I can't believe it's only been a year and a half since The Da Vinci Code was released. I feel like that thing is really old already. Maybe I subconsciously tried to black the movie out from my memory. Or maybe it came and went, grossed its ridiculous $758 million and then disappeared from everyone's mind, not just mine, and so it hasn't been talked about much in mainstream discussion (like some embarrassing thing we want to sweep under the rug). Because I feel like the movie came out years ago, I also felt like it was taking forever for the sequel (or prequel? I don't read these dumb books), Angels & Demons to get underway. I guess it was only announced a year and a half ago (right as the first movie was reaping in the big dough), and Tom Hanks was only secured to reprise his role as Robert Langdon back in April. I guess there's been plenty of slower-going productions.

According to Variety, Angels & Demons is finally set to begin filming, and now that it's taken this long, it's going to be a rush job. Ron Howard will return as director for a February start in Europe. And apparently he will still be finishing up Frost/Nixon when he begins shooting this, and both movies will end up released late next year. Variety compares the double feature to Spielberg's 1993, which saw back-to-back shoots/releases with Jurassic Park and Schindler's List, with the former being the box office giant and the latter being the Oscar darling. But those two movies didn't come out at the same time, which seems to be the case with Howard's two movies. Variety also makes a comparison to Eastwood's 2006, with the relatively close releases Flags of Our Fathers and Letters from Iwo Jima, but of course those two films were actually related to each other. Hey, why not just reference Back to the Futures II & III? Better yet, how about Columbia Pictures holds off on releasing Angels & Demons until the Spring of 2009? Opie doesn't need the pressure; he's lost enough hair already.

"I need to try to write this post without pissing off a whole mess of people," Erik said to himself as he read an article on the top 10 most powerful Christians in Hollywood. Yes, such a list does exist, and unfortunately this Jew is nowhere to be found on it. Let it be known that I have nothing against Christians, or any religion for that matter, but this list just cracked me up. Over on Hollywood.com, they've posted a list (compiled on BeliefNet.com) of the 10 most powerful Christians in Hollywood (however the original list contains 12). First off, I'd love to know their definition of 'powerful.' Powerful how? Like, the number one person on the list can talk to Jesus whenever he wants, however he wants -- and, like, the number four person on the list can only communicate with Jesus through text messaging? I don't get it. But do we really need to get it?

Why don't you go ahead and take a wild guess as to who the number one most powerful Christian in Hollywood is. Yup, Mel Gibson. He likes to drink, he likes to drive, and he likes to spit out Anti-Semitic remarks at the police officers who pull him over whilst drinking and driving (hey, why not combine two lovable past times into one -- it saves time!). Here are the other nine most powerful Christians in Hollywood: 2. Denzel Washington. 3. Patricia Heaton. 4. Tyler Perry. 5. Ralph Winter. 6. Angela Bassett. 7. Martin Sheen. 8. Martha Williamson. 8. Kristin Chenoweth. 10. Philip Anschutz. Okay, I can understand how Anschutz, the 31st richest person in America, might make the list, but how does Chenoweth (who's about to star in the upcoming Space Chimps) rank higher than him? How is she a more powerful Christian?

I'd still like to know how they define 'powerful?' Over on BeliefNet, here's their reasoning behind the list: "We chose them from dozens of candidates, in consultation with insiders and observers who are part of the Christian-Hollywood scene. Those who made the Beliefnet Power Dozen are here because they have the clout to choose their career direction, while keeping their faith and even injecting it into their work in subtle or not-so-subtle ways." So, then, why not say most influential? Most spiritual? Most loved? Why use powerful? What do you make of the list? Is Mel Gibson really the most powerful Christian in Hollywood?

Craig Gillespie's upcoming film, Lars and the Real Girl, has inspired intrigue and curiosity for months now because it's a hard film to peg. Initially, it looked to be a black comedy full of quirk and strangeness, as a man begins to date a Real Doll, rather than finding a living, breathing real girl. The trailer didn't help matters, seeming much more comedic than dramatic, but as I said in my review from TIFF: "While the title insinuates that it's a wacky comedy, it's actually a smart, well-crafted, and heart-wrenching film that smoothly discusses the intricacies of loss and depression."

