionary Bay talks about not only making a sequel that'll make kids' dreams, but also sticking his custom-made Nikes up the collective ass of his crew. Watch as "Bay-os" and "Bay-hem" ensue in Bethlehem, PA, with fast bikes, nice cars, and big booms...

Heck, just about the only thing missing from this two-minute taste is some sweet hand-injury action.

New York City's Film Forum will be screening both The Godfather and The Godfather Part II during a special three week engagement beginning September 12. And yes, it's a big deal. The first two installments of Francis Ford Coppola's trilogy are often featured in repertory houses, sure, but Film Forum's presentation is of newly restored 35mm prints, which were produced under the direction of Coppola and cinematographer Gordon Willis and the supervision of film historian and master preservationist Robert A. Harris. The Godfather will run solo from September 12 through September 18, then The Goffather Part II will run solo from September 19 through September 25, and finally, back-to-back screenings will be featured from September 26 through October 2 (the double feature does, unfortunately, require separate admissions). As far as I can tell, neither of these digitally restored classics includes new computer-generated characters or backgrounds, and obviously the guns are likely to still be guns rather than walkie talkies.

If you can't make it to NYC for any of these shows, Paramount is apparently also releasing the restored films in other select cities, including Los Angeles and San Francisco. Or, you can check out the new versions as part of "The Godfather, the Coppola Restoration collection," which also includes a remastered Godfather Part III, on DVD or Blu-Ray beginning September 26 23 (the DVDs may be purchased in a 5-disc box set, which includes two discs of special features, or separately, in case you like to forget about Part III; the Blu-Ray versions seem to be only offered together in a 4-disc set).

In the absence of anything official from the land of J.J. Abrams' Star Trek, we must report on the tiniest tidbit we can. The latest "scoop" comes from E! Online and the mouth of Clifton Collins Jr., who plays Ayel the Romulan.

"Me and Eric [Bana] are the new Romulans," Collins said. "They had a linguist come in and invent Romulan!" Does that mean that Bana's Nero is a Romulan? There was much Trekkie buzz over Nero's funky ears on the first character posters, as well as writer Alex Kurtzman's explanation of them to UGO: "Nero isn't necessarily a Romulan ... It's all part of the plot." Perhaps "new" Romulans fall into that "not necessarily" category?

You will ponder more than that, thanks to Collins' description of what these new Romulans look like -- they may actually be inspired by Pirates of the Caribbean. "We're space pirates," Collins explained. "Think of Johnny Depp as a Romulan." That means eyeliner, doesn't it? Gobs and gobs of black eyeliner, the key accessory of all swashbucklers. No, in all fairness, E! is probably just stretching the quote a bit -- but it does explain the wicked tattoo Nero is sporting.

There will also be some surprise cameos in Trek, Collins wouldn't say who, but he dropped a hint. "There are certain things that as kids growing up, whether it's Star Trek or other shows at the time, all you got to do is really just hear their voice and your heart warms." Will the heart-warming voices belong to characters or actors from the original series? "Maybe." And that's all the news from the land of Trek, readers. Now it's time to amuse yourselves by trying to guess who the thrilling cameos could be! By the time we narrow it down, we may have an actual still or (gasp!) a trailer to discuss. Hey, a girl can hope.

Star Trek opens May 8th, 2009. Many, many, tiny stories from now.

As is usually the case when people and groups make a lot of noise over a film's perceived offensiveness, I suspect all the ruckus over a planned boycott of Tropic Thunder over its perceived treatment of people with mental disabilities has only served to give it additional publicity. Nonetheless, organizations such as The Arc are going ahead with plans to call for a boycott of the film. Slate has found the organization's instruction sheet for putting together protests of Tropic Thunder, a six-page bulletin suggesting techniques and talking points for mentally disabled self-advocates and supporters. Sample talking point: "Movies and media, like the movie Tropic Thunder, encourage disrespect of people with intellectual disabilities. We want that to stop!"

The whole thing is an interesting read. Ordinarily I'd say they haven't seen the film, but the organization claims that its leaders have had a chance to watch it and have concluded that "the film's depiction of people with intellectual disabilities is derogatory and demeaning." In that case, they've missed the point spectacularly. As others have argued, the film targets not the mentally disabled but Hollywood's infantile treatment of same. Simple Jack is a clever, incisive parody. And I say that as someone who thinks Tropic Thunder as a whole is pretty weak.

