Ever since Daniel Craig took over as James Bond and helped re-boot the entire franchise with a modern, serious spin, folks have wondered how far, exactly, they'd take our favorite secret agent. Not long ago there was a rumor that Bond would go full frontal in Casino Royale, but that came and went. And then, for some odd reason, fans pondered whether Bond would ever seduce a man ... or if a man would ever seduce him. Perhaps the rumor began when Craig co-starred in Infamous and shared a kiss with Toby Jones -- or maybe a select group of fans simply like to push the buttons of those who would rather ... let's just say not be down for watching Bond take on a homosexual experience.

Well, most of you have nothing to worry about (and I say 'most' because I know our readers like to get their freak on and wouldn't mind some Bond on Hanz action). While in London, Craig addressed the issue and, regarding whether Bond would ever seduce another man, he said: " No. Kill him and then seduce him [laughs] but not seduce him. This is that question that keeps eternally coming up but it's never been on the agenda and we've never had a discussion about it. It's not something that I desire or want. No." Or shall we call that a Double-O No?

What do you think? Is there room in the franchise for them to play around with this idea?

Three people I'll admit to being a fan of: Harvey Milk; Gus Van Sant; Sean Penn. Yet for some reason I'm not really looking forward to Van Sant's Milk, a biopic of openly gay politician Harvey Milk, in which Penn will play the title role. Mostly (and I said this when Penn was first attached) I can't see the cranky actor playing the typically smiling San Francisco city supervisor, who was assassinated by a co-worker in 1978. Sure, Penn is a terrific actor who can play nearly any kind of role. But Harvey Milk? I'll believe it when I see it. If you haven't already seen the Oscar-winning documentary The Times of Harvey Milk, and you are looking forward to Milk, you might as well save the doc to watch after seeing the Hollywood version ...

... Or, this Hollywood version, at least. There are two. The other one, titled The Mayor of Castro Street, is supposed to be directed by The Usual Suspects' Bryan Singer. But according to Variety, Mayor is stuck "in strike limbo" -- Christopher McQuarrie's script is reportedly finished but failed to be submitted pre-strike. So, Milk will definitely be the first to be filmed, and therefore will likely be the first to hit theaters. Traditionally, the first of dueling biopics wins the better box office (see Capote vs. Infamous), so Mayor may not even want to bother. Unless it gets a much better actor to play Milk -- and who knows a better actor who also resembles Milk more than Penn? As much as I dislike Penn in the role, I don't see anyone else fitting the part (I'd rather just let Times be the only Milk movie). At one point, Matt Damon was also lightly attached to Milk, but the latest news makes no mention of Damon playing assassin and fellow S.F. City Supervisor Dan White, who he would be perfect as. If he were still set to play the film's villain, I would be totally into it, but without him, I'm really fearful.

Last year's best actor, according to almost everyone in America, was Philip Seymour Hoffman. This year's is Forest Whitaker. But who is the better of the two? Luckily in the U.S., critics don't have to damage their brains deciding. In London, however, critics do. Thanks to later release dates in the UK, Capote is considered a 2006 movie there. So are Good Night, and Good Luck, The Squid and the Whale and The Upside of Anger. All four are featured among the nominees for the London Film Critics Circle awards, which will be presented February 8.

At least Hoffman hasn't been pit against Toby Jones, the other portrayer of Truman Capote, in Infamous. The former is in the Actor race while the latter is recognized in the British Actor category.

Neither Capote nor Good Night, and Good Luck, both of which were nominated for the Best Picture Oscar were considered by the London critics for Film of the Year. Their five picks were limited to more current releases, including The Queen, which received the most nominations, with seven.

Is it obvious that The Queen is recognized so well by the Brits? Well, considering it is a British film, it qualifies for more categories than other top contenders for the major awards. It is the only title to be listed in the Film of the Year and British Film ("The Attenborough Award") categories and Helen Mirren has been nominated for Actress and British Actress, an honor she shares with Judi Dench. Without the double mentions, The Queen would be tied with The Last King of Scotland for five noms.

