Above is an on-set glimpse of Kirsten Dunst and Ryan Gosling in their upcoming film, All Good Things. The actors were filming scenes in New York City's Carl Schurz Park, and you can check out a bunch of photos over at Just Jared.

As Jessica explained in January when Dunst signed on, the film focuses on two star-crossed loves, Gosling and Dunst. He's a rich young man, and she's a girl from the wrong side of the tracks. She goes missing, and "a sleazy detective begins to uncover information that could bring our golden boy to his knees." (The lovely Jeffrey Dean Morgan is playing the detective.)

The more I see Gosling's work, the more I appreciate it, though I can't help but wonder if pairing him with Dunst is a huge mistake. Then again, maybe he can pull a performance out of her that's reminiscent of the good old days. (I hope, I really hope, because this movie sounds cool.) At the very least, there's a number of great co-stars -- Kristen Wiig, Frank Langella, Diane Venora, Phillip Baker Hall, and more are on the roster.

Now that Jake Gyllenhaal has officially signed to star in Prince of Persia: The Sands of Time, that basically means we can take his name off the table with regards to all future comic properties (at least until after Persia comes out, because that may turn into a franchise if the first makes loads of duckets). While we still have no idea whether Tobey Maguire will return to play Spidey in a Spider-Man 4, we do know that Sony is prepping something. They just re-upped their deal for a fourth installment (fact) and they may be looking to get more bang for their buck by shooting two sequels at the same time with a story arc that stretches across both films. However, it all comes down to negotiations -- and if parties (be them studios, actors, writers or directors) can't decide on a fair enough deal, things could potentially fall apart rather quickly and go in a completely different direction.

Here's the question: Has enough time passed for Sam Raimi, Tobey Maguire and Kirsten Dunst? Do they miss the roles? The characters? How much would it take to get them back? And do we want them back? I think it's pretty clear we all still want Spider-Man in our big-screen lives, even though the third film was what it was. But are Maguire and Dunst still the right actors for the job? Or would some new blood do an old franchise some good?

For awhile, lots of people were looking at Jake Gyllenhaal to replace Maguire if a decision like that had to be made. With Jake G. out of the picture, who else could you see filling Maguire's Spidey tights?

Cinematical just received a tasty little scoop from one of our trusty top secret super delegate Hollywood insiders, and it's purty interesting (all you Spidey fans might want to listen up): Apparently, in the last few weeks, James Vanderbilt (Zodiac) has turned in a working draft of Spider-Man 4 to the studio. However, according to our source, "his story arc has encompassed two films, making Spider-Man 5 shootable at the same time. The studio saw dollar signs and is in the process of reworking his deal to snatch up the story arc." Don't expect anything immediately, though, since we've been told both sides are still trying to negotiate the deal.

Right now we have no word on what that arc is or where Vanderbilt is taking his script, but it's interesting to know that they're looking to spread the next Spidey storyline across two films, instead of shooting one more and taking it from there. Obviously Sony has wiped away the bad buzz from Spidey 3 and is interested in stretching this franchise as far as they can. After three flicks, I can't see Sam Raimi, Tobey Maguire and Kirsten Dunst returning to shoot two Spider-Man films together (would be a lot to take on), but you never know. In the meantime, here's what we know: Looks like Vanderbilt is writing Spider-Man 4 and Spider-Man 5, and the studio might look to shoot both flicks at the same time. As of right now, the studio has no comment. We'll update this post should we hear more ...

Whaddya think?

It was supposed to be a story about a British dude who ticks off the celebrity and Vanity Fair masses, relayed in a voice that charms some, but annoys many. But then the first short little trailer for How to Lose Friends and Alienate People popped up, and as Christopher Campbell said last December, "the trailer makes How to Lose look like a Ben Stiller comedy."

Now the international trailer has hit the waves, and yes, indeed, it still looks like a Stiller comedy -- right down to the dog accidentally flying out the window. Where's the snark? (Okay, snark without cute undertones.) I was expecting bitterness, not slapstick -- a questionable lead, not a seemingly innocent Simon Pegg. At least it's got some Danny Huston without the vampiric language and sharp teeth.

Still, I don't know what to think anymore. My world is all askew, because Kirsten Dunst's moments in the trailer actually seemed more interesting than Pegg's bumbling shenanigans. The film will hit screens this fall.

Warning: Watch for foul language.

[via Ace Showbiz]

With all of the little tykes and tots who have hit the big screen over the years, one would think that it might be one heck of a daunting challenge to narrow the list down to a top 25, but I think Moviefone may have done it. They've posted a list of the Top 25 Child Stars of All Time, and they've hit just about every child star I can think of, including a few I forgot about.

The list starts with Kirsten Dunst. She might not have had a lot of movie gigs in her early days, but she certainly wowed audiences with her portrayal of Claudia in Interview with the Vampire. I, for one, was so impressed that I had a much different vision of her future career, and am still waiting for the day that she can tap into what made her shine all those years ago. From there, we've got a collection of old and new names, moms and sons, and all the biggies.

The queen of children's entertainment Shirley Temple meets up with newer talent like Anna Paquin and Christian Bale (remember Empire of the Sun?). There's also some funky trivia tidbits as well. Growing up, I was a rabid fan of Hayley Mills, from her classic In Search of the Castaways, to her brief stint in the first incarnation of Saved by the Bell. But did you know that she was cast to be Stanley Kubrick's Lolita before Disney got her out of the deal?

Check out the list, and weigh in below. Do you think they got it right, and is anyone missing?

