So after what's felt like a gazillion years, I finally managed to catch Jersey Boys on Broadway last night ... and all I could think about the entire time was why this hasn't been turned into a movie yet. (But in a good way.) In the past few years, we've had Chicago, Rent, Hairspray and The Producers, with Mamma Mia and Nine on the horizon. Where's Jersey Boys? The damn show gets a standing ovation every night, not to mention it's got a great story, great characters and, well, fantastic music. It'd be like Goodfellas: The Musical -- and something like that would probably rake in more cash (from both men and women) than most of these movie-musicals to date.

I haven't had this much fun watching a musical in years; probably since Wicked (which is another one that needs to hit the big screen at some point). But when I sat there, picturing how they could adapt each scene and make it really work on the big screen, one annoying issue kept beating me over the head: Who in the world do you cast? Since Hollywood is all about sticking names in these sorts of roles, you'd need four young guys who not only can sing (Valli gets UP there), but also come with thick Jersey accents. Off the top of my head, I don't know of any young, Hollywood stars who fit the bill. MAYBE Zac Efron, but he might be a tad too young ... and I've never seen him do a tough, Jersey accent (honestly, I don't know if I want to ...)

Amy Poehler certainly didn't look pregnant when she showed up for a chat at the Apple store in Soho last weekend (as part of a series of talks taking place during the Tribeca Film Festival), but in retrospect, the Baby Mama star had the sprightliness of a gal with a special secret. Along with moderator and Saturday Night Live co-star Fred Armisen, Poehler really worked the room, gently mocking the crowd ("I think all these guys are waiting to get into the Genius bar") while slipping in occasional hints that she actually has an authentic strategy behind her career.

"I would like to do more serious acting," she said, not mentioning her recent voiceover work for Hoodwinked 2: Hood vs. Evil. "I've been doing sketch comedy for a long time, and it'd be nice to turn the volume down a little bit and try other stuff. I have a secret desire to be on Law & Order, but I wish I could be on an old Law & Order, with Jerry Orbach." Armisen, somewhat facetiously, said he would never tire of comedy. "It's like eating to me," he claimed.

If you read online film writing regularly, you've probably heard about (if not bookmarked) the sites of David Poland and Jeffrey Wells. Poland runs Movie City News, but shares his personal views on film-related happenings over at The Hot Blog. Wells's one-man site Hollywood Elsewhere includes a range of movie topics, from reviews to thoughts about Nikki Finke to discussions of studio politics.

The two writers are notorious for feuding with one another on anything and everything, which helps boost interest in their sites (and likewise, traffic). It's always a bit of a shock when they actually agree on something, and when one goes so far as to promote the other's writing, it certainly draws your attention to the issue under scrutiny.

The issue in question concerns press/preview screenings, embargoes on film reviews and, specifically, problems in these areas that Chicago critics encountered with Twentieth Century Fox movies. If you're not a film critic, you might wonder why this matters, but it does affect the timeliness of movie reviews. If I don't see a movie until the night before it is released, either my review will appear late or it will be hastily written, and that's not helpful if you like to read reviews before deciding whether you want to see a film. On the other hand, studios are worried that if I review the movie too early, any negativity could impact box-office, and it might spoil some of their marketing strategies.

They're claiming that none of their films are ready yet, but is that the real reason 20th Century Fox has decided to pull out of next week's San Diego ComicCon? The studio was previously scheduled to hold a "star-and-filmmaker-studded panel" next Friday in the main hall, featuring exclusive first looks at films like Aliens vs Predator, Jumper, Babylon A.D. and Hitman. While practically every other major studio (Warner Bros., Paramount/Dreamworks, Lionsgate, New Line, Sony Pictures, Universal and Walt Disney) still have plans to appear, Fox has officially pulled out. Or have they? According to The LA Times, the studio was reconsidering that decision yesterday afternoon -- meanwhile, ComicCon organizers were scrambling to fill their much-coveted slot.

This hasn't been the greatest of weeks for Fox. Earlier, there was a whole big stink going on in Chicago over Fox's apparent snub of some film critics when it came to invites for advanced screenings of their films. From what I understand, The Chicago Film Critics Association has instituted a boycott against Fox releases. The boycott won't affect reviews; instead, they'll be staying away from additional coverage like features, interviews, etc ... Personally, I'm a bit peeved as well after finding out yesterday that the only Simpsons Movie screening happening in the New York City area (that I'm aware of) is taking place the night before the film will be released. And, as far as I can tell, the same goes for the rest of the country. So, while I usually like to have a day or so to sit with a film before I review it, I now have a few hours.

