Recently, when Paddy Considine was being considered for the role of the villain Jigsaw in The Punisher: War Zone, a fan questioned why the movie would cast a Brit as an Italian mobster. That fan will probably continue wondering, because, according to The Hollywood Reporter, Lionsgate has finally announced the actor who won the part over Considine, and it is another English actor, Dominic West. If you remember, Considine was offered the role when the first choice had to pass, but then that first choice ended up taking it after all. So, West must have been that first choice. Funny, I was expecting someone more well-known, but I guess with recent appearances in 300 and Hannibal Rising and a recurring part on the popular television series The Wire, West is still more famous than Cinderella Man's Considine (personally, I can only place West in 28 Days, while I've seen much of Considine's work). For those unfamiliar with the comics, Jigsaw has a torn-up and re-stitched face, so it isn't like audiences will be recognizing West's own mug anyway.

Joining West is a more familiar actor who has also just been cast in the movie. Everyone's favorite conniving fat man, Wayne Knight (Seinfeld's "Newman"), will play Microchip (aka Linus Lieberman), the lone confidant who works with The Punisher, supplying him with guns and ammo -- think James Bond's Q meets Batman's Alfred, says Wikipedia. Because we can expect nothing less from Knight, though, I have to assume he also stabs The Punisher in the back and then gets eaten by dinosaurs. West and Knight join Ray Stevenson, as The Punisher, and the recently announced Dash Mikok (Romeo + Juliet's "Benvolio"), as Detective Soap, Colin Salmon (Resident Evil), as Agent Budiansky, and Doug Hutchison (The Green Mile) as LBJ (aka Looney Bin Jim). The comic adaptation will be directed by Lexi Alexander and may be released as early as late 2008.

Have you had your fill of Indiana Jones IV spoilers yet? Well, if you can tolerate one more, keep reading. I've got a new one for you. But first, I would like to direct your attention an amusing report from the Associated Press. It's about how the Indy production has moved shop over to Hawaii's Big Island, specifically to the Hamakua Coast, north of Hilo. It also reveals that, according to the Aloha State's film commissioner, the production is still going by the name "The Untitled Genre Project." Okay, here's the funny part: the report contains the following misspellings: "Raiders of the Lost Arc," "Shia LeBeouf," and "Cate Blanchet." I know, I shouldn't talk, because I've been known to confuse the spellings of Columbia (Pictures) and Colombia (the country). And I must forgive the fact that LaBeouf and Blanchett do have difficult names. If I was to ever misspell Raiders of the Lost Ark, though, I would hope to get a million comments calling for my resignation from blogging about movies (that would be about a thousand more than I currently get, right?).

Anyway, now that I've given enough filler, I can get on with the spoiler. The Honolulu Advertiser claims (via IGN) Steven Spielberg and Harrison Ford are shooting the opening sequence near a Hamakua waterfall. This scene involves Indiana Jones fighting with Russian soldiers. If this is correct, it could be similar to the opening sequence of Raiders, the only other Indy pic that starts in a jungle setting. So, is everything about this sequel going to evoke the first movie? We've already heard rumors that the plot again revolves around the Ark of the Covenant. Personally, I'd rather see Indiana Jones in Jurassic Park than a repeat artifact. With Spielberg and George Lucas now in Hawaii, he can still change his mind and go in that direction. Since the Hawaii location will probably be harder to find for fans and paparazzi, I expect fewer images and videos from the latest sets, but maybe we'll at least get something official from Lucasfilm one of these days. In addition to Hamakua, shooting will take place near Keaau at a secluded piece of Shipman Estates property, which is also being used for equipment storage and set construction.

As much as I complain about CGI in movies, I do recognize and respect the few films that have used computer effects well. The truth is, some bad movies have great digital effects that go under-appreciated, which is far more tragic than the so-so movies that are ruined by weak CGI. Sure, Tron is a guilty pleasure for me and many others, but its only real worth is in its place in film history. Other movies that are important for their advancement of digital effects include Forrest Gump, Cliffhanger and The Perfect Storm -- none of which needs to be thought of for any other reason.