It's funny how some actresses just seem to inspire the worst in critics; or in the case of Kirsten Dunst, she brings out the worst in just about everyone. I only ever seem to come across people who can't stand her. Ever since her kick-a** performance in Interview with The Vampire at the tender age of 12, she has been one of my favorite actresses; and I am even willing to overlook Get Over it. Variety reports that Dunst is in talks to star in All Good Things alongside Ryan Gosling. The period thriller is set in the go-go '80s and centers on a well-to-do young man (Gosling) who falls for a girl from the wrong side of the tracks (Dunst). When she turns up missing, a sleazy detective begins to uncover information that could bring our golden boy to his knees.

The film is the feature debut of documentary filmmaker Andrew Jarecki, who made his name as the director of Capturing the Friedmans -- a film that I can't recommend enough. News of Dunst's negotiations hit the Sundance circuit since she is in town promoting her directorial debut, Welcome. Gosling has already signed on the dotted line for Good Things, but Dunst is still in the middle of negotiations. The actress has already signed to star in Sweet Relief; the story of Marla Ruzicka, a relief worker in Iraq and Afghanistan during U.S. invasions; so, I would guess that if Dunst is planning on starring in Good Things as well, it is all going to come down to scheduling.

Toby Young's book "How to Lose Friends & Alienate People" is one of the most annoying memoirs of all time. It makes sense, of course. If Young could lose friends and alienate people so easily, he'd have to lose and alienate his readers. A paradox sure, but appropriate. Just as fitting would be a movie adaptation that isn't enjoyable to watch. The guy playing Young should be so despicable that he's not even worth watching. He couldn't be like Billy Bob Thornton's amusing curmudgeon type of character. He'd have to be annoying enough to want to throw things at the screen and walk out. At least the movie version, which doesn't come out until next fall, co-stars one of the most irritating actresses, Kirsten Dunst.

Otherwise, though, How to Lose Friends & Alienate People looks too funny. Just look at this new trailer, courtesy of The Sun. First of all, it's impossible for me to hate Simon Pegg. Even less hate-worthy than Billy Bob Thornton's curmudgeons, Pegg is actually one of the most lovable annoying guys ever to grace the screen. He's an enjoyable bad boyfriend, an enjoyable bride-ditcher, an enjoyable pretentious co-worker, etc. Even though the trailer makes How to Lose look like a Ben Stiller comedy, Pegg still makes it seem funnier than that somehow. In addition to starring Pegg, it probably helps the movie's appeal that it's directed by Robert B. Weide, who has a lot of experience with uncomfortably (yet hilariously) offensive people from directing multiple episodes of Curb Your Enthusiasm and the Oscar-nominated documentary Lenny Bruce: Swear to Tell the Truth. It also helps that the trailer doesn't show much of Dunst.

[via Empire]

Kirsten Dunst has let them eat their cake, and has been saved by Spider-Man over and over again. She's tried to spice up her personal life with lots of risque sex. But that wasn't the start of her wild life. Before that, she was a Crazy/Beautiful bad girl, and before that, she was saucing things up as a minxy, pre-pubescent vamp in Interview with the Vampire. Yet there was a time when her adventurous life was nothing more than eating some scary-looking scalloped potatoes and not being creeped out by the giggling doughboy hanging out in the kitchen.

Yes, believe it or not, that curly-haired little tyke is Ms. Dunst. She might be difficult to recognize at first, but once she happily scoops out that scalloped potato microwaved slop, you should be able to see the older Dunst in that cherub face. Man, I forgot how many gross microwaved foods there used to be. Remember the microwaved cakes? Ugh. Anyway, I don't think we'll be seeing Kirsten pop up in any more microwaved food ads, but we will get to see her next year in How to Lose Friends & Alienate People.

With Spider-Man 3 arriving on DVD today, it's fitting that we should receive a major announcement regarding Spider-Man 4. Entertainment Weekly reports that James Vanderbilt (who penned the very awesome Zodiac) has been hired to write the script for Spidey 4, and Sony plans to swing the fourquel into theaters in 2009 (most likely early summer). Whether or not Vanderbilt will be the only writer to take on the project is not known; I wouldn't be surprised if this thing passes through the hands of at least two more writers before it moves ahead. Personally, I don't see the impending writer's strike lasting too long (if it happens at all), and so Vanderbilt should start plugging away almost immediately ... if he hasn't already done so. Most likely he pitched his idea to Sony with a full outline, and so I can't see it taking that long to punch out a draft or two.

What we don't know at this moment is whether Tobey Maguire, Kirsten Dunst and Sam Raimi will return to the franchise. Raimi has already stated that he wants to be involved in some capacity (most likely as producer), and after taking a critical lashing following Spider-Man 3, it'll be interesting to see if Raimi decides to direct one more. Of course, it probably depends on Maguire and Dunst to a certain degree, but if you ask me, I'd like to see them start from scratch with a new cast and director. Feel free to continue the storyline, but this franchise could use some new blood. There's a writer. There's a potential release year. What say you?

[Thanks Steve]

The trick to creating a successful adaptation is not so much in being a stickler about the plot, but in recreating the verve behind the words. It goes beyond simple interest in the characters. Adaptation is just like translation -- translated word for word, it will seem flat and lack the life it does in its original setting. The translator must understand the context of the words within the language, and then find the best fit to recreate that same sentiment. Yet it must also stay true to the original words. If it diverges too much, the life will be lost, even if the meaning is the same. The right adaptation will flow so well that it will not only feed a fan's penchant for details, but also recreate the element of surprise within them.

It, of course, helps when the original screenwriter is the woman who wrote the novel -- Anne Rice. But even director Neil Jordan's inclusions, which took some liberties, Interview with the Vampire maintained most of the spice that made it a book worthy of a cinematic adaptation. He brought the world to the screen, impressing audiences as well as Rice herself -- who was, at first, quite vocal in her distaste over casting. But even she was stunned with what Jordan and his cast accomplished, and ultimately gave the film much praise.