I recall reading about real-life experiments with invisibility a couple years back, and I could have sworn I blogged about them here on Cinematical. But I must have decided to keep Harry Potter fans from getting their hopes up, despite the fact that the original article I read had specifically mentioned Potter's invisibility cloak. Plus, I must have been hesitant to attempt to explain the science behind it.

Well, now that more news has come out about the development of materials that may be able to render people and other three-dimensional objects invisible, I figure it's time to get excited. Now we can definitely wander around Hogwarts after dark without being spotted by Argus Filch. Or, for the grown up kids, you can potentially sneak into the girls' locker room. Just beware that these real-life cloaks probably don't work so well in such foggy conditions.

Once in awhile I come across little stories that are relevant to this column that don't necessarily call for so many words of commentary. But it's a shame to skip over them, so occasionally, I'd like to break The Exhibitionist up a bit and write about a few of them at once.


The first thing that caught my attention this week was a report of a study focused on ambient lighting, such as the kind used in cinemas. According to research conducted by academics at the University of Cumbria in England, and at University College Dublin in Ireland, movies should be viewed in rooms that are as well lit as the movies themselves. So, yes, that means your local multiplex has the lights dimmed way too low.

But, you wonder, isn't it dark in theaters because we can see the movie much better that way? And when we're at home don't we turn out the lights, or, when it's daytime, close the shades for the same reason? Well, yes, but incorrectly so, say Cumbria's Professor David Manning and UCD's Professor Patrick Brennan. Their findings indicate that such darkness actually hinders the eye's ability to see at optimum capability. "Ideally, ambient light should be adapted to the brightness of the screen for the eye to pick up as much detail as it can," Manning said. "However, most people prefer to watch films in a darkened room, but as the eye adapts to the surrounding light these conditions may not be conducive to picking up maximum visual detail."

Get your ass to Mars ... again. According to Moviehole, there's a new Total Recall movie in the works, but it is hard to really tell if it's to be a sequel or a remake. Apparently The Weinsteins have owned the rights to the original TR for years and they had plans to do a follow up. Then Spielberg's Minority Report happened. Huh? Aside from also being adapted from a Philip K. Dick story, MR has nothing to do with TR. Except that it was originally scripted by Ronald Schusett and Gary Goldman as Total Recall 2. Of course, the end result bears no resemblance to that draft, in which Tom Cruise's character was actually Arnold Schwarzenegger's Doug Quaid, the Precogs were mutated humans (from the Martian atmosphere) and all the action took place on Mars. Still, Moviehole claims Minority Report beat The Weinsteins to the punch and so this new Total Recall project will in fact be a remake.

Personally, I don't see how Minority Report keeps The Weinsteins from doing a sequel. Dick's story had no relation to his "We Can Remember It for You Wholesale", which was the inspiration for Total Recall, and really the movie makes no reference. Sure, Schusett and Goldman's idea for a sequel is no longer possible, but there is certainly other ways to do one. However, the fact that Schwarzenegger isn't exactly an actor these days also contributes to the problems with producing a sequel. Doing a follow up without him, though, would not be that surprising. In fact, it is particularly common with Paul Verhoeven movies to do a sequel without the stars of the first film (Hollow Man II; Robocop 3; Starship Troopers 2). At least Sharon Stone is interested in a Total Recall sequel. Certainly it would be more ridiculous to go the remake route, considering how popular Verhoeven's original was -- and still is.

For those of you looking to hire Alan Hedgcock to work on your film, you might notice his websites are down (bandwith exceeded). This is either because all of Hollywood is trying to access the pages, or because the authorities have taken them down due to the fact that he has just been found guilty of conspiring to rape two children. Hedgcock, along with two other men, were sentenced to a total of 27 years in prison (Hedgcock's sentence is 8 years) for their plot to kidnap and rape two teenage sisters, as well as for possession of child pornography.

Hedgcock's special effects makeup work can be seen in 28 Days Later ..., Kingdom of Heaven, First Knight, Black Hawk Down and The Upside of Anger, among other films. He also apparently co-wrote the book Behind the Mask: The Secrets of Hollywood's Monster Makers. Evidence introduced at trial showed that it was Hedgcock who first suggested the plan -- to abduct the two girls, aged 13 and 14 -- to his partner. Together with this partner, he then detailed a plan to rape the girls in a nearby woods. Hedgcock's partner broke down and alerted police of the plans before they could be carried out. The two men were cleared on charges of conspiracy to commit murder.