Whether or not this ComicCon pull out has anything to do with the aforementioned boycott -- I don't know. I do know, however, that Fox has become a major player when it comes to fighting movie piracy (they're one of the studios who wanted to ban advanced screenings in Canada), and so perhaps it's not a question of whether their footage is ready -- but, instead, has to do with them being afraid that same footage will be on YouTube within the hour. Oh, and I should note that Fox Atomic will still be attendance ... handing out raffles, or something. Yay! Raffles!

Apparently, someone is having a blast with their cell phone camera on the set of The Dark Knight, which is currently shooting in Chicago. Tipster Paul pointed us towards a site that is currently hosting what appear to be the first photos of Batman on set. Based on both pics, I'm going to be careful about announcing to the world that Christian Bale is inside that bat suit -- since we never actually see his face, there's a chance it's a stuntman. Regardless, does the dude look jacked or what? We got our first chance to see Bale in full costume the other day when folks scanned a full page photo of the new and improved Batman from out of EW magazine. However, the pics today are the first to show the man in action.

Based on what we see, it looks like Batman is hanging around in some alley waiting to jump off a set of wooden stairs. There's one shot of him from the front (featured right), as well as one from behind and off to the side. Artistically, I really dig the second shot (it would be better if that shampoo-like bottle wasn't in frame), but when it comes to spy photos I'm not so sure we're looking for fancy angles. This new set of photos join a host of other pics that have shown up online in recent days while the much-anticipated sequel shoots in Chicago. We've already received what appears to be a first look at the Joker's purple clown car, as well as shots of both Maggie Gyllenhaal (as Rachel Dawes) and Aaron Eckhart (as Harvey Dent). With spies situated all over this set, it's only a matter of time before a crystal clear pic of Heath Ledger as the Joker makes its way onto computer screens across the world. Stay tuned folks, there's a lot more coming down the pipeline ...

Michael Keaton is one of my favorite actors. He is that all-too-rare performer who can make each line and every action feel as if it is happening for the first time. He's genuinely exciting to watch. The only grievances I have with him are that a) he works much too infrequently, and b) when he does work, it's too often in projects that are beneath him (Jack Frost, Herbie Fully Loaded, White Noise...let me just say Jack Frost one more time.) He hit his creative stride in the late 80's, showing his range in under-appreciated gems like The Dream Team and Clean and Sober, and with a very fruitful Tim Burton collaboration. That pairing brought us one of the all-time great comic performances in Beetlejuice and of course, Keaton as Batman in -- for my money -- the two best superhero films ever made. As far as I'm concerned, no other film Batman even comes close to Keaton, and I immediately associate him with the role. Kilmer sleepwalked through it, Clooney looked embarrassed (rightfully so), and Christian Bale bored me to tears. Keaton played the role largely straight, but it's the flashes of madness and manic energy that brought his Bruce Wayne and Batman to life. "You wanna get nuts? Let's get nuts!"

And now it seems Keaton has been spending time around the Chicago set of The Dark Knight! I did some hunting online and found that Keaton is shooting his directorial debut, The Merry Gentleman in Chicago right now, so it's possible he just stopped by to say hello. But the kid in me who saw Batman at the dollar show eight times can't help but hold out some sliver of hope that Michael Keaton might make some sort of appearance in the new Batman flick. I'm being realistic, I don't expect him to suit up and high-five with Christian Bale, or for them to fight crime side-by-side, but wouldn't it be a great touch to have a little winking cameo from (apologies to Adam West) the real Batman? Keaton did a similar fun little reprise of his Jackie Brown character Ray Nicolette in Out of Sight, so why not this? The fans would love it. Of course this is all pure speculation and dreaming, but we'll find out if it comes true when The Dark Knight hits theaters on June 18th of 2008.

It looks like we're getting another big-budget musical from the Weinsteins -- probably not a bad idea, since the last one they made won six Oscars. Variety recently reported that Rob Marshall has signed to direct the film version of the Tony Award winning musical Nine. The musical debuted in 1982 with Raul Julia and beat out Dreamgirls that year for Best Musical. In 2002, Antonio Banderas took on the lead and *won a Tony for Best Male Performance. The story was inspired Federico Fellini's 8½, and centers on an aging director suffering from his romantic entanglements and a creative dry spell. This is the first project for Marshall with the Weinsteins since Chicago, and he was eager for another film after Memoirs of a Geisha, saying, "I began looking intensely at (other projects), including remakes of movies, originals and Broadway musicals." Marshall will also help with the choreography for the film along with John DeLuca.

The project is still looking for a screenwriter, and casting has yet to begin -- there is no word on whether Banderas will return. Marshall warned that "This one needs to be created specifically for the talent involved, to suit their strengths, casting will be a big issue here, and if commitments complicate things, it will be 2009." We're not quite sure what that means since any movie that he started prepping now wouldn't likely arrive in theaters until 2009 anyway, but I'm sure the Weinsteins won't mind waiting, since it seems that their reputation at the box-office could use a little help.

