I guess I'll be better equipped to comment on this after I watch Indiana Jones and the Kingdom of the Crystal Skull on Sunday, but George Lucas has told Roger Friedman that he envisions Shia LaBeouf, playing Indy's maybe-son Mutt, taking over the Indiana Jones franchise from Harrison Ford. Speaking about the "more than a strong possibility" (Friedman's words, not Lucas's) of a fifth film, Lucas says: "I have an idea to make Shia [LeBeouf] the lead character next time and have Harrison [Ford] come back like Sean Connery did in [Last Crusade]. I can see it working out." I note this without comment for now. Next week, once a bunch of us have seen Mutt's debut, we'll go nuts.

Lucas did say something else to Friedman that I found a bit offputting. In an attempt to brush off the mixed buzz on Crystal Skull, he said: "This movie is the exact same experience as the other three were. The difference is, the novelty of discovery is gone." The "exact same experience"? Why, it's almost as if the movie were a Kraft cheese stick rather than a piece of pop art! Dammit, George. We may all know it already, but some of us like to pretend otherwise. Why don't you let Spielberg do the press rounds from now on, whaddya say?



[hat tip: CinemaBlend]

It wasn't Darby O'Gill and the Little People that brought Sean Connery to superstardom. It was his many gigs as James Bond, stretching from Dr. No in 1962 to Never Say Never Again in 1983. But that era is over. These days, Daniel Craig is 007, and he's gearing up for the 22nd Bond installment with Quantum of Solace. So, what's that have to do with Connery? Well, according to Ace Showbiz, a new press release says that the actor has considered returning to the franchise as the big baddie.

Connery is quoted as saying: "I wouldn't mind coming back as a Bond villain. But I don't think they would pay me enough. They don't pay the money for other parts, only for the Bond character, although that wasn't the case when I was doing it." Ouch! I would think they might want to add Connery in to at least save some face. Sure, things change, but what production wants to be considered penny pinchers that only care about Craig?

Ace goes on to say: "Allegedly, the 77-year-old Academy Award-winning actor has been involved in negotiations to land a villain role with the film's producers since Daniel Craig has been tapped to bring Ian Fleming's agent back to the big screen with Casino Royale."

Could this be true? Would they ever pay enough for this to really happen? We'll have to wait and see. But in the meantime, what do you think? Should Connery return to the world of James Bond?

Should Sean Connery be a James Bond villain?

Yes!!!No way. He should leave it in the past.I don't know...I don't care...Vote

Maybe the most irritating thing about Roland Emmerich's generally unwatchable 10,000 BC was leading man Steven Strait's bizarre accent. Totally indeterminate -- he trilled his r's and drawled occasionally -- it was clearly meant to indicate in some uncertain way that what we're watching takes place a Very Long Time Ago. Hello? The movie is called 10,000 BC and the characters are already speaking English. Making them speak weird English isn't exactly adding verisimilitude. I don't know who Emmerich thought he was fooling.

I always find this sort of thing annoying, and sometimes vaguely insulting. I'm perfectly fine with characters who speak English even though they're not supposed to -- it's easier that way, and I can suspend disbelief. But if you're going to go that route, why add constant, pointless reminders of the very fact you're trying to dodge? Part of the reason I admire The Hunt for Red October is that John McTiernan said "screw it" and let Sean Connery keep his Scottish brogue as a Soviet submarine captain.*

If you're old and boring like me, chances are you're not heading out to some paradise for Spring Break this year. It's cool, though, because Moviefone has got you covered. They've had the unfortunate job of combing through thousands of photos, searching for the top shots of our favorite female AND male movie characters wearing their most beloved, adorable swimwear.

On the girls side, we have one of the more geek-famous shots of Princess Leia rockin' her slave bikini. (A personal favorite, if I may say so myself.) There's Halle Berry, Jessica Alba, Elizabeth Hurley, Ursula Andress -- trust me, you'll want to check out this gallery. The men also get their time in the spotlight (though none of them beat my rock-solid abs). Let's see, we have dudes like Matthew McConaughey (who takes his shirt off in every film just so he can wind up on a list like this later in the year), Jesse Bradford, Sean Connery and, of course, Daniel Craig. You be the judge of which Bond looks better in a bathing suit.

