• Each year, surveying Oscar's Best Actress pool sets off a bout of hand wringing over the absence of serious parts for serious female actresses, but this year the low may actually be below the bottom of the pool. After a very short list of sure things (Meryl, Carey Mulligan in An Education and Gabourey Sidibe for Precious) the field becomes a wide open wasteland with almost no true attention getting roles leaping out. It's gotten so bad, writes the Hollywood Reporter, that "some are talking about Sandra Bullock." [Hollywood Reporter]

• As if answering the question raised by the item above...On the strength of 2012, This Is It, Angels and Demons and Terminator:Salvation Sony Pictures is having its best year at the international box office in its history with grosses currently at $1.63 billion. Fox, however, holds the international top slot this year with $1.79 billion in receipts and counting [Variety]

•Kent Alterman will be your next man to blame for why Comedy Central isn't funnier. The former New Line exec was named head of programming for the network. [Variety]

• The first plug pulled at the new Less Is Less Miramax — Richard Linklater's Liars (A To E), a romantic comedy that was to have starred Kat Dennings and Rebecca Hall. [Movieline]

• Disney has put in dry dock/beached/torpedoed/depth charged/recalled to submarine base/(insert your preferred nautical analogy here) a remake of 20,000 Leagues Under the Sea set to be helmed by McG. Cheated of his chance to ruin the submarine genre forever, the great director will instead focus his attentions on the thriller Dead Spy Running. [Variety]

• As long as there are film studios, there will be some executive who will have the bright idea to let Robin Williams star in yet another surefire failure of a comedy. Anna Faris is currently in talks to play Williams' daughter in Wedding Banned for Touchstone. [Hollywood Reporter]

• MTV has acquired the exclusive rights to air This Is It, the Michael Jackson concert rehearsal documentary. [Hollywood Reporter]

• The Wrap reports that Project Runway's move to Lifetime has not quite worked out as Harvey Weinstein and company expected. After a very strong debut, ratings have fallen off more than 20 percent. Worse for Lifetime, having the show on its network, for which it paid a hefty price, has done little for its overall ratings picture. In fact, Lifetime's ratings in the critical 18 - 49 female demo are off 13 percent from last year. On the other hand, after losing its signature show, Bravo's ratings are up this year by 5 percent in the 18- 49 demo, and it had its "best ratings quarter ever this summer." So who is auf now Frau Klum? [The Wrap]

• Anthony Hopkins has signed on to play Thor's dad Odin in the Marvel film adaptation of its comic book series. Chris Hemsworth will star as the thunder god, while Natalie Portman will take on the thankless love interest role. Kenneth Branagh is, amazingly, directing. [Variety]

• And the new Mad Max will be...Charlize Theron. Little is known about the working script, but the Oscar winner will apparently be the front woman in director George Miller's reboot of the classic series. [Variety]

• Sethe MacFarlane's American Dad has been renewed for a sixth season. [Hollywood Reporter]

• Sony reported its fourth straight quarter of losses, although the hurt this past quarter was not as bad as analysts had predicted. The company saw sales fall off another 20 percent overall. The motion picture division saw a "30.4% year-on drop in sales — or 20% on a U.S. dollar basis. But as the NY Times reminded us this weekend, what matters is that Michael and Amy really really like each other. [Variety]

• Tensions flared at the wrap of the theater owner's ShowEast conference over the taking forever rollout of digital technology. The Hollywood Reporter reported, "it sounded more like a threat than a promise when University Mall Theatres' Mark O'Meara kicked off one d-cinema presentation by declaring, 'Digital cinema is here to stay.'" [Hollywood Reporter]

• Prepare yourself for Fish Hooks. The first new animated show to be greenlit by the Disney Channel in three years will soon be tormenting your dreams as it is forced down grown-up America's throats by a nation of over-hyped children. [Hollywood Reporter}

Every new messaging has brought studio complaints about how they're being killed with "word of mouth." Before Twitter, it was text messaging, Facebook, MySpace, "the web," email and, for all we know, AOL, television, FM radio, the telegraph and the passenger pigeon, which prevented hucksters from getting people to hand over money for what they think will be a good show, but really isn't.