This week I was in the mood for a stream-of-consciousness rant:

It's apparently still a big secret that, just as certain films are marketed to teenage boys, other films are marketed specifically to the critics, with the long view set squarely on Oscar night. These films come with a professional polish, and usually contain 20 or 30 minutes of extra footage. They practically scream "Oscar," but most critics can't seem to hear. Roger Ebert, even after 40 years of experience, was fooled into voting for Crash as the best picture of 2005, a decision that I'm sure helped to fuel Oscar voters. And Peter Travers practically lines up the ten most likely Oscar nominees every year in his December list.

Films like All the King's Men and the other shoo-ins for award consideration are screened in advance, plenty of times, for hungry critics. Basically it's the studios and advertisers who are deciding which of these films get the awards push. Frankly, I'd sooner vote for Borat, Snakes on a Plane or Ultraviolet for Best Picture than All the King's Men, The Last King of Scotland (56 screens), Copying Beethoven (26 screens) or others of that ilk.

Just in case you missed them the first time around, here's a round-up of what we (and you!) have been talking about on Cinematical this week:


HOT TOPICS!

Disney Insider: Orlando Bloom Won't Survive Pirates 4? (139 comments!)
Avalanche of Animated Adventures Alienates Audiences (87 comments!)
Julia Roberts Set to Eat, Pray, Love (36 comments)
Quickhits: Pitt Plays With State, Berg to Helm Tonight, and About Those Deathly Orlando Bloom Rumors (28 comments)
Cinematical Seven: Horror Films That Really Scare Me (27 comments)
Film School: Is it Necessary? (11 comments)
The Punisher Is Coming Back! (11 comments)
Christopher Guest Pimps VW as Nigel Tufnel (8 comments)
Chris Nolan Says No to the Penguin (7 comments)
Monday Morning Poll: Is the Sleeper Hit Dead? (7 comments)
When Partnerships Make for Great Filmmaking (6 comments)
Digital Transforms Movies (5 comments)
Deliver Us From Evil Stirs Prosecutor's Interest in Cardinal Mahony (4 comments)

More, much more, after the jump ...

I bet there are some real hardcore fans of A Nightmare on Elm Street who bought a house on Elm Street in their own town just to have that association. But if they wanted to be a REAL hardcore fan, they'd get a place on N. Genesee Avenue. More specifically, they'd get the place at 1428 N. Genesee Avenue in Los Angeles. For those of us who don't know everything Freddy Krueger, that address is the location of the house used in the Nightmare films, otherwise known as "Nancy's house." It has 4 bedrooms, 3.5 bathrooms, a pool and a fireplace. And it is selling for just under $2 million. The ad for the home says it's a bit of a fixer (must be all the damage from Freddy) but "with some work this could be your Family Dream House." Right. Because the kids are really going to love living there. Of course, there are some twisted people out there, and I can envision a fan-couple moving in with their young daughters, who they make play jump rope on the front walkway.

As for anyone looking for a creepy home with a little more space, there's also the Clutter Home in Holcomb, Kansas. This home is available through a private auction and has the added creepiness factor of actually being a multiple murder site. Yes, I think it was featured in In Cold Blood (but maybe not in Capote or Infamous). However more than being a movie location, it's where the Clutter family were killed in the middle of the night by Perry Smith and Richard Hickcock. This "beautiful" property has 5 bedrooms, 4 bathrooms and, "ample space for the children to work on 4-H projects and school activities."

Whichever of these you choose, you should start packing right away, because with Halloween right around the corner, you'll definitely want to do something extra scary for the trick-or-treaters (actually, the Clutter home probably isn't a popular trick-or-treat stop unless the Holcomb kids have good legs and not much interest in filling their candy bags).

I've tried as hard as conceivably possible to avoid this story because it's about as lame as a story can get: Daniel Craig, my fantasy-husband and your future James Bond, has been caught kissin' a man -- specifically, Truman Capote, in the latest Capote biopic, Infamous. As we are all likely aware, Mr. Craig will play the role of Perry Smith, one of the duo of killers Capote interviews as the subject for his book, In Cold Blood. This news has turned up everywhere, absurdly.