Head over here to check out the ladies, and over here to check out the guys. And make sure you vote for your favorites at the end.

I just love those lists that are supposed to represent the fandom of the general public. This is probably because my preferences rarely converge with them. Sure, some of my tastes are a little off the beaten path -- I'd pick Danny Huston over Brad Pitt, or Julie Delpy over Julia Roberts. That being said, I still love me some good mainstream. Yet I still find myself raising my brows when I read these lists, just as I did today when I saw the annual Harris Poll for America's favorite movie stars, which Hollywood.com put up today. The order is surprising, as is the one lone oldie to the group.

Their results, counting down from 10 to 1:

10. Bruce Willis
9. Sandra Bullock
7. (tie) Matt Damon & Sean Connery
6. John Wayne
5. Will Smith
4. Julia Roberts
3. Johnny Depp
2. Tom Hanks
1. Denzel Washington

Yes, that's John Wayne there at number 6. Apparently he is the only actor to nab a spot on the poll every year since its inception in '94. Also, Depp is quickly working his way up the ranks, having moved up four positions from last year. Personally, I find the list surprising, and a bit sad in the realm of women in cinema. What say you?

Well he might not have his Capone yet, but Brian DePalma is still determined to bring his Untouchables prequel to the big screen. MTV Movies Blog reports that DePalma will likely make The Untouchables: Capone Rising his next film. DePalma tells MTV that they still have not cast their Capone (played by Robert De Niro in the original film), but that he was looking for an actor with "...that street animal sexuality" -- and this just might be me, but Nicolas Cage is not the first person to come to mind with that particular description (although, I guess it doesn't matter now). Gerard Butler (300) is attached to play Jimmy Malone -- a role made famous by Sean Connery (I can still picture the overacting 20 years later... "You wanna know how to get Capone? They pull a knife, you pull a gun. He sends one of yours to the hospital, you send one of his to the morgue. *That's* the *Chicago* way"). But, it did get the man his only Oscar, so you can never tell.

DePalma told MTV that the story will focus on "[Jimmy Malone]'s relationship with Capone during Capone's rise". News of a prequel first emerged around this time last year; so here we are a year later, and not all that much has been accomplished. DePalma did make assurances that the film would be keeping as much of the original feel of the 1987 flick as possible, saying, "I would like to use a lot of the original music from 'The Untouchables,' (which means the amazing score from Ennio Morricone will return) and the original locations in Chicago." I wonder if that will include giving the cast some snazzy costumes from Armani again. Until DePalma finds his Capone, though, he probably won't be 'rising' anytime soon.

After that big plot leak this morning from an extra, I didn't think I'd ever again see another spoiler about Indiana Jones and the Kingdom of the Crystal Skulls. But then, thanks to Movieweb, I came across an interview with George Lucas, himself, at TV Guide.com. And guess what? The Indiana producer shares some new information about the seemingly secreted blockbuster. Mind you, he doesn't really technically share any plot points or spoilers, but he does confirm one major thing: Sean Connery will not be making a cameo. All our hopes that somehow Connery had taken the role without it getting out to the media are now over. Turns out that Connery would rather stay retired and "play golf." But that isn't all. It turns out Lucas actually replaced Connery with another actor.

Say what? Don't worry, Lucas assures us that not only was Connery substituted, but so was his character. So, the replacement isn't Henry Jones (aka Indy's dad), it is some other minor character who somehow fulfills the same narrative role. In the end, Lucas claims it was better this way, because fans would have seen Connery early on and then hoped he was going to appear throughout. The original script, though, had Henry Jones show up only for a short part. Could this substitute character be Jim Broadbent's academic colleague at Yale? Makes sense. Check out Lucas' exact reasoning for why the switch was better in TV Guide's interview.

In more tune with this morning's leak, MTV Movies Blog yesterday posted some words from Cate Blanchett regarding her character. Of course, the actress was more tight-lipped than Tyler Nelson, and only confirmed that regretfully she was not a romantic interest for Indy and nowhere in the script did it call for she and Harrison Ford to share a kiss. So, before today's spoilers, it was already speculated with strong evidence that Blanchett would be playing some sort of villain.