So, here's the latest incarnation: Did you tweet about your disappointment in a movie, like Bruno? Did all your friends tweet back in agreement?

According to social media specialists, Universal is mad at you for driving away 73% percent of Bruno's ticket sales! When movie-goers take to their micro-blogging sites and hurl instant critiques at helpless studios, all their marketing machinery is rendered impotent. Some of this summer's alleged victims have included Bruno, Land of the Lost, and Year One.

After mega advertising campaigns, months of free publicity from hungry media outlets (and web sites looking for cheap content!), specialists hired to create Facebook fan pages and Twitter feeds, people insist on slagging summer movies on Twitter. Like, all Sascha and Universal wanted to do was expose the ugliness that lives in your heart through various stunts involving dildos and terrorists. Then you had to go off and mean about it. What's a matter with you?!

So how have the studios tried to harness the awe-striking a wrathful power of Twitter? Here's an example:

With Year One, Sony at first tried to get in on the action and created a promotional Year One twitter account that would cull all the posts tagged with "#yearone. Sad for Sony, though, most of those tags were attached to disparaging statements. So they tried to pivot and create their own Year One twitter meme!

But no amount of tweet co-opting could save the floundering flick (full disclosure, I have a soft spot for Biblical comedies that have fantastic Oliver Platt cameos, so I dug it — you're welcome, Sony!) But let's be honest here, Studios. Just between you and me, nobody else is listening right now: you really didn't expect that many people to go continue to see a shitty movie after it opened, right? You must have known that eventually people would talk. They'd tell other people how little they liked Will Ferrell screaming at the sky. Again. And though the time between seeing said shitty movie and then telling your buddies about how shitty the movie maybe has shortened thanks to twitter, you must have known from the beginning that you were pushing a shitty product.

So really there's only one way to combat the Twitter effect: Stop making shitty movies.

P.S. I really laughed during Land of the Lost! Sorry no one else did, Universal!

First, let's briefly recap what we and others have reported so far: The film was set to begin shooting last week. Five days before the start of shooting, director Steven Soderbergh turned in a rewrite of the original script, which was written by Steven Zaillian, that Sony executives, led by co-Chairman Amy Pascal, did not like. The studio felt that Soderbergh, who was insistent that every event in the film had to have taken place in real life, was taking the film in an "artsy" direction that they weren't willing to gamble $58-million dollars on, so they killed it. That's the short version of events according to Amy Pascal anyway.

Since then a few more details about the project emerged. Movieline and Deadspin provided some new information in reports of their own, and today the New York Times has an article that sheds some light on Soderbergh's zeal for authenticity.

One reason was to win the approval of Major League Baseball, which was not happy with some factual liberties in Mr. Zaillian's version. Such approval is crucial in a baseball film that intends to use protected trademarks.

"Typically, on a film like this, we look at it for historical accuracy," said Matthew Bourne, a vice president of Major League Baseball for public relations. "We've been in touch with Soderbergh and Sony, and they've been receptive to our requests."

What baseball saw as accurate, Sony executives saw as being too much a documentary.

All of this brings us to the information provided to us by a tipster who'd been working on the project and has a decidedly different point of view than that of Amy Pascal and Sony.

First and foremost, Soderbergh had been upfront with the direction in which he intended to take the film from the very beginning of his employment. In fact, it was clear to all of us - whether in the Art Department or the Costumes Department, etc. – that Soderbergh intended to use real people to play themselves in the creation of the true story of Moneyball. Additionally, for months Soderbergh had been shooting interviews with real ball players and people from Billy Beane's past, and the studio approved these shoots. How could the studio then at the eleventh hour claim that his approach was a surprise to them? He intended to tell the true story rather than a fictitious version of the story. How innovative.

What exactly is wrong with making a movie accurate? And since when does an authentic film translate as an "art" film? I know numerous people that thought that Soderbergh's approach sounded insightful and interesting and true to the game and what really happened. If baseball lovers and non-baseball lovers alike in my large social network felt this way (not to mention the hundreds of bloggers that were fans of the concept), why couldn't this approach have universal appeal?