Now the film is further subverting expectations with it's marketing plan. Reuters reports that church leaders will be involved in the film's promo screenings, which will come out before the film goes into wide release on October 26 (it hits LA and NYC theaters this week). SKE distribution head Bingham Ray says: "We've found an enormous response from mainstream Christian groups. Some pastors may discuss the film as part of their sermons." Usually, films that target church groups have a distinct religious message that includes themes, or icons, like Evan Almighty or The Passion of the Christ.

That being said, it's not surprising that churches are showing interest -- Lars might be in love with a Real Doll, but he is also a kind, thoughtful religious man who is active in both his community and his church. In fact, religion and the church are represented in the film with warmth, without biting social commentary. Still, whoever would have thought that church groups would show interest in and embrace a film that includes a Real Doll?!

Over on The Hot Blog, David Poland has the weekend box office numbers up, and the one thing that popped out at me, probably because I just saw and reviewed the film last week, is that Lake of Fire, which opened at Film Forum in NYC this weekend, did not do nearly as well as might have been expected. There's some discussion in the comments on Poland's post speculating on the whys and wherefores of the film's less-than-stellar opening, the main gist of which is that either the film did not appeal to people because no one wants to see the abortion process on a big screen while they're munching their popcorn, or because the film doesn't take a side on the abortion issue, and people who are passionate about it on one side or the other do not want to see the other side treated fairly.

I pondered this for a while this morning as I lingered over my Monday morning coffee. As I noted in my review of the film, Lake of Fire does give both sides of the debate equal weight, but I also think that the way each side will be perceived is in the eye of the beholder. I could see the film playing well in red states, because the film doesn't portray right-to-lifers (on the whole) as a bunch of nutcases. Sure, there are some some interesting folks in there, but there are also attractive women in there talking about why they are pro-life. And even the folks that a liberal might view as off-their-rocker (such as Assembly of God preacher John Burt and Operation Rescue founder Randall Terry) would probably be viewed by a lot of fundamentalist Christians as good, God-fearing guys who are simply passionate about their beliefs on the subject.

The story of Noah and the flood will be told a million more times in some medium or other. But following the disappointment of Evan Almighty, it seems a little soon for a new movie version. Sure, Evan wasn't exactly a strict adaptation of the Bible tale, but it was based enough on it to make audiences not so hungry for another Ark adventure. Yet, according to Variety, Unified Pictures (Don't Move) has announced plans to do a computer-animated Noah's Ark, which will be scripted by Philip LaZebnik, who has worked on Dreamworks' Biblical kids film The Prince of Egypt and Disney's Pocahontas and Mulan. Religious films, whether live-action or animated, can be hit or miss, but like Evan Almighty, this new project is not a straightforward telling of Noah and the flood; instead it will focus on the story from the point of view of the animals.

Personally, I love the idea. But I'd love it much better if it was coming from Nick Park and Aardman Animation. It would be like Creature Comforts ... on a boat. The connection between Unified and Park exists: the indie studio has worked many times with Northern Arts Entertainment, which distributed a lot of Aardman shorts, including Park's Wallace and Gromit films. Unfortunately, it doesn't seem like that dream will happen. Unified seems pretty set on making a CG pic that resembles those made by the big studios. The best way of doing that, of course, is to get some familiar comedic voices involved. If this pic is more successful than Evan Almighty, perhaps we'll then get to see a greenlight on Darren Aronofsky's own Noah's Ark movie, which he's been interested in doing since he was 13.

Get ready for the next religious flick to potentially stir up some controversy -- Variety reports that Drew Heriot has been tapped to helm his feature debut, The Aquarian Gospel, which just happens to be a story about the missing years of Jesus, from ages 13 to 30. (Hey, is that where they get the idea for 13 Going on 30?) You might not recognize Heriot by name, but you've definitely heard of his work. He directed the documentary The Secret, which is, yes, THAT secret. In case you've been living under a rock -- it's the self-help movement about positive thinking that has taken North America by storm.

As for the film, which was written by John F. Sullivan and William Keenan, it is inspired by two books about this missing bit of time -- Levi Dowling's The Aquarian Gospel of Jesus the Christ, and Nicholas Notovich's The Unknown Life of Jesus Christ. The film will follow the religious icon as he travels through India, Tibet, Greece, Egypt, and other locales, as he encounters historical and religious figures. The plan is to use actors from these areas along with cameos by current spiritual leaders.

What sort of claims does the Aquarian Gospel make? Well, it says Jesus was conceived by a human father, that he wasn't Christ until he made himself a "fit vessel," and that reincarnation is real -- souls are settling past life debts until they become perfect and end the cycle. Hmm... I wonder how the ever-growing population fits into that. Maybe Jesse was right and we are just fractions of people.

One might see a bunch of huge snags as a good reason to re-think the making of a film, but not Constantin Films -- and let's hope that's because they've got a real keeper. Back in April, John Goodman was sued for backing out of the production of Pope Joan. Soon after, production was halted. As if that wasn't enough, July brought about the firing of the film's director -- Volker Schlöndorff. He had criticized the company's habit of making extended versions of their films for television (they plan to do just that with Joan). Undeterred, Variety has reported that Constantin Film has selected The Miracle of Bern and Deutschland. A Summer Fairytale helmer Sönke Wortmann to take over the directorial chair.

With the director in place, they're now hoping to get production going early next year, with Franka Potente still tapped to star. (How funny would it be if she could no longer do it? Also disappointing, since I'd love to see her really command a period piece.) The film is an adaptation of Donna Woolfolk Cross' bestseller Pope Joan, which tells the legend of a ninth-century woman who disguised herself as a man and ascended the papal throne -- but was later found out when she had a baby during a procession from St. Peter's. Oops. I have to say -- having the sex when you're not only the Pope, but a female one at that, is pretty risky. Assuming the production hits no more snags, we should be able to see it for ourselves in a year or two.

Like most hardcore movie nerds, I'm a huge Monty Python fan. And while I do own that massive Flying Circus box set, the goody-laced Monty Python Live! double feature, and even a few of their old albums ... my Python movies are my very favorite pieces of the collection. (I don't really count And Now for Something Completely Different as a "true" movie, and the Live at Hollywood Bowl concert flick is included in the MP Live! set.) So basically that only leaves three actual Monty Python movies: The legendary Monty Python and the Holy Grail (awesome Special Edition right here), the inconsistent but frequently hilarious The Meaning of Life (SE here), and the first ninth second Monty movie out of the gate...

Life of Brian! And if you wanted to own a solid version of this movie on DVD, you had to invest about $35 on this (really excellent) Criterion Collection release. (Or you could opt for this bare-bones and lame-transfer DVD.) But as of November 7 you'll have another option! According to DVDActive.com, Sony will release Life of Brian: The Immaculate Edition on that date, and you Pythonites should have a ball with what's included.

In addition to the main feature (which is just as hilarious today as it ever was), we'll also get TWO Python commentaries (one with Gilliam, Idle and Jones; the other with Cleese and Palin; unfortunately Chapman is still dead), a two-hour animated original script "readthrough" (!), an all-new 60-minute behind-the-scenes documentary (and I'm sure they'll cover the original controversy surrounding the film), five deleted scenes, some goofy old radio ads, and (as they say) more! Finally my Python Cinema Trilogy will be ... upgraded! (Again!) To those who already own the Criterion set, the question is this: Are the new doco and the nifty-sounding 'readthrough' piece worth the price of the platters? Because I'm pretty sure the rest of the goodies CAN be found on that Criterion release.

Intrepid Pictures, which recently gave us that bad remake of The Hitcher, will soon be giving us a weird knock-off of The Terminator. At least, that's what it sounds like from the synopsis given for a script titled The Fourth Horseman, which Intrepid just acquired, according to The Hollywood Reporter. The "original" screenplay, written by Marshall E. Uzzle and Perry Fair, is about a young priest sent to kill a teenage girl because she's supposedly about to give birth to Death. As in the last of the Four Horsemen of the Apocalypse. Apparently the girl already has three children, named War, Pestilence and Famine, because the synopsis calls them "siblings," but I'll assume someone got that bit confused. Still, if this is to be the birth of the "fourth horseman" as the title suggests, it should also be assumed that the other three are already out there somewhere.