James Bond -- when played by Sean Connery, Pierce Brosnan and now Daniel Craig (and a bit less so when played by Roger Moore, Timothy Dalton and George Lazenby) -- has long been the gold stanard by which all other cinematic spies have been judged. He's smooth, aloof, quick-witted and charming. Guys want to be like him and women with names like Pussy Galore want to sleep with him. But these days, 007 has some serious competition from a more reserved, grittier and -- dare we say -- more likeable amnesiac spy named Jason Bourne (Matt Damon).

When The Bourne Identity came along in 2002, it pretty much reinvented the action-spy genre, placing its hero, Jason Bourne, squarely in the real world (where things like Bond's invisible car do not exist) and dealing with the unheard of (in the Bond world, at least) issues of moral accountability, character metamorphosis and even vulnerability. Clearly influenced by his neophyte rival, a new Bond was born in 2006's Casino Royale, with Daniel Craig stepping into the tux of a more down-to-earth, relatable and gadget-free 007. Even so, the gap between these two men remains enormous.

From the cars they drive to the villains they battle to the way they fight to the women they bed, Moviefone compares the two most badass spies ever to grace a movie screen in a Jason Bourne vs. James Bond gallery. Check it out and then tell us: Who do you think is the more super spy?

Now that he's back in the spotlight with another Rush Hour movie, producer Arthur Sarkissian has some new projects to announce. One is a remake of Sidney Lumet's The Anderson Tapes, which originally starred Sean Connery and a young Christopher Walken. The new movie won't exactly be a remake of the earlier film, though; it will just simply also be based on Lawrence Sanders' novel, which Sarkissian has optioned. One thing that will be different about Sarkissian's version is it will be set in Miami instead of New York. It will have the same plot, about a thief released from prison who hatches a plan to rob an entire apartment building. Unbeknown to him, he's under constant surveillance, a topic with more relevance today then in 1971 (coincidentally, though, the original The Anderson Tapes opened on the same day as Watergate, only one year prior). Also significant these days is the movie's idea of different government agencies not knowing what the others are doing. Like the recent redo of The Manchurian Candidate, this could be one of the few remakes that are on-point rather than wholly unnecessary.

A second project Sarkissian has announced is an adaptation of part of William Stadiem and Mara Gibbs' book Everybody Eats There: Inside the World's Legendary Restaurants. Apparently the producer has a passion and knowledge for haute cuisine and he hopes to turn one of the book's chapters into a comedy about a very picky eater. This guy is notorious throughout the world, and makes enemies of top chef's, who conspire to get rid of him. Hopefully by the time the movie is made, Americans will still be obsessed with cooking shows and movies (the disappointing box office for No Reservations suggests the trend is already on its way out). Up next for Sarkissian is his remake of Jean-Pierre Melville's Le Cercle Rouge, which starts filming in October with Johnny To directing. He's also producing Prince Test, the directorial debut of ER's Noah Wyle.

Talk about stumbling onto the Holy Grail -- this is a bit like finding an unpublished F. Scott Fitzgerald novel in your grandmother's attic, or peeling back some old wallpaper and discovering an unknown Mozart composition stuck to the wall. That's exactly what author Robert Sellers found during a clandestine meeting with an unnamed friend of Kevin McClory while researching his book "The Battle for Bond." If you aren't familiar, Kevin McClory is the man who wrestled legally with the Broccolis over the right to the James Bond movies, and eventually was awarded the right to remake Thunderball, which eventually became the (somewhat painful) film Never Say Never Again.

Hardcore Bond fans know we're talking about Warhead, the James Bond movie that never was. It would have starred (and was co-written by) Sean Connery and would feature James Bond batling robotic sharks, skiing on the Hudson River, terrorists bent on exploding a nuclear warhead underneath Wall Street, and helicopter attacks on the Statue of Liberty. According to Sellers, "It would have been the most extravagant Bond film ever." It might sound corny now, but to me it's already better than A View To A Kill, which is one of my least favorite Bond films.

It would have gone before the cameras in 1977 with a budget of $22 million, but the Broccoli's started legal proceedings against the film and things ground to a halt, never to be revived again. Check out some exclusive photos from inside the book over at Commander Bond, and think about what this could have done, for better or for worse, to the franchise.