Regarding the notion that Sony executives were shocked to discover the direction Soderbergh planned on taking the film:

Soderbergh's script dated June 17, 2009 was not the first script that he handed in to Sony. On June 7th, Soderbergh submitted a draft to the studio with the following note on the first page:

"NOTE: Scenes involving Billy Beane's minor and major league career have been removed from this draft. They will be determined by filmed interviews with scouts, coaches, managers, players and family members who were with him at the time."

Sony executives read this draft. And Sony executives gave Soderbergh their notes. Clearly Amy Pascal did not read this draft – if she had, maybe the drama that began with the June 17th draft could have been avoided.

Another fact: Soderbergh handed in yet another draft dated June 10, 2009 with this note on the first page:

"NOTE: Billy Beane's minor and major league career will be shown via filmed interviews with scouts, coaches, managers, players and family members who were with him at the time. These interviews will comprise approximately ten percent of the film.

"Another ten percent of the film will consist of re-enactments of real events as remembered by the people playing themselves. The purpose of these scenes will be to provide set-up and perspective for subjects, situations, or relationships which currently appear in the screenplay without the requisite/normal amount of context."

Now why in the world was Amy Pascal so shocked (or, rather, "apoplectic" as it was relayed to the production team) when she read the June 17th draft? Could Soderbergh have made his intentions any more clear? Even if these executives did not read beyond PAGE 1, they would have known the direction in which he wanted to take the film – and they should have perhaps reported that to their boss. And maybe, just maybe, if there had been communication with their boss, maybe, just maybe, another avenue could have been taken rather than pulling the plug three days before the film was supposed to start shooting. For instance, maybe they could have delayed principal photography while script/concept issues were resolved.

Our tipster closed with this note:

On the day that Amy Pascal pulled the plug, there were 230 people that were working on Moneyball. Now those 230 people are all out of jobs.

When Soderbergh had to address a stage filled with crew members who were about to lose their jobs, he told us that just as Moneyball was the unorthodox version of building baseball teams, Moneyball the movie was the unorthodox way of making a film. Unfortunately, Amy Pascal does not believe in Moneyball as a concept; otherwise the film would be in its second week of shooting right now.

So there you have it—Another side of the story. All of this is obviously meaningless in the grand scheme of life, not to mention very "inside baseball" (pun intended), but it's so damn fun to talk about. We anxiously await the next bit of backbiting to emerge between the Sony and Soderbergh camps.

Why Did Sony Kill the Pitt/Soderbergh Film Adaptation of Michael Lewis' Moneyball [Previously]
MLB Approval Still Murky as Moneyball Circles the Drain [Movieline]
Money Worries Kill A-List Film at Last Minute [New York Times]
Soderbergh's Moneyball Script Too Real to Get Made [Deadspin]
pic via Vulture

Rumors have been swirling since Variety first reported last week that Soderbergh's vision for the film differed dramatically from the vision studio executives had for the film, but up to this point no one associated with the project has been willing to speak on the record about it.

But yesterday Sony's Amy Pascal, the studio executive in charge of the film, spoke to the LA Times' Patrick Goldstein. According to Pascal, what it all boiled down to was essentially simple—The studio loved screenwriter Steven Zaillian's original adaptation of Lewis' book, while Soderbergh felt the script lacked authenticity and rewrote it himself, making radical changes that Pascal and the studio weren't willing to gamble on, fearful that Soderbergh would turn it into an "artsy" film like Solaris or Schizopolis, especially when baseball movies traditionally don't do well at the box office outside of the United States. Soderbergh was insistent that everything in the movie had to have happened in real life.

Reports Goldstein:

Some changes to Zaillian's script were subtle, others were dramatic. At one point, Beane signs Scott Hatteberg, a journeyman catcher with a bad arm whom Bean can get for peanuts and turn into a first baseman. Beane loves Hatteberg's ability to get on base, but his staff is appalled — he just can't turn anyone into a slick-fielding first baseman overnight. In Zaillian's script, one of the coaches watches Hatteberg taking ground balls at a Little League field, his wife armed with a plastic laundry basket full of baseballs. She hits the balls to her husband off a tee, with their 4-year-old daughter backing him up down the line. One ball takes a bad hop and goes between Hatteberg's legs. When his daughter scoops it up, the coach quips: "Maybe we should sign her."