Basically, I'm of the opinion that Mr. Craig may kiss whomever he wants and take whichever movie roles he'd like, regardless of what the script calls for him to do with his lips. Frankly, I love him and he can do no wrong. What totally upsets me is that none of these articles acknowledges that this is not the first time Mr. Craig has kissed another man onscreen, and by failing to acknowledge this, all these cheesy gossip rags have overlooked an excellent, important film of Mr. Craig's - 2004's Enduring Love. Maybe this latest kiss is catching all the flak because Craig's character entered into it voluntrily, unlike his kiss in Love with Rhys Ifans, which came at the tensest moment in the film. But Craig's character in Love is the Devil certainly voluntarily submits to a love affair with British painter Francis Bacon, played by Derek Jacobi. I've never seen Love is the Devil, but I think you get the idea that Enduring Love is highly recommended.

Here we are at Day Three of Telluride already. Only one more day of fun and film at 10,000 feet to go before I'm off to Toronto. Today was beautiful in Telluride, absolutely perfect for sitting outside to interview Venus director Roger Michell during an afternoon screening of his film. Michell was every bit as delightful in person as he seems in his Q&As. He was due to take off right after the post-show Q&A to get his kids back to London in time for school tomorrow, before heading to Toronto himself to promote the film there. I'll have the interview up as soon as I have enough spare minutes to get it transcribed.

After the interview, I had a little time before I needed to queue up for the screening of Infamous at the Galaxy, so I headed down to Main Street (aka Colorado Street), the heart of Telluride, to score a sandwich to eat in line. On my way back to the Galaxy, I found a nice little coffee shop, where I got a lovely triple-shot latte -- just what I needed to boost me through the afternoon and evening. Finally got into the Galaxy after waiting in the queue forever. It's a neat theater: They convert the elementary school gymnasium into a full-fledged theater by covering everything in black velvet drapes and bringing in lots of cool neon galaxy-themed art. I enjoyed Infamous more than I expected to. I wasn't sure the world needed two films about Truman Capote in as many years, but the film was well-done and well-acted, with Sandra Bullock putting in a particularly strong performance as Capote's childhood friend, Pulitzer prize-winning author Nelle Harper Lee (To Kill a Mockingbird). I love To Kill a Mockingbird, but I had no idea that Lee based the character of Dil on Capote. I know, I'm probably the only person on the planet who didn't know that. That's okay. You learn all kinds of unexpected things at film festivals.

Saturday was interesting. I was supposed to go to an early screening, but didn't sleep well (the altitude is getting to me a bit) and decided to stay in this morning to write reviews instead, while slurping down what passes for coffee here at the lodge. I'd pay serious cash for Seattle's 24/7 access to a latte right about now -- my blood-to-caffeine ratio has dipped dangerously low at this point.

Possibly because of that, I forgot to mention an interesting story in yesterday's report. On the gondola ride back to the lodge, I met a woman who had just been to the Emmys. She is a "seat filler" at the awards shows, primarily the Oscars and Emmys. She's done this for years -- she doesn't get paid for it, but she has a blast. What's a "seat filler," you ask? A seat filler sits in empty seats next to stars whose spouses or dates have gone off to the bathroom or to sneak a smoke, so that when the camera pans their way it doesn't look like they're alone.

While throwing together this week's Trailer Park, I couldn't help but think back to one of my favorite Wonder Years episodes. See, I was a fanatical Wonder Years fan growing up. I don't think there will ever be another set of characters from a television show with whom I connect with so well. That's right, Kevin Arnold is, and will always be, my childhood hero. Admit it, you're right there with me.

Okay, so if you, like me, are a huge fan of The Wonder Years, then you should immediately remember the episode in question upon reading the following sentence: "Give me some men who are stout-hearted men, who will fight for the right they adore." Did you get it? Glee Club? Season 3, episode 16? A classic! Anyway, the following films are all about men -- stout-hearted men -- who stand up for what they believe in and refuse to give up until the job is done. Well, except, one of them is a tad on the feminine side ... but he's still driven by his passion to succeed. And that's what counts. Welcome to this week's Trailer Park: