News broke in May that Anthony Hopkins was heading an all-star adaptation of William Shakespeare's King Lear. But as I mentioned then, this is one of two Lear projects on the way -- the other being a theater version starring Ian McKellen. This was going to be shown in the UK, but according to CNN, it's also hitting stateside on PBS next season.

Here's the kicker -- McKellen stripped down to his birthday suit for the role. Considering the kerfuffle that followed one slipped Janet Jackson nipple, one would think that there'd be a nice blur applied to Sir Ian's bits. However, PBS president Paula Kerger says: "Let's talk about this in January. It's what I think about it and what the FCC will allow." And as for what she thinks: "It's powerful. His entire performance is quite powerful."

Powerful or not, I'm sure there would be quite an uproar if his nudity was shown on a public station, even if it fits with the King's decline into madness at the hands of his evil daughters. So, I doubt that we'll get an unedited version of the play, but maybe there will be an unrated DVD that can go head to head with Hopkins. And, would Anthony go that far for the role?

I'm still trying to decide who I like more as Lear. It's probably McKellen, but Hopkins did a great job in Titus, so anything is possible. Who do you prefer?

I haven't seen this weekend's The Incredible Hulk yet, and will do so a little begrudgingly because it's an implicit (or explicit, depending on whom you ask) diss of Ang Lee's Hulk, a film I admire. But to the extent my interest in the Louis Leterrier version is piqued, it's mostly because of the casting of Edward Norton as the title character's alter ego. It's such an interesting choice -- partly because Norton usually stays away from projects like this, partly because he's so uniquely gifted, and partly because my mind just reels at hearing "you wouldn't like me when I'm angry" coming out of his mouth. I'll watch The Incredible Hulk less because I want to see another movie about Bruce Banner than because I'm curious to see Norton's interpretation of him.

All of which got me thinking about superhero/comic book casting in general. It's a subject that attracts a lot of breathless speculation every time a new movie is in the works, and there's rarely consensus on anything. In this edition of Cinematical Seven, I take a look back at what I think have been the most inspired, interesting, or appropriate superhero (and villain, because why not?) casting choices in recent history -- not so much the resulting performances (though it can be hard to distinguish in hindsight) but the initial casting decisions.

As I like to do with these lists, I tried to mix the obvious with the out-of-the-blue, so feel free to weigh in with what I unjustly left out. In no particular order:

No matter how many times Guillermo del Toro and Peter Jackson mention bringing back every Lord of the Rings cast member they possibly can, it causes a flurry of excitement. Even if it remains unconfirmed, everyone is just so excited that it might as well be signed into contract.

And this time is no exception. Del Toro casually mentioned to Variety that talks have begun with Viggo Mortensen, Andy Serkis and Ian McKellen -- or, at least, preliminary contact has been made. There's not much talk of recasting, either, should someone be unavailable. "I am all for keeping the actors who originated the parts, as much as availability and their willingness will allow."

Pre-production is about to begin on The Hobbit, with Fran Walsh and Philippa Boyens tackling the screenplay under the direction of Jackson and del Toro. "We will all be involved in the script in some fashion but the exact definition is about a week away." So, there might be some very cool announcements made during that Hobbit chat. (Have you sent your questions, yet?)

I feel like I'm calling a golf tournament with Hobbit news sometimes, like I should be whispering "preliminary contact has been made." But please don't mistake that for careless sarcasm. The thought of Viggo Mortensen returning as Aragorn, son of Arathorn, is enough to keep me awake at night. I love that character. Tolkien could have devoted ten books to him, and I would have never gotten sick of him.

Like we doubted it for a second! But I always love hearing from Sir Ian McKellen, he's just so gracious and charming. Empire caught him at the Speed Racer premiere, and made him speak the words to quicken the hearts of all Middle Earth fans. "Yes, it's true," he said. "I spoke to Guillermo in the very room that Peter Jackson offered me the part and he confirmed that I would be reprising the role. Obviously, it's not a part that you turn down, I loved playing Gandalf."

And Gandalf loves being onscreen. "We talk occasionally and he's looking forward to coming out of retirement, yes. Guillermo will be getting around to starting the script in about six weeks when he's finished filming Hellboy 2."

As to how they will finagle two movies out of one book, even Gandalf isn't privy to the inside information, but he's not at all worried. "Well I've read The Hobbit so I've got a good idea of what the story would be. But as to how it's going to work over two films and what's going to happen on screen, well Guillermo has not got down to working out the major details yet – I can tell you it's going to be amazing though."

Just a month after the news that Sir Ian McKellen was "waiting for the call" to reprise his role as Gandalf in the upcoming Hobbit films, and a few days after the official announcement that the rumors about Guillermo Del Toro directing are true, TheOneRing.net has gotten word from Del Toro that, "all bureaucracy pending," McKellen is on board to play Gandalf, and Andy Serkis is happy to again lend his body to Gollum. Further confirmation of McKellen's intention to return comes from McKellen's official website (which he maintains himself), where he includes The Hobbit in his filmography. And Serkis seems to have done the same.

In the interview, Del Toro also makes the promising announcement that he plans to treat Peter Jackson's films "as canon," with the only major changes being greater use of animatronics (rather than pure CGI) and a subtly different color palette.

This project has been very abstract in my mind, and my excitement about it has been sort of theoretical and vague -- until now. Now it's coming together, not just as a cool new pair of movies, but as an extension of Peter Jackson's masterpiece. It's hard to describe just how much Jackson's films mean to me (I rewatch them at least annually), and it says a lot about my admiration of Del Toro that I'm not queasy about someone else messing with the saga. It also says a lot about McKellen's importance to the franchise that it took the news of his return for me to wake up out of my stupor and get genuinely psyched. Let the countdown begin.

[parts via CinemaBlend]

"I promise to polish you off quicker than any barber in London," simpers Mr. Todd, as played by the obsequious Mr. Tod Slaughter. While we're waiting for the new Depp/Burton Sweeney Todd, The Demon Barber of Fleet Street, we can scan over the ancient version, maybe while playing the Stephen Sondheim album in the background. The 1936 film has a reputation for creaking like a badly-greased windmill, while an eye-rolling British ham goes through his rounds. Expect to hear just that received idea in many a review of the upcoming Sweeney Todd. Such is the craft of what a friend refers to as "bullcrit" (n., the repeating of overheard ideas without personal experience).

In this space, writing about Orson Welles' Mr. Arkadin, I was mentioning how much I was coming to enjoy really ripe theatrical acting. And then comes this brilliant New Yorker article by Claudia Roth Pierpont (only abstracted on their site, unfortunately). She discusses the different approaches to Shakepeare on film by Laurence Olivier and Orson Welles. Both were primarily theatrical actors, given to exotic makeup and putty noses. I'd never compare Olivier and Tod Slaughter, but to use the evolutionary parlance, they had a common ancestor: the flamboyant British stage actor Edmund Kean, whose bravura knife-waving performances of the Bard used to electrify audiences of the early 1800s. As the vengeful razor-man, Slaughter is actually better than you've heard. I was happy to read that then film-critic Graham Greene once praised Slaughter as "one of our finest living actors."

There's this fantastical film made a few years ago called Neverwas that, aptly, almost never was. While it had an all-star cast, the movie never saw the light of day, save a screening at TIFF and some releases outside of North America. After a few years in the never-ether, the film is finally getting an absolutely bare-bones release on DVD. The directorial debut of Joshua Michael Stern, who previously penned a little-known thriller called Skeletons, Neverwas is the next generation of Hook. If you think back to 1991, you might remember when Robin Williams was a grown-up Peter Pan, heading back to Neverland. Although the green-tighted hero was played by an adult, Hook was definitely a clear-cut family film. Neverwas, on the other hand, has its grown-up hero, but it is not the children's film that it seems to be.

Aaron Eckhart plays Zach Riley, an up-and-coming psychiatrist who is adamant to take a job at a mental institution, and convinces the head doctor (William Hurt) to hire him. One of his patients is Gabriel Finch (Ian McKellen), a strange old man who is convinced that Zach is Zachary Small, a children's book hero who will help him save his kingdom of Neverwas. He is partially right -- Zach's father was the book's writer, T.L. Pierson (Nick Nolte), and he used his son as the model for the heroic character. Pierson is actually the reason for Zach's interest in the hospital. The writer suffered from depression, and killed himself while Zach was still a boy. Years later, Zach is haunted by his memories of his father, surely amplified by the reminders around him, and the fact that Pierson spent time in the same institution.

