I’ve got a much longer entry in the works about what I did over the weekend, but I’m in the middle of a crushingly busy week, so I don’t know when I’ll be able to finish it. In the meantime, here’s a quick note about yesterday’s big announcement. If you didn’t hear, Shia LaBeouf revealed the title of the upcoming fourth Indiana Jones movie at the MTV Video Music Awards. It is — are you ready? — Indiana Jones and the Kingdom of the Crystal Skull.

The reactions I’ve heard thus far have been luke-warm at best, with many people saying that the title is too long. I’ll admit, it’s a bit ungainly — it would be better if Uncle George shortened it to Indiana Jones and the Crystal Skull — but I’m generally fine with it. It has an appropriately pulpish sound, and crystal skulls — which do exist and have long been rumored to possess occult or mystical powers — are far more the sort of thing you’d expect an Indiana Jones story to pivot around than Area 51 and the Roswell aliens. (One of the rumored plotlines from a couple years ago had our favorite fedora-wearing whipcracker uncovering the truth that Mulder never seemed to get to the bottom of, an utterly ridiculous idea that would make a disastrous movie, in my not-so-humble opinion.)

Actually, the more I think about it, the more I think I like the title. I’m starting to think that maybe George, Steven, and Harrison might be making a for-real Indy movie, instead of the lame and pointless mess that everyone fears…

Genre fans like myself have done a lot of groaning in recent days over the news that Hollywood — which lately seems to be more interested in leveraging recognizable brands (i.e., churning out new versions of properties whose names are already familiar to movie-goers) than in filming original screenplays — is forging ahead with a remake of Escape from New York and that Keanu will be playing Klaatu in a new version of The Day the Earth Stood Still. (Actually, he’ll probably be just fine in that role; he even has a passing resemblance to Michael Rennie. It’s just the principle of remaking an undisputed classic like Day that bothers me.) So it came as a pleasant surprise to read about an interview with the eternally awesome Bruce Campbell in which the Brucester puts to rest a number of rumors that have been causing me some concern:

• Campbell will not be reprising his role as Old Elvis/Sebastian Haff in a sequel to the charmingly goofy Bubba Ho-Tep. (The sequel — supposed to be called Bubba Nosferatu — may still go ahead without him, but I don’t see how anyone could hope to fill those porkchop sideburns the way Bruce did.)
• There will be no lame-ass mash-up of Freddy (A Nightmare on Elm Street), Jason (the Friday the 13th series), and Bruce’s signature character Ash (The Evil Dead trilogy).
• There will not be an Evil Dead 4. (Really, what could possibly be left to do after the utter silliness of Army of Darkness?)
• And finally — saving the best for last — there will be no remake of the original Evil Dead starring Ashton Kutcher as Ash. Said Campbell: “The feedback from the fans was 90 percent negative. It’s going nowhere.”

It’s nice to hear that, occasionally, rarely, common sense prevails…

It’s confirmed: Karen Allen is reprising her role as Marion Ravenwood in Indy IV. Here’s a photo of the cast that was revealed yesterday at Comic-Con:

My enthusiasm for this project continues to grow… I think Karen looks great, and it’s good to see her alongside Steven and Harrison again. It’s like a reunion of long-estranged family members or something. Click the photo to enlarge, click through for more Indy goodness!

Continue Reading…

Here’s something else I’m obsessing over lately: the upcoming DVD release of Blade Runner: The Final Cut. (Actually, I’m obsessed with the fact that all the earlier, non-digitally-enhanced versions of this movie will be made available along with this revised version, just like the fans desire, unlike a certain other highly desirable landmark film of the science fiction persuasion, whose fans apparently don’t have a voice in the matter…)

