Oh, don't worry, this isn't some too-soon remake of that Matthew Perry / Salma Hayek film. This is something a wee bit more serious.

Variety reports that Liam Neeson and Orlando Bloom have signed on to star, and Javier Bardem is in talks to co-star, on a currently untitled film based on Bill Carter's book, Fools Rush In. The book focuses on Carter's time as an aid worker in Sarajevo, as he was grieving the death of his girlfriend in a car accident. It certainly will be a challenging piece of cinema, as Carter was there during the 43-month Balkan siege. I'm guessing that the untitled nature of the project is related to the Perry film.

Anyhow, Bloom says: "I read the script, and the very human story and the very core of this film spoke to me very clearly. This is a departure from the very big Hollywood productions." Andrucha Waddington, a Brazilian director, will helm the feature, and the production is scheduled to begin later this year. Now if only I could get over my Orlando apprehension...

See, it's totally NOT Orlando Bloom. Instead, as previously rumored, Jake Gyllenhaal has landed the lead role in The Prince of Persia: The Sands of Time for director Mike Newell, Walt Disney Pictures and Jerry Bruckheimer. Remember how we told you to expect both leads to be announced at the same time? Well, starring opposite Gyllenhaal will be ... Gemma Arterton. Yes, that random up-and-comer who recently nabbed a role in the new James Bond flick, Quantum of Solace.

In the film, Gyllenhaal will play Dastan, a young Prince who teams with an exotic princess named Tamina (Arterton) on a mission to stop "a villainous nobleman from possessing the Sands of Time, a gift from the gods that can reverse time and allow its possessor to rule the world," so says The Hollywood Reporter. The film, of course, is based on the popular video game (which I've personally never played) and, if successful, might turn into a brand new explosive franchise for Disney. Can Disney ultimately find a way to succeed with a video game adaptation where others have failed? And what do you think about Gyllenhaal playing the prince? Arterton as the princess? Good casting choices or completely off course?

Sound off you Persia fanboys (and girls)!

The man behind Election might not be heading to Hollywood yet, but he is heading to Europe, and he has a certain pirate in his sights. The Hollywood Reporter posts that Hong Kong filmmaker Johnnie To is heading to France to take on Red Circle, a remake of the 1970 crime thriller Le Rouge Cercle, and Wai Ka-Fai is developing it. So far, so funky, until you imagine that he wants Orlando Bloom to star in it.

I want to like Bloom. Really, I do. But the man just kills me. Rather, he has in his post-Lord of the Rings work. He inspired people to hope for his demise in Pirates, sunk with Elizabethtown, and is now being eyed to lead a crime thriller? A crime thriller that would have him star as a cool thief straight out of prison, no less. I just don't see it; he doesn't have the charisma for a tough thieving heist.

At least it's far from definite. To is said to have sent an offer to the actor, but negotiations haven't happened yet. Meanwhile, Chow Yun-Fat and Liam Neeson are in negotiations to co-star. Those two -- they sound just about right, but it makes me even more nervous about Bloom, who couldn't even begin to battle the presence of Johnny Depp. So, I ask you -- do you agree with To's selection, or can you think of someone better?

The cast and crew of New York, I Love You keeps growing and growing. There's not even enough room on the headline to list all the names that were just added. New York is a collection of short stories, part of a "Cities of Love" anthology that was begun by Paris, je ta'ime. New York will reportedly be followed by Shanghai, and then cities in South America and Africa.

The stories are showcasing an incredible variety of actors and directors. Natalie Portman and Scarlett Johansson are both making their directing debut, there's a good representation of international talent, and Brett Ratner hasn't been driven away by pitchforks and torches. Variety reported that Orlando Bloom, Olivia Thirlby, Hayden Christensen, and Ethan Hawke had climbed aboard the film. No word on who's segments they will appear in yet -- but a far better choice for Bloom's career than Prince of Persia, wouldn't you say?