Soderbergh cut out the joke because it was the screenwriter's invention — the coach had never actually said it. He also cut out a scene where Beane gives a tongue-lashing to Jason Giambi, one of his departing free agents, again because it didn't actually happen. Zaillian's script was anchored by on-screen monologues by Bill James, the oddball guru of modern-day baseball statistics (who today works in the Boston Red Sox front office). James functioned as a Greek chorus for the film, offering wry, Yoda-like explanations about the complexity of the game.

Zaillian's deft renditions of James' maxims were funny and always to the point, allowing the audience the opportunity to see inside the game. In one monologue, James says: "If you score three runs and the other team scores four, you can be inspired as all hell but you still lost. The numbers represent the ineluctable sum of victories and defeats, and that cannot be made one iota larger or smaller than it is by PR campaigns, personal animosities or any of the greater and lesser forms of B.S." But in Soderbergh's draft, the James material had all vanished, presumably to be replaced by interviews with Beane's real-life associates.

At a "summit" held after Soderbergh turned in his draft of the script, he reportedly pleaded "trust me" to the Sony executives, who were obviously unwilling to do so. Besides Pitt, the film was also set to star comedian Demetri Martin as well as former ballplayers Darryl Strawberry, Mookie Wilson, David Justice and Lenny Dykstra, but Soderbergh's unrelenting zeal for authenticity proved to be the project's demise.

Bob Costas would be proud.

As for Michael Lewis, he seems unfazed by the developments with the film version of his book, telling MSNBC recently, "I don't understand why they bought it for a movie in the first place."

Sony's Amy Pascal Speaks Out About Moneyball [LA Times]
Image via Vulture

Now, to the untrained eye this may appear to be that ancient, hibernating specimen called a "conflict of interest." When we called up Steinhauer to ask if she thought it was, she said, "Jamie Lynton [wife of Michael] is one of my oldest friends" and asked semi-rhetorically, "Do I cover the movie beat?"

The Times' Hollywood coverage is run by its culture desk, while Steinhauer answers to the national desk. "I don't have anything to do with the cultural coverage," she said. But that's where her husband, New York Times Hollywood reporter Ed Wyatt works; Steinhauer pointed out that her husband covers TV, not movies, so this shouldn't conflict him.

The image associated with this post is best viewed using a browser.Well! This is one of those cases where only extremely smart people can understand that this is fine. For example, Sony Pictures also makes television shows, which, we've established is what Ed Wyatt, Jennifer Steinhauer's husband, covers. He just wrote a story about Sony Pictures on March 23, in which Michael Lynton was quoted. Maybe it would be better if his wife—who also happens to be the NYT's L.A. bureau chief (we're being repetitive on purpose)—did not allow the head of Sony Pictures to host her book parties?

Of course, the NYT is far more expert in this issue than we are! Bernie Weinraub, their old Hollywood correspondent, is married to Amy Pascal— who heads Sony's movie studio. Before he retired in 2005, he also claimed to only cover television. So they know what they're doing here.

It may be that Sony Pictures executives are so inherently interesting, and honest, that NYT staffers based in LA naturally gravitate towards them. Which, okay then! Anybody can have any friends they want. But you can't have any job you want, always. The Times has already been embarrassed by its staffers' speaking fees this week. Sometimes it's better to have an abundance of caution, rather than no caution.

According to our tipster, who works for one of Sony's Internet service providers, MySpace's security team inadvertently banned Sony employees from accessing its site in the course of going after a spammer:

I just talked to MySpace's head of security and they are lifting the block.

Here's why Sony was blocked. They get their Internet through us. MySpace went after one of our customers for MySpace spamming. We terminated that customer because I hate spammers with a vengence, but then MySpace banned our whole [system]. In essence, MySpace believed we were just a hosting provider and not the actual Internet — i.e. providing transit connectivity where companies go through us to reach other companies.