*Correction: Banderas was nominated but the award went to Harvey Fierstein.

I haven't picked up an issue of Premiere Magazine in quite some time, but a friend of mine recently recommended I visit the publication's newly refurbished website. So I did. Pretty solid content across the board, I'm happy to opine -- but one particular article caught my eye, tickled my fancy, and squatted in my brain long enough to recommend it here.

Basically, a bunch of the Premiere writers were asked to come up with their picks for Most Overrated Film of All Time -- and while most of the sacred cows slaughtered here are pretty darn obvious ones, the opinions and explanations as to why each film was chosen, well, I thought they were fairly compelling. Frankly, I'm thrilled to see someone call Field of Dreams "just too on the nose," because it absolutely is.

Fully prepared for the onslaught of How Dare YE!! hate mail, the Premiere posse has wisely decided to add an equally pithy rebuttal in defense of each movie. So when someone has the audacity to impugn The Wizard of Oz, we sane people have a defender who'll say Dude, Please. I've placed the 20 titles under the jump, just to help spark discussion, but do not let that stop you from reading through the whole article. It might make you think a little differently about some of those Unquestioned Classics that everyone's afraid to admit they don't really dig. (Yep, 2001: A Space Odyssey is overrated; I said it and I'm proud.)

Ready for this one my dear Cinematical readers? Apparently, the folks running Chicago's German Christkindlmarket this year have decided to drop New Line as a sponsor because they're afraid advertisements for The Nativity Story will offend non-Christians. WTF? Oh yes, a festival that has the word 'Christ' in its name refuses to have anything to do with a movie about the dude's birthday. This is the same event that kicks off its month-long festivities with a "holiday" tree lighting ceremony presented by the one and only Christmas Fairy. No, it's not a Christmas tree, it's a Holiday tree -- and the Christmas Fairy just happened to show up because Chanukah Harry was too busy that day. Right? Not for nothing, but something tells me the PC Fairy showed up a bit early, high as a kite. And, personally, I'd love to ask the PC Fairy two questions: What are you on and can I have some please?

The entire situation was perfectly summed up by a rep from New Line, who said, "We don't understand why our sponsorship would be rejected for religious reasons, particularly considering the fact that our film details the story that inspired the holiday season that the Christkindlmarket was created to celebrate." Can I get an Amen to that! I mean, how much harm can a movie poster cause? I assume New Line wasn't going to set up a booth and use some of its staff to re-create the birth of Jesus -- although something like that would have been fun to watch. Besides, anyone who attends a Christmas-themed festival and complains about an advertisement for The Nativity Story should lay off the egg nog, put down the American Express card and look up the word 'moron' in the dictionary -- because there's a good chance their picture would be right there beside its definition.

I can barely keep up with indie filmmaker Joe Swanberg's projects. He's had films screen at SXSW two years in a row: Kissing on the Mouth in 2005 and LOL in 2006 ... and I'm wondering if we'll see Hannah Takes the Stairs in Austin in 2007. The Chicago-based filmmaker co-produced a multi-episode webcast for Nerve called Young American Bodies, and that's received a lot of praise. On top of that he's made a number of short films that he distributes through his website. And in his spare time, for fun, he's starring in Austin filmmaker Bryan Poyser's upcoming short film, Best Birthday Ever. I've met Swanberg and he always seems to be bursting with energy.

Swanberg's latest project is one that could totally make or break him: the in-house trailers for SXSW 2007. If you've ever attended a film festival, you know about these trailers. You end up seeing them multiple times -- if you attend enough films, you're sick of even the best trailers by the end of the festival. They're also the only films that will be watched by every single film festival attendee, so it's great exposure for filmmakers.

SXSW has a long tradition of good in-house trailers: the Burger Hut shorts, considered some of the best, are available to view on YouTube. I can still practically recite from memory the 2005 trailers, directed by Bob Odenkirk (Melvin Goes to Dinner), which featured Jeff Goldblum and Ron Livingston. The trailers were a little repetitive, but they were better than in 2006, when SXSW relied solely on a single IFC-branded in-house trailer that was annoying even the first time. Matt Dentler, producer of SXSW's film festival, says that the festival may include another IFC trailer next year as a "policy trailer" (telling you not to smoke or use your cell phone), but also will use the Swanberg trailers.

So we're all relying on you, Mr. Swanberg, to entertain us in those brief moments between the house lights dimming and the films beginning next March. If we can make it through four days without groaning and wanting to throw things, you'll be a success. If we can make it through the entire film festival without hating the trailers and cursing your name, you'll be a genius.