Anyway, the best part, which also parallels the plot of The Terminator (in which the baby-to-be was a future good guy), is that the young priest falls in love with the teen and, of course, impregnates her. Seems like he really paid attention when studying for the priesthood; his seminary school must have forgotten to stress the part about not sleeping with teenage girls and spawning evil forces of destruction.

The Fourth Horsemen probably won't have anything as cool as robotic killing machines from the future, but it better at least have some apocalyptic teasers in it. If it's just another bad religious-themed thriller a la Lost Souls, then Intrepid is probably wasting its time. But that's easily cynical for me to say, since other than Rosemary's Baby, I hate those kinds of movies (though I admit I've never seen the original The Omen). Currently Uzzle and Fair's script is being rewritten by scribes F. Paul Benz and Steve Tomlin, who last gave us Blind Horizon, a 2003 thriller starring Val Kilmer and Neve Campbell. And if that doesn't sell the project's worth to you, it's also being produced by Mike Karz (Malibu's Most Wanted; Good Luck Chuck).

How do you make a film about ancient Tibetan history and legend, while keeping it relevant to a modern audience? It helps if, as is the case with Milarepa: Magician, Murderer, Saint, your director is a Tibetan Buddhist lama, and you have over 50 Tibetan monks in your cast and crew -- and a story full of human drama that centers around a fascinating character. The film tells the story of Milarepa, an 11th century yogi and poet who rose from a tragic youth and a period spent studying black arts so that he could exact murderous revenge, who went on to achieve "enlightenment" and become one of the most famous of the Tibetan Saints.

The film's storyline sticks pretty close to Tibetan Buddhist legend: Milarepa, born as Thopaga (played by various actors as he ages, and by monk Jamyang Lodro as an adult) to a wealthy merchant family, enjoys a pampered existence in his youth, until his father suddenly falls ill and dies, leaving his estate in trust with his brother to hold for Thopaga until the young boy comes of age to marry his cousin, to whom he is betrothed. The uncle, a greedy and deceitful man, steals Thopaga's estate and forces the boy, his mother and his younger sister to live in poverty, surviving off scraps. Thopaga's mother, Kargyen (Kelsang Chukie Tethong, who also provides some of the vocals for the soundtrack) is bitter and angry at the unfairness of her brother-in-law's actions, but is powerless to change things.

The people over at Universal Pictures are smart, sneaky buggers. Evan Almighty just opened in the UK, and everyone was ready. You see, the company hired a special PR firm just to make sure Christian organizations knew about the film -- namely ministers, publications and websites. They held a number of "priest screenings," and also offered suggestions for just how these people could incorporate the film into their work. For example, they could take this super-handy route: "God: The Hollywood Years," and talk about God on the big screen. Or, there was "Noah and 9/11," where they could chat about religious extremism.

Wow. Do you think these people would take to being spoon-fed angles by a Hollywood company? Apparently, they ate it up like candy. Rev David Birt says: "I've encouraged my flock to see the film. It has interesting subjects -- like whether we want a God who is judgmental -- and I've used it in two sermons already." Reading that, I can't help but imagine churches getting PR press releases that they then slide into their sermons. A publication called Christianity changed its cover at the last minute, and added a feature inside to discuss the themes that Almighty covered. Simon Jenkins, editor of rejesus.co.uk says: "It's not a hugely significant film, but it is unexpectedly religious. Hollywood and Christianity have an interesting relationship but this time they're singing from the same hymn sheet."

I'm not so bothered by priests, ministers and those in religious organizations citing a Hollywood movie, but am pretty creeped out that they're doing so after a solid PR campaign. It's a brilliant and successful move for Universal,
but what does it say for the content that comes down to devout followers? It's kind of eerie to imagine that what you hear in the church could be that easily influenced by a company. Sure, Evan Almighty is religious, but where will the churches draw the line between discussing religious phenomenon outside the church, and being told what to say by the companies behind said phenomenon?