Oh and it wasn't just Sony... Los Angeles County government along with Orange County government offices use us for transit. So they were also blocked.

We were emailing MySpace for a few days, but they didn't believe we provided anything more than dedicated servers. We believe the only reason MySpace finally unblocked our network was because we sent them a link to your story.

We were scratching our heads as to why MySpace blocked Sony when Sony spends so much money advertising movies and music.

Our tipster speculates: "Revenge for all the crap services that MySpace provided to Sony as a studio? Maybe." There'd be a ha-ha joke about how not being able to log onto MySpace's unusable site is a kindness, except that Hollywood studios, which set up pages for their movies to promote them, actually need to access the site. Here's the memo about the outage:

From: Brian Franke
Sent: Thursday, May 14, 2009 1:32 PM
To: Interactive
Subject: MySpace.com Update

Folks,

Just wanted to let you know that we are looking into the MySpace.com redirect to Google.com issue.

It appears to be on the MySpace end (unexpectedly), and has been escalated to their network team.

No ETA yet on a resolution.

Please contact me if you have time-sensitive MySpace deliverables, and we can discuss options.

Regards,

Brian

—-—-—-—-—-—-—-—-—-—-

Brian Franke

Executive Director of Technology

Sony Pictures Imageworks Interactive

Update: Brian Franke's colleague Nancy Kim, director of digital communications strategy at Sony Pictures Entertainment, sent us this email:

Hi Owen,

Can you please remove this article?

Not sure where you received that information? As Sony is certainly not "banned".

Please feel free to call me if needed.

Thanks!

Nancy

So now Sony has two problems: A ban by MySpace, and a digital communications strategy which seems to involve denying reality.

(Photo by xurble)

Kavanaugh currently has long-term deals to co-finance productions at Sony and Universal, the latter of which funds 75 percent of its offerings (most recently Frost/Nixon and Changeling) with money from Relativity Media. The NYT notes that Relativity has projects in development with DreamWorks, Paramount Vantage and MGM as well, and that Universal is a few signatures away from selling its genre arm Rogue Pictures to Relativity for $150 million. Plus he's in litigation with his lenders at Citigroup.

Busy guy! Alas, that all might have to wait:

Mr. Kavanaugh was stopped by an officer with the California Highway Patrol at 12:41 a.m. in the Westwood district of Los Angeles on Oct. 23 [...] Mr. Kavanaugh was driving a black Audi at about 60 miles per hour in a zone with a posted speed limit of 35. Along with a speeding charge, he was cited for driving under the influence of alcohol, driving with a blood alcohol content of .08%.

An additional charge said Mr. Kavanaugh was driving while his license was suspended as a result of a previous drunk driving conviction. He was not booked or detained, though he was arrested on the misdemeanor charges by way of a citation, and is scheduled for arraignment and a hearing on probation in Beverly Hills at 8:30 a.m. on Dec. 12.

Perfect! Close enough to walk.

• Ryan Kavanaugh, Top Film Financier, Arrested for Drunk Driving [NYT]

The big challenge is how to wield the budget ax in a way that won't alienate the A-list or compromise the promotional value of the event. One catering exec who's done scores of premieres says he's being asked to do more for less, and the only choice is "to get creative" when the food budget is cut.

"The shrimp are in hors d'oeuvres instead of a buffet," he said. "You cut back on things that take an inordinate amount of labor."

Premieres also drive publicity, so in order to generate that publicity at lower costs, "what you're going to see are more premieres at the Academy with a relatively inexpensive reception in the lobby and then a couple big, themed parties every quarter," a planner said.

Nevertheless, Sony, Showtime and Overture Films are a few of the companies to retain those festive, debauched standards of yore, while Universal will reportedly leave the decision to its division heads. CAA, meanwhile, denied speculation that its popular Holiday Infant Roast would be suspended for a cheaper, William Morris-style Kitten Potluck. A hard-hit Paradigm, alas, confirmed it will downgrade to roadkill.