I really dug Orlando Bloom in the Lord of the Rings trilogy, then recoiled in horror at his work in Pirates. Okay, not horror, but I was completely disappointed and wished the entire time that Will Turner would get killed and Sparrow would get Swann. When you're rooting for the womanizer, even when he's played by Johnny Depp, you know something is off. So, I wasn't really into the idea of him as the Prince of Persia, and was relieved to hear that he was out of the picture. Who's the next big name to make waves?

Latino Review says that Jake Gyllenhaal has been offered the lead role in Prince of Persia: Sands of Time. Now, if the site is to be believed, this will be the best film of all time. Well, the most visually appealing, that is. Okay, just something immensely appealing to my movie-fan heart. It's not just the Jake -- they say that lots of parkour is involved as well. (If David Belle got involved too...)

But seriously -- parkour is beautiful, and immensely great to watch on film -- unless it's being done by a bad guy who out-cools James Bond. And Gyllenhaal, he's got the acting chops and the body, and he'd also be a solid choice to make the film desirable to a larger audience. However, LR does note that Jake's messed up his ankle playing basketball, so he'd have to mend up first before taking on the role that starts this summer in Morocco. (Mend, please mend!)

I've said my piece, but what do you think?

UPDATE: Cinematical has talked with a Disney rep who would not deny nor confirm this rumor. Their "you'll see soon enough" stance leads us to believe there might be some truth here. Oh, and expect both leads to be announced at the same time.

Though this news hasn't officially hit the trades, Hollywood.com is reporting this morning that Orlando Bloom has landed the lead role in Jerry Bruckheimer's next giant adventure trilogy, The Prince of Persia. The deal is reportedly worth $40 million, and Bloom beat out Zac Efron (no way could I see him in that role) for the part. Bloom, as we all know, helped Bruckheimer's previous Pirates of the Caribbean trilogy become one of the most lucrative ever. So if Bloom is in, and a Princess still needs to be cast, does that mean we could be hearing Keira Knightley's name pop up in the near future?

Last we heard from Prince of Persia: The Sands of Time, shooting was to begin in Morocco this summer, with a release date of June 16, 2009 already in place (check out some concept art here). Mike Newell (Harry Potter and the Goblet of Fire) will direct off a script from Jordan Mechner. Prince of Persia, of course, is based on the very popular series of video games. The story will revolve around a Prince (Bloom) who teams with a rival princess (Knightley???) to stop an evil ruler from unleashing a sandstorm that could destroy the world.

So, what do you fans of the game think about Orlando Bloom in the lead role?

UPDATE: Disney has gone on record with several sources (including Cinematical) claiming this story is absolutely not true. Of course, we will let you know whenever the real casting announcement has been made.

Last month, I was sold on the idea of Peter Sarsgaard being a lascivious '60s swinger who gives Carey Mulligan An Education. In the sea of my hopes for a good film, I sort of glossed over the fact that Orlando Bloom was also involved. (He might make a great, stunt-performing Legolas, but he hasn't impressed me in anything else.) Well, now it seems that he's not on the roster.

The Hollywood Reporter posts that the actor has pulled out of Lone Scherfig's An Education, citing scheduling conflicts, which seems a bit weird since the film just began shooting. One would think that he would have someone watching his calendar and noticing that he was double-booked...

Whether that's the real reason or not, Orlando is out, and has been replaced by Dominic Cooper, the guy who recently popped up in The History Boys, and who will soon be a leading man in Mamma Mia! The Brit already has experience acting in the '60s/'70s as well -- he was a "Squaddie at Disco" in 2005's Breakfast on Pluto.

Which would you prefer? Orlando Bloom, or Dominic Cooper?

A retro film set in 1960s London is interesting. Hearing that Nick Hornby wrote the script makes it intriguing. An awesome cast -- that just makes the upcoming film An Education sound downright tasty. Variety reports that Lone Scherfig, the Danish filmmaker behind Happy-Go-Lucky, is gearing up to helm the feature, and these are the names she'll get to mold with her directorial hands: Peter Sarsgaard, Orlando Bloom, Alfred Molina, Sally Hawkins, Rosamund Pike, Emma Thompson, Olivia Williams, and newcomer Carey Mulligan. (Some of the cast signed on earlier this month.)