The crew from The Digital Bits is currently at the legendary Comic-Con convention in San Diego (which these days covers a lot more than just comics), and they’ve just posted up the official details of the release, including photos of the two-disc, four-disc, and “Deckard’s briefcase” variants. The details generally match what I already posted a while back, but clear up (for you non-fanatics in the audience) what the differences between the movie versions are and describe exactly which features are included in which set. I’m pleased to see that I won’t be forced to buy the briefcase full of unnecessary doodads in order to get the original theatrical cut of the movie. (I am kind of bummed that the legendary Work Print will only be available in the briefcase set, but I’ve reached a point where I just don’t need all the little premiums and the oddball packaging cluttering up my place. If it won’t fit nicely on a shelf with all the other standardized cases — reference my experience with The Big Stupid Cylon Head — then I don’t want it. And while I’m curious about the Work Print, it’s really not enough to justify the aggravation of finding someplace to store the oddball package. He said bravely, knowing there was still a good chance he’d cave and buy the damn thing anyway.)

All three variants of Blade Runner will be out on December 18th. A little late for a Christmas gift, but maybe you can buy it for yourself with the money you get every year from your favorite auntie, and watch it on New Year’s Day instead of football…

In other news, The Bits is also reporting a rumor that Lucasfilm is going to make some kind of DVD-related announcement at the con, and naturally there’s speculation that it involves the long-promised “Ultimate Edition Star Wars Saga” Set. But you guys know where I stand on that: if there’s no anamorphic transfer of the unrevised original film, then there’s no sale here.

Yes, I’m obsessing. We fanboys do that from time to time…

***VIDEO MISSING***

The cool thing about this clip — the opening titles from the 1980 Flash Gordon feature film, in case you didn’t know — is the artwork that appears in and among the credits. That’s taken from the original comic-strip by Alex Raymond, my friends, the medium where Flash was born. It’s neat stuff, I think, and I’d love to see a live-action movie or television series that was truly faithful to the look. That’s what I was hoping to see in the new Sci-Fi Channel series. Maybe in the next remake…

Here’s something I’ve been meaning to put up for a few days, another snapshot from the set of Indiana Jones IV:

I like this shot a lot. I think Indy looks much more “old mannish” here than he did in the one of him in his “work clothes” — in fact, I think his suit looks a lot like the one that Connery wore as Henry, Sr., in Last Crusade, perhaps deliberately so — but there’s a great period feel here, and it’s a neat bike. I still haven’t heard any confirmation that Shia LaBeouf is playing Indy’s son, but I see a look of both Harrison Ford and Karen Allen in his features, so I feel comfortable in assuming that’s who he’s supposed to be. I suppose it could be a case that Indy thinks this might be his son, only to learn otherwise at the end, but I have a feeling we’re looking at a Kirk-and-David-Marcus scenario here. And the rumor that John Hurt is playing Abner Ravenwood — Marion’s father, and possibly-Indy-Jr.’s-grandfather — only adds to my suspicions. We’ll see, I suppose. I hate to admit it because I was so opposed the idea of doing another Indy flick, but I’m really starting to get enthused about this…

Click the picture for the big view. More photos from the location shooting in New Haven, CT, can be found here and here.

Am I the only thirtysomething fanboy type in the country who couldn’t care less about the new Transformers movie opening tomorrow next week? Seriously, I can hardly hear my own typing over the sound of all that saliva pouring into keyboards all across the blogosphere. Wired.com has published no less than three articles and a photo gallery; Boing Boing has already posted a point-counterpoint review entry; and my good friend Steve is alternately doing the Snoopy dance over the concept of photo-realistic Autobots and fulminating against the fact that notorious crap-master Michael Bay directed the film.

Me, I just don’t get the fuss. I watched the old cartoon show and found it entertaining enough, and I also think its way cool that Peter Cullen — the voice actor who played heroic Optimus Prime on the old cartoon — was asked to reprise the role for this new movie. But I never owned a Transformer toy, I never saw the 1986 animated Transformers movie, and the previews for this new version leave me absolutely cold. I guess I’m just a couple years too old for this particular pop-cultural touchstone to have affected me… and for some reason, that bothers me. I don’t know why…