• Hollywood Scales Back Parties [Variety]

After the jump: Jack Bauer's back, and he's more pro-torture than ever!

· 24 will debut in a two-part premiere on January 11 and 12. [Variety]
· The early release of Quantum of Solace overseas earned $38.6 million in countries like the U.K., France, and Sweden. [Variety]
· Miramax picked up Keira Knightley and Eva Mendes drama Last Night for $4 million. [THR]

Is it oversimplifying to wonder where this faith came from, or what Screen Gems thinks it will get out of this? Have you ever once heard anyone walking around on a studio lot, at festivals or elsewhere intoning, "I want to be in the Hayden Christensen business?" Seriously, yes or no: Is there a demand for three Hayden Christensen films?

Not that we have anything against Hayden Christensen; Shattered Glass was wonderful, and it's not his fault Star Wars set fire to its own legacy. He's not waving the Hayden flag on some hubristic victory lap this morning, either; the word slipped out via Variety, which reported that Christensen and his brother's shingle Forest Park Pictures will bring projects directly to Screen Gems when he's not invited to participate in the studio's own films. The first film under the pact, the thriller Bone Deep, shoots later this fall (also starring T.I. and Chris Brown, who curiously have SG deals as well), and the two remaining projects are yet to be determined.

"Hayden is a very talented and versatile actor with a proven worldwide box-office history," Screen Gems president Doug Culpepper told the trade paper. Again, nothing against Christensen's talent (we've seen better than pretty much any actor under 30 these days), but "proven worldwide box-office history"? Excepting Star Wars, which you kind of have to do considering what little he's been able to whip up in their "proven worldwide box-office" aftermath, Christensen's only score was Jumper, a generally reviled $220 million grosser that lost money Stateside and cost almost three times what Screen Gems is going to pay to make and market any of Christensen's upcoming projects — genre films like Awake, which did less than $30 million worldwide in 2007.

Obviously this isn't the worst deal Screen Gems could make; there's always that home-video and Flopz™ afterlife. (Or only life, as with his straight-to-DVD 2007 effort Virgin Territory.) Still, though: In this economic climate, Hayden Christensen is a player? Does Screen Gems know something we don't? And if so, can we have stock tips while they're at it?

• http://www.link.com">Hayden Christensen is Screen's gem [Variety]

• Jack White slams Coca-Cola for using James Bond song [NME]

STATEMENT FROM METRO-GOLDWYN-MAYER STUDIOS INC.

LOS ANGELES, CA August 25, 2008 — Contrary to recent media reports, Metro-Goldwyn-Mayer Studios Inc. (MGM) is not for sale. There is no "asking price" for the company. MGM's existing financing arrangements are sufficient to meet its needs. Goldman, Sachs has been retained to explore enhancements to MGM's long-term capital structure. All of the MGM shareholders, including Providence Equity Partners, TPG, Sony Corp. Of America and Comcast Corp, are pleased with the Company's current momentum and are committed to the future growth of the studio.

"Enhancements to ... long-term capital structure"? Isn't that what selling is? In any event, we'll give the shareholders the benefit of the doubt; the principals have every reason to be "pleased with the company's current momentum," with the minor exception of Heather O'Rourke's outstanding request to God to burn the studio to the ground before it can remake Poltergeist. That will no doubt affect the asking price, which insiders place around an overvalued $5.2 billion that would likely keep the Lion in his same fetid den for at least another year. At least someone could come groom him every once in a while; we hear Kerkorian loves cats. Or at least certain feline parts — where on Leo's body would his library be?

• More speculation over MGM sale [THR]
• MGM: On the Block, Again [BusinessWeek]

Not long after his micro-budget debut Wrong Numbers hit at the 2001 South by Southwest film festival, Holdridge said he had fielded calls from every major studio looking to adapt his comedy about "unruly teens trying to buy beer for a party on their last night of high school" for Hollywood. Sony eventually hired him to write the script on spec, which apparently took a couple years too many for the studio's taste, as Holdridge discovered when he heard about a new Sony project called Superbad:

That was the last straw. As far as he could tell, Wrong Number had been co-opted by Judd Apatow and company.

"It was devastating," Holdridge recalls, hesitant to accuse any particular individual of ripping him off. "Their script was different. Our script was fucking awesome, but you can't copyright a concept." Holdridge suspects the executives at Sony may have suggested his idea to more established Hollywood comedic forces, but he places some of the blame in his own lap. "I have some responsibility because I went and made another movie," he says. "I don't want to complain. What if we just had the same idea?"

Yeah, what if? It's not like Midnight Kiss doesn't owe its own life to Before Sunrise/Sunset, Manhattan and a few other couples-gabbing-in-the-streets classics. And Apatow is the Comedy Person of the Year, after all. But as Holdridge alludes to in the profile, Wrong Numbers is illegal to screen since Sony picked it up seven years ago. We can't wait for the double feature when the time finally comes — and as much as we appreciate his discretion under the circumstances, we're fairly sure it will come.

[Photo: Getty Images]

• 'In Search of a Midnight Kiss' Director Alex Holdridge [indieWIRE]

WHAT'S NEW: The primary competition for The Dark Knight's second weekend will be... itself. You have to feel for Sony and Fox for dropping Step Brothers and X-Files: I Want to Believe opposite History's Greatest Film, but that's just the kind of extraordinary season it's been. Those films will perform decently enough, though — roughly $30 million for the Judd Apatow-produced Ferrell/Reilly comedy, $21 million for the sci-fi franchise adaptation — which is another bummer for Fox, which has only its overachieving The Happening to show for a long, lean summer at the box office.

Also opening this weekend are the concert/protest film CSNY: Deja Vu; the oversexed '60s groupie chronicle Eight Miles High; Nanette Burstein's controversial pseudo-doc American Teen; the small-town gardener doc (seriously) A Man Called Pearl; and Minnie Driver's middling psychological drama Take.

THE BIG LOSER: Not so much a "loser" as a handicapping interest of ours, Christian Bale's reported mum-thumping exploits — however blown out of proportion the actually are — could drop The Dark Knight a few percentage points more than it otherwise would have. But even if plunges by 50% (which it won't), it'll still nab $80 million, so again, save your pity for Fox.

THE UNDERDOG: When news hit in 2006 that director Julian Jarrold (Kinky Boots, Becoming Jane) was taking on an adaptation of Evelyn Waugh's novel Brideshead Revisited, skeptics seemed less anxious about a perversion of the author's elegant, class-crash tragedy than how the film would stand up to the epochal 1981 miniseries adaptation. We don't have time or space to even touch that, but it hardly seems to matter: Jarrold's Brideshead bites deep into the love triangle between middle-class Charles Ryder and the Catholic-burdened Flyte siblings Julia and Sebastian, aided by a cast of young British talent led by Hayley Atwell, Ben Whishaw and the extraordinary Matthew Goode (The Lookout, Match Point). Emma Thompson drops in as well for a stirring matron act, but it's Jarrold's scope and Goode's tone harmonizing so dynamically here that you almost can't imagine this story ever required nine hours to tell.

FOR SHUT-INS: Among this week's new DVD's are the Gen-Y card-counting drama 21; the nifty Famke Janssen pool-shark indie Turn the River; the taut enviro-horror sleeper The Last Winter; and, at last, complete series collection of Edgar Wright and Simon Pegg's Spaced.

So is this your week to catch up on The Dark Knight? Or do you, as Fox so desperately hopes, want to believe? Can Step Brothers actually have more gags than those in its trailer? Go ahead — call your shots now before the August doldrums come to claim us all.

UNAUTHORIZED USE OF CATERING AND CRAFT SERVICE ON THE LOT Thursday Jul 10, 2008, SPE

Over the last couple of weeks, Studio Operations has received a number of complaints from production companies who are experiencing an increased number of unauthorized persons entering their stages and eating from their craft service areas and catering trucks.

Please note that any person entering stages or utilizing craft service and catering services on the Studio lot without prior authorization from the production company or the Studio Operations department is in violation of Studio policy. This also applies to special events, concerts or any other activity on the stages or the Studio lot.

Thank you for your cooperation.