While I vowed that I learned my lesson about great actors not necessarily making great movies after Derailed, I so, so, so want to see this. The film will focus on a 17-year-old girl played by Mulligan who lived in the quiet burbs of London. However, it's during the swinging '60s, and she gets pulled into craziness by a 30-something Brit played by Sarsgaard. (Cradle robber.) As THR described it: "He courts her with chic dinners, clubs, and foreign trips, charming her father (Molina) but putting her future at Oxford University in jeopardy." Thompson, meanwhile, plays her school's headmistress.

Dumb joke of the day #2: She should've bought a SarsGuaard.

Production begins in London this March.

The outlaw Ned Kelly, along with his gang, is an important historical figure in Australia and an important cinematic figure in Australian cinema. Including a widely distributed 2003 release starring Heath Ledger, Naomi Watts and Orlando Bloom, the gang has been portrayed in at least 10 films. Kelly's story was first the focus of a 1906 film by Charles Tait titled The Story of the Kelly Gang, which is considered to be the first feature-length dramatic motion picture, with an original running time of 70 minutes (however, there had previously been feature-length films of boxing matches and also other very long religious films). The whole film no longer exists, though; after 100 years, there is only 17 minutes of footage available. It had been thought to have been gone altogether until 1975, when the first small segment was found. Since then, other substantial bits have been recovered, with last year's discovery of a whole reel -- 11 minutes -- being the most significant. What is left of the film was recently digitally restored, screened publicly and finally released on DVD.

That fragmented footage has now also been added to a United Nations heritage register. UNESCO's Memory of the World register recognizes and preserves artifacts and records of world significance, and currently the list only features fewer than 200 items. Another piece of Australian history added to the register this year is records of 165,000 convicts transported from England to Australia throughout the 18th and 19th Centuries. Non-Australian items include records from Nelson Mandela's trial and, also of cinematic interest, the 1939 classic The Wizard of Oz and the personal archives of filmmaker Ingmar Bergman, which includes hand- and type-written original manuscripts, drafts, notebooks, production papers, photographs and behind-the-scenes footage from his films, and correspondences, all of which, laid out, apparently reaches about 45 meters in length.

About seven hours into Pirates of the Caribbean: At World's End, someone stuffs a monkey into a cannon, lights the fuse and sends it shooting across the deck to crash into another character. That monkey is like us, the audience -- bruised, confused and unsure what it did to deserve this punishment. We have to endure a hurricane of hooey, a hydra-headed story with more subplots and pointless reversals than a Raymond Chandler tale and more doodad MacGuffins -- a compass that points to this, a key that unlocks that -- than even a parody could endure, all of which leads to a sort of white noise of confusion where a plot should be. Even if that monkey-cannon were pointed at my head, I couldn't explain to you why, for example, the key pirates from the previous two films are now introduced to us as 'pirate lords' -- leaders of some kind of pirate's union, which, judging by Captain Jack (Johnny Depp) and Captain Barbossa (Geoffrey Rush) does not offer dental. It's their lordship, and what that means for pirates everywhere, that this trilogy capper is supposedly about.

You'll remember that at the end of the last film, Dead Man's Chest, Depp's swishy swashbuckler was betrayed by Keira Knightley's colonial babe Elizabeth Swann, left manacled to the deck of his ship as it was being eaten by a steroid-squid, in the hopes that a sticky pirate curse would drown with him and his ship. The audience wasn't fooled -- even the most casual moviegoer knew Depp would be returning for part three -- but films that include an easy-breezy transition between life and afterlife often find themselves having to paddle twice as hard to get dramatic tension going, which is one of the problems that most plagues At World's End. After all, if no one can really die, what's the worst thing that can happen? (One of the reasons I've never bothered to read a comic book in my life, by the way) Somewhere around the thirty-minute mark of this one, we're re-introduced to Captain Jack, who is stuck in some kind of Looney Tunes purgatory, commanding a ship sitting in the middle of a desert, and crewed only by multiple Jack Sparrows.