Popular Mechanics has listed these four films with six other (better) milestones. Many of them are not surprises; everybody thinks of Terminator 2: Judgment Day when thinking of significant digital effects, even though it wasn't even the first movie to feature morphing (Willow is not included in the ten, but it is referenced). Jurassic Park is also obvious, but then, this isn't really an opinion-based list. It is a chronological top ten based on real, monumental breakthroughs. There are a few on the list, such as Cliffhanger, that I didn't even know were of importance. Did you know it was the first film to use digital effects as an eraser?

So, I may have to take a look at this list whenever I'm about to curse the existence of computer effects. A lot of the worst effects are appropriately featured in movies that are already terrible, anyway (personally, I think The Lord of the Rings and its CGI fall into this worst/terrible category, but I probably shouldn't be admitting this, especially since it is on the list).

What do you think was the most important advancement in special effects history (pre-digital era included)?

Related stories:

Visual Effects Oscar Down to 7 Contenders

Ray Harryhausen's Greatest Hits

Yes, the increasingly baffling George Lucas did say he and Lucasfilm were done with making movies. Particularly tent-pole movies. I know, it sounds ludicrous -- you can get the whole amusing story here courtesy of Kevin K. However, never fear fans -- Lucas doesn't plan on running out without ruining finishing one enormous tent-pole little franchise first. Yes, despite his newfound understanding about the follies of tent-pole flicks, George Lucas has certainly not given up on Indiana Jones 4 ... yet, and he still wants to make it a reality. Said Lucas: "Steve (Spielberg) and I are still working away, trying to come up with something we're happy with. Hopefully in a short time we will come to an agreement." Oh good.

In other Spielberg news, Jurassic Park 4 reportedly has a director finally lined up. You can stop with your rumors about new directors, or the return of early directors, because the most recent Park director is getting tapped again. Original expectations were correct, Joe Johnston is returning. Guess they want to recapture the magic and popularity of the third installment ...

Paul Davids' documentary The Sci-Fi Boys is the kind of mediocre effort that makes its way onto DVDs as supplement material, although finding an appropriate special edition to include it with would be tough, as its focus isn't limited to any specific film or filmmaker. Davids, an admitted "sci-fi boy" filmmaker, spotlights other directors like Peter Jackson, Stephen Sommers, John Landis, Roger Corman and William Malone, all who grew up as fan boys before acquiring their own followers. Of course, with all the attention Davids gives to himself (the photo above shows him on the left as a young model maker), he could include the film as an extra on one of his own films, except that it wouldn't quite fit with his '97 debut Timothy Leary's Dead.

Most people, the kind who don't mind the occasional big budget popcorn flick anyway, had good things to say about Jurassic Park when it came out in 1993. The sequels, however, didn't impress quite as much. I can agree that The Lost World took the franchise to puzzling levels of goofiness, but I think the series redeemed itself somewhat with the third installment. It wasn't perfect, and the raptors by that point conveniently switched from intelligent to dimwitted as arbitrarily as Homer Simpson, but at least some elements of realism were brought back and the kitsch of the previous episode was tastefully discarded.

The lesson, perhaps, is that you can never go back. Michael Crichton is an intelligent man, but he's far too left-brained to write a truly compelling story. This made Jurassic Park the perfect vehicle for Spielberg, as he could take the best elements of Crichton's tale of  science vs. nature and flesh it out into the mega blockbuster it became.

So what of Jurassic Park IV? Producer Frank Marshall says the script has been written and production will begin next year. Nothing is really known about the script, though it's been rumored the story will focus heavily on the character of Lex, the granddaughter of the billionaire investor, John Hammond (Sir Richard Attenborough), who funded the park. It is doubtful, however, that Ariana Richards, who played Lex in the original movie, will reprise her role. I don't see how the series can duplicate the original movie at this point, and I don't think it should try to. Jurassic Park III was a step away from The Lost World, and it was a wise step to take. If the fourth installment continues on that path, so much the better.