The studio is now mulling taking the extra measure of hiring a new security staff to man each and every table, and going so far as to issue laminated credentials. Should an unauthorized snacker so much as dip a single cauliflower floret into some hummus without first showing their IDs, guards are under strict orders to tazer the offending grazer; legitimate craft services users will then be required to step gingerly over their incapacitated, convulsing bodies, and partake freely of the carb-heavy spread.

[Photo: BravoTV.com]

• Previously: Frustrated Sony Worker Seeks Circle-Jerk Companions [Defamer]

20th Cent. FOX lot. MWM, horny, hung thick! Any other studs here? - 38 (Fox Lot)

38, MWM, VGL, discreet, clean, NEG, and HUNG. Looking for some playmates on the lot for jacking/oral. Or around the area who can host from time to time. Cool with jacking, oral, anything safe. And, yes, total top here. Forward pics. No pics = no response. Face too. Gotta see you before meeting up. Total discretion, obviously. Thanks and have a great day.

No, thank you! Not be outdone, Sony's rascal in Culver City reintroduced his offer as well ("Stuck here on the lot again today, no luck yesterday, getting hornier by the hour"), once again accompanying his plea with a photo of an unsuspecting cluster of folks listening in at the masturbatory hotbed of Stage 19. We can't wait to see how a horny Paramount drone, with the swinging dick of his studio's billion-dollar 2008 tightly in hand, ups the symbolic ante on Wednesday with the C/L's lustiest, most well-cast and best-marketed ad to date.

• 20th Cent. FOX lot. MWM, horny, hung thick! Any other studs here? [Craiglist]

• Sony Lot JO [Craigslist]

Anyone on the SONY lot up for a mid afternoon Jerk? (Culver City)

Stuck here on the lot. Anyone here know somewhere to get together, unzip, pull out our cocks and jerk out a load?

need to cum bad

Could this be the same "preppy and athletic" Sony lot horndog of several years ago, who demanded a headshot and resumé before meeting to rub one out? There's only one way to find out, fellas. And while we wish, per the query, that we could recommend a darkened nook behind some Spider-Man soundstage lending itself to such rendezvous, unfortunately, we have no knowledge of anything currently shooting on the lot beyond a junior exec and FedEx guy in the Thalberg Building men's room. Good luck, you star-crossed tossers!

• Anyone on the SONY lot up for a mid afternoon Jerk? (Culver City) [Craigslist]

The good news: You can wait and watch Made of Honor on your iPod in about three months! The bad news: It'll cost you $14.99 to download it. (Or $9.99 three months after that.) And for digital media that costs exactly nothing to reproduce, package or distribute, we think that amounts to little more than information highway robbery. And just in time for the studios to stonewall SAG on new-media revenues!

Or maybe they're not quite connected — yet. Conceding it would get paid for new media when studios got paid, the WGA settled its strike in February by negotiating for roughly 2% of studios' online grosses each year through 2011. But in an earnings call yesterday, Time Warner CEO Jeff Bewkes cited a 60%-70% profit margin during a VOD trial for Warner Bros. films on cable — more than twice the return on Time Warner DVD rentals. It's anyone's guess how that shakes out in terms of purchases, but with DVD sales last quarter at $3.5 billion, and with a fairly clear break between online and traditional media consumers, even a tenth of that revenue online would be enough for SAG president/time-bomb Alan Rosenberg to reinforce the hard line as the first round of negotiations come to a close Friday.

Moreover, as an observant tipster pointed out to us this morning, the markup on these downloads is pretty obscene, maybe even illegal. After piracy concerns were allayed in the last year, pricing was the only remaining sticking point for Apple — which wanted to keep purchases at $10 — and studios, which compromised at $15. Albums on iTunes cost an average of 40% less than their CD counterparts; but with online retailers and box stores pressuring DVD prices below $20, why should they get away with a difference as little as 15% in some markets — especially with no extra features or deluxe packaging? The courts have even addressed this before, but it usually applies to manufacturers complaining about suppliers, not the other way around. Someone! Get the FTC on the line!

• Purchase New Movies on iTunes [Apple]