Whether or not you're offended by the use of the word "retard" in Tropic Thunder, it's hard to deny the difference between the intention of the humor and the ire of the groups protesting it. When Ben Stiller's character, Tugg Speedman, learns that he was mistaken in going "full-retard" with his miscalculated awards-bid performance as a mentally challenged man in Simple Jack, you either laugh or you don't, but you definitely get it. Stiller's point is that self-important actors often take crass or poorly formulated roles on the basis of subject matter simply so they can get a chance at the podium. At no point are we forced to laugh at a character meant to be taken as actually retarded; instead, we only get Tugg Speedman's really bad, really offensive interpretation of one.

At his Scanners blog, Jim Emerson gets this point, and smartly rails against complainers like the Special Olympics for making such a big deal out of a scene before even coming to terms with its purpose. He also brings up a brilliant historical parallel: In 1977, Randy Newman's single "Short People" was pulled from the air because it supposedly offended, uh, short people. "If you do satire or parody, you have to expect there will always be fools who will take it literally," writes Emerson. "Those people are called 'literalists.' And there ought to be a law against them."

It's hard to deny that, in any format, The Dark Knight has made a considerable impression on the moviegoing landscape (current gross: a bajillion dollars and counting), yet it's equally difficult to deny that the IMAX showings held their own potent appeal, thanks to director Christopher Nolan's use of proper cameras to help the action fill the screen -- and if any of you haven't noticed, that's a lot of screen to fill.

ComingSoon.net has confirmed that next summer's Night at the Museum and Transformers sequels will be showcased in IMAX, while it remains rumored that this fall's Eagle Eye and next spring's Watchmen will be as well. Now, while Paramount/Dreamworks and Warner Brothers have often been equally eager to offer up super-sized blockbusters in the format, I'm curious to know if audiences have subsequently raised their expectations for this fare. For me, the nearest location is well across town, and before The Dark Knight, the last thing I bothered to catch there was Beowulf in 3-D. (I can, however, attest that announced plans to format several theaters in the AMC chain for the IMAX experience are indeed underway a wee bit closer to my neck of the woods.)

So, without the draw of IMAX in its full effect, or even the likes of 3-D technology, do you find it any more worthwhile to go out of your way and catch an anticipated film at your nearest location, or will it take something truly special from here on out?

Tropic Thunder, starring Ben Stiller as one of a group of runaway actors whose work on a big-budget Vietnam epic goes horribly awry, is a funny, far-fetched mockery of modern Hollywood; the laughs don't maintain anything like a coherent intensity, but when they come, they're big enough to get you through the spaces between them. Some will mistakenly call Tropic Thunder a satire, but Tropic Thunder is in fact an example of satire's boisterous, bumbling sibling, the spoof. A satire's held with a light but precise grip, so the point can slice and the blade can cut; a spoof's more of a club, landing with blunt force and broad impact.

Star and director Stiller attacked the celebrity-industrial complex before, in 2001's Zoolander, and Tropic Thunder has more in common with that film than you might think; Stiller manages to mock action and thrills while also delivering them, and he's got a fine grasp of coarse celebrity behavior. Stiller seems drawn to characters whose self-centered arrogance is mixed in equal measure with self-loathing insecurity. We see an interview clip where Stiller's character, box office star Tugg Speedman, is informed by an interviewer how "Someone close to you said 'One more flop and it's over for him.'" Speedman pauses, and then asks his follow-up: "Somebody said they were close to me?"

Too much merchandising can saturate the classiness of a film, but I still think any actor who has played an iconic character should stick with that role through and through. Decades ago I was down for any movie star reprising a role for an animated spin-off (Mary Steenburgen, you're constantly giving me reasons to love you), and today I support anybody who follows his or her character to the world of video games. So, regardless of whether or not Francis Ford Coppola approves, kudos to Robert Duvall for being involved with Electronic Arts' upcoming game version of The Godfather II.

While other actors from the Godfather sequel have at least allowed their likenesses to be represented, just as they had with The Godfather: The Game before, Duvall's role in the game is more significant. Variety reports that his character, Tom Hagen, features prominently as an adviser to the player, and Duvall is recording new voiceover dialogue for this purpose. As with the first game, Al Pacino has chosen to not be involved (he's obviously holding out for that Scent of a Woman game to mark his video game voice work debut).