Last week I brought you a story about the busy, busy career of David Goyer. His teen supernatural thriller The Invisible hits theaters today. The Dark Knight, Jumper, Super Max, Here There Be Dragons -- all of these projects have Goyer's name attached in some capacity. Well, add another big one to the list. It has just been announced that Goyer will direct the X-Men spinoff Magneto. The first three X-Men movies grossed over a billion dollars worldwide, and as long as that cash cow is giving milk, you can bank on many more films from the X-Men family. In fact, another -- the X-Men prequel Wolverine -- will hit theaters before Magneto. Wolverine will be written by David Benioff (who wrote one of my favorite recent screenplays -- 25th Hour), and Hugh Jackman will return as the mutton-chopped mutant. A director for Wolverine should be announced very soon.

Magneto will be an "origin story," and the plot, hinted at by the other X-Men films, is as follows: "Magneto comes to grips with his mutant ability to manipulate metal objects as he and his parents try to survive in Auschwitz. Magneto meets Professor Xavier when the latter is a soldier liberating the concentration camp." Sounds like some heavy subject matter for a comic book flick! Magneto will try out and shape his powers "by hunting down and killing Nazi war criminals who tortured him, and his lust for vengeance turns Xavier and Magneto into enemies." There was talk for a while that McKellen would reprise his role using the digital retro-aging techniques used in X-Men: The Last Stand, but that idea has been scrapped, and that's probably for the best. It sounds like if you want your McKellen fix, you'll have to hope they use a flashback structure, because Magneto and Professor Xavier will both be played by actors in their 20's. This doesn't leave a whole lot of exciting possibilities. I hope we don't wind up with Ashton Kutcher in a purple helmet and Seann William Scott in a bald cap.

Ian McKellen is the definition of stardust -- he is versatile, romantic and ethereal -- and it only makes sense that he signed on to narrate the upcoming film Stardust.

They don't call him Sir for nothing. He has earned that title time and time again with his plethora of intense roles. Each role he mastered as if it required nothing but him reciting the words. I always enjoy an actor who obtains such simplicity; a simplicity that can play Shakespeare (so many actors lack this ability and training) or something as majestic as Gandalf in Lord of the Rings.

Stardust is based on Neil Gaiman's novel baring the same name. The story is a lovely one, as a young man tries to win the heart of the woman he loves by promising to find a fallen star. His journey begins when acting to fulfill his promise. He then finds himself searching in the land of Faerie where he encounters hoards of magical and frightening beings.

The film includes a star-studded cast: Claire Daines, Robert DeNiro and Sienna Miller play characters in the story McKellen will tell. Matthew Vaughn, producer of Snatch, will be responsible for bringing the film to life. But it's McKellen's voice that will bring the film full circle. The actor -- not shy to voice-over work -- is bound to entrance us with this fairy tale; simply with the cadence of his voice.

What is it about kid's films? Or, rather, what is it about kid's films recently? Computer animation has made making kid's film's easier, it seems, based on the flurry of dreck like Chicken Little and The Barnyard; the better question is if computer animation has made releasing them too easy. The case in point this week is Flushed Away, the latest collaboration between Aardman Animation (Wallace & Gromit, Chicken Run) and Dreamworks Animation (Shrek, Madagascar). Flushed Away combines two worlds - the design and aesthetic of Aardman's gentle, claymation stories with the computer-generated spectacle of Dreamworks' industrial approach to animation. The result is a curious, unfixed mix of the good, the bad and the ugly -- while Flushed Away has a certain English whimsy to it, it also has the overstuffed, joke-a-millisecond kind of excess that executives think render animated films breezy trifles, but actually turns them into leaden chores. Or, put another way: In Flushed Away, a group of minion frogs in the service of a mercenary bad guy known as Le Frog (and voiced by Jean Reno) are given the order to action; they immediately hurl up their hands and cry "We surrender!" Is this funny, to a kid? Is it funny to any grown-up whose I.Q. is higher than their belt size?

Before Le Frog enters the arena, though, Flushed Away begins as pampered house pet rat Roddy (voiced by Hugh Jackman) is left alone as his owner leaves the house for a holiday. Roddy promptly goes on a high-spirited spree, playing with all the toys and dolls and neat geegaws, but we also notice he's a bit lonely. A plumbing mishap leads loud, boisterous rat Sid (Shane Richie) to Roddy's home, and soon Roddy is plunged into the toilet and out of his paradise. In the sewers, Roddy finds a small London, underground -- a teeming Rodent-opolis of families, commerce and bustling activity. Roddy's quest to get back home brings him to the dock of ship's pilot Rita (voiced by Kate Winslet), who may be able to get him to the surface -- but that's waylaid by the manipulations of the silken-voiced mastermind known as The Toad (Ian McKellen), who's plotting to wipe the sewer rodent-opolis away. ...