Maybe the best thing about The Ten -- a new anthology comedy assembling ten short vignettes, each based on one of the ten commandments -- is how it starts with that premise (famously used by Krysztof Kieslowski in The Decalogue) and immediately, casually, chucks it in the dustbin. "Honor thy mother and father" leads to a vignette where a mother (Kerri Kenney-Silver) explains to her two African-American sons that their father's never been part of their lives because they were conceived during the '80s, when she was having lots and lots of sex with celebrities. Their father is, in fact, Arnold Schwarzenegger; since having their real father bond with them would be impossible, she's hired a local Arnold impersonator (Oliver Platt) to come hang out with the boys. ...

No, the scene's focus isn't parent-and-child interaction and the currency of respect that should flow through that relationship; the scene's focus is Oliver Platt in a leather jacket and wraparound shades, playing football with his two long-lost not-sons, murmuring fatherly endearments in the strangulated Teutonic tones of a bad Arnold imitation. That, to me, is funny; who cares if it really explores the ideas in the correlating commandment?

The Ten, an anthology comedy comprised of ten vignettes inspired by the ten commandments, is a bit of a throwback to scatter-shot comedies of the past like The Groove Tube and Amazon Women on the Moon; at the same time, it's possessed of an ultra-modern deadpan sensibility, with highbrow ideas sharing screen time with lowbrow cheap laughs. The Ten was co-written by Ken Marino and David Wain; Wain was also the director. The two have collaborated on other films (most notably Wet Hot American Summer) and also worked together in the comedy collaborative "The State." Wain and Marino spoke with Cinematical via telephone about the challenges of making The Ten, how you fake 40 CAT scan machines on a low budget, method mustache acting and cute-yet-terrifying animated animal orgies.

Ken Marino: (Singing) "... Band on the run! Band on the run!"

Cinematical: Is there nothing like Wings to cut the strain of the all-day, conducted-by-telephone promotional tour?

KM: You took the words right out of my mouth.

Cinematical: So let's start by just getting our praise of Krzysztof Kieslowski and his hard-to-pronounce name out of the way. Was The Decalogue really an inspiration for The Ten?

David Wain: Well, insomuch as it's exactly the same premise, yes.

Cinematical: But you guys didn't actually think ... Was the actual starting point "Let's do the Ten Commandments ..."?

KM: The starting point was 'Let's steal Kieslowski's idea and do our own funny version of it. ..."

Cinematical: Which you certainly succeeded in doing, but: Do you feel like maybe he's stolen the ten commandments and no one else can do them?

KM : I feel like he stole the ten commandments from some other book -- some other, dare I say, good book. ...

It is now anybody's guess when Pope Joan will go into production. You may remember that the adaptation of Donna Cross's novel hit a snag back in April because John Goodman abruptly departed the film. He was subsequently sued, and production of the film, which was supposed to start shooting in May, was put on hold. Now, the film has also lost its director, Volker Schlöndorff (The Tin Drum), who has been fired. Constantin Films gave Schlöndorff the pink slip following the filmmaker's remarks to a newspaper about his problems with Constantin's practice of simultaneously making extended versions of its films for play on television (ooh, does that mean there's a longer cut of Perfume: The Story of a Murderer out there for my enjoyment?). I'm not sure what his stated problems were, whether he feels the practice makes audiences more patient to wait for films to hit their TV sets or if he simply has a problem with his work being out of his control and released in a cut that isn't his own.

The film will (eventually) star Franka Potente (The Bourne Identity) as the title character, a woman who pretends she's a man and manages to become Pope for two years in the 9th century. Although this film is based on a recent novel, Pope Joan is a legendary figure in history, and may have actually existed. She was previously portrayed by Liv Ullman in a 1972 film from director Michael Anderson. It should be a monumental role for Potente, who follows such Oscar-winning, cross-dressing actresses as Hilary Swank, Gwyneth Paltrow and Linda Hunt (plus cross-dressing/cross-gendering nominees Felicity Huffman, Julie Andrews and Ingrid Bergman). Pope Joan had been re-set to begin shooting in six weeks (they must have finally replaced Goodman), but it will probably be delayed again while Constantin searches for a new director. Meanwhile, Schlöndorff will just have to look forward to screening his latest, Ulzhan, at Toronto this fall.