400 Screens, 400 Blows is a weekly column that takes an in-depth look at the films playing below the radar, beneath the top ten, and on 400 screens or less.

State of Play (240 screens) continues playing this week, and despite its lukewarm performance and reviews, something about it makes me happy. In mid-2003, I got myself into hot water with a Russell Crowe fan club. I reviewed a very minor film called The Hard Word, starring Guy Pearce, who of course had been Crowe's co-star in L.A. Confidential (1997). I took the opportunity to compare the two actors, praising Pearce for his work in interesting films like Ravenous and Memento, and questioning the much more fashionable Crowe. I did this mainly because I was irritated at the enduring popularity of two terrible films, the sludgy, brooding mess Gladiator (2000) and the manipulative Oscar bait A Beautiful Mind (2001).

I felt that Crowe went through the former film with one single expression, a glower, and through the latter with an unchanging collection of tics and actor's tricks; neither one was a particularly interesting or deep performance. Both performances received Oscar nominations, and Crowe won for Gladiator. I was also irritated that the immeasurably superior Memento, and Pearce, didn't get the same attention. In any case the Crowe fan club grabbed my review, posted it on one of their forums and went to town. I started getting all kinds of angry, nasty e-mails. The fact that I presented one, small opinion contrary to their perfect, orderly world absolutely infuriated them.

It's a strange coincidence, but just the other day I was having a conversation with a friend and we turned to each other and said: "Hey, whatever happened to Madeleine Stowe?" Well, she hasn't been making many appearances on the big screen lately, but that doesn't mean she hasn't been busy. Variety has announced that Stowe will be make her directorial debut for Hyde Park Entertainment with the period drama, Unbound Captives. The film stars Rachel Weisz, Hugh Jackman, and Robert Pattinson and centers on a woman, "whose husband is killed and her two children kidnapped by a Comanche war party in 1859."

Stowe wrote the script herself back in 1993 as a starring vehicle, but at the time no one was jumping at the chance to finance the film of an actress and first time screenwriter. But that doesn't mean that the studios didn't like what they saw, because according to Variety, "Fox offered Stowe $3 million, and later $5 million, for her script, with Ridley Scott poised to direct and Russell Crowe to star. She turned down what was among the highest sums offered a first-time scribe because there was no promise she would be anything more than screenwriter." Stowe was convinced that it was better to let the project die on the vine rather than have somebody else mess with her script -- and I have to hand it to her, I doubt I would have been as principled.

I have the deep suspicion that despite being picked up round the Internet, this Nick Cave "synopsis" will end up being some kind of hoax. If it does, the story someone has concocted for Gladiator 2 is so brilliantly crazy that it's worth reading.

Gone Elsewhere has the rundown for you. This script meets up with Maximus seconds after he comes to in the afterlife. Our deceased gladiator isn't met by his family, but by a mysterious figure named Moredecai. He introduces him to the Roman pantheon who mock him, and offer a deal to kill their brother Hephaestos. If he can, they'll reunite him with his wife and son. Once out of immortal earshot, Moredecai tells Maximus these are lies and that his wife, Maria, sacrified her place in Elyisium to allow their son, Marius, to cheat death. He's now back in Rome living a mortal life. Disbelieving this, our undead hero marches to find Hephaestos who is trying to usher in an age of a "one, true God" and sends him hurtling back to mortal Rome. There Maximus encounters the adult Lucius who is pretty busy slaughtering Christians for the Emperor, a situation that Maximus finds himself embroiled in ... and not surprisingly, one that reunites him with his adult son. There's the cue to unleash hell.

Needless to say, it's a unique read. Cave really took the "What we do in life, echoes in eternity" tagline literally. (You'll know what I mean when you get to the end.) It's so easy to let your mind get carried away imagining scenes like Lucius passing a bust of Maximus and realizing he just saw him in a mob that I'd like to see this filmed, albeit not as a Gladiator sequel, but as pure Roman fantasy. Read it, and see if you agree.

[via IMDB]

Newspapermen occupy that movie middle ground between detectives and action heroes. They dig up clues, but the clues are hard-won, based on experience and the building up of contacts and sources. The clues are rarely left at the scene of the crime. Newspapermen rarely get into danger, but when they do it's not something they're really prepared or trained for. Coming face-to-face with a deadly killer, Washington Globe reporter Cal McAffrey (Russell Crowe) can barely make eye contact. Cal doesn't fight or outwit the bad guy; he just runs and hides. It's not important that he try to be a hero. It's more important that he survive to write the story.

Of course, real reporters don't get to solve murders and uncover international corporate conspiracies every day, and that's where Hollywood comes in. The new film State of Play is based on a six-hour BBC mini-series from 2003. I haven't seen the original, but I'd bet that it's much distilled and sped up, and no one is going to argue that the new film is any kind of improvement. But taken on its own, it's probably the best newspaper/journalism movie in years -- perhaps since Shattered Glass (2003) -- even if it falls far short of the purity of All the President's Men (1976). It's also the first movie of its kind to address the inherent feud between sturdy, superior, old-fashioned print reporting, and reckless, inexperienced, sloppy blogging. (Guess which side the movie is on?)

Thirty years ago, a political crisis and two movie stars inspired thousands of young people to pursue a career in journalism. Now that the profession may be dying, is it foolish to hope that an economic crisis and three movie stars could revive interest?

Opening tomorrow, Kevin Macdonald's State of Play stars Russell Crowe as a world-weary reporter investigating a murder in which his old friend, politician Ben Affleck, may have been involved. Rachel McAdams also stars as an up-and-coming blogger. Obviously, that's a very different kind of movie than Alan Pakula's All the President's Men, which starred Robert Redford and Dustin Hoffman as Bob Woodward and Carl Bernstein, the Washington Post reporters who helped uncover the full extent of the Watergate conspiracy in the 1970s. In the wake of that movie, The Atlantic commented: "Today's generation of young Americans is flocking to journalism schools in unprecedented numbers ... the extraordinary popularity of 'communications' has been attributed to 'the Woodstein Phenomenon,' the effect of the Woodward and Bernstein feat of exposing and unseating the Nixon gang in the White House."

Ever since, there has been no shortage of qualified journalists; the problem is that jobs for journalists are drying up faster than a water hole in the Sahara. Without getting into a discussion of why the newspaper and magazine industries are dying, my questions are:

• Will anyone look beyond the murder thriller trappings of State of Play?
• Will it cause anyone to think about why good, solid investigative journalism is still so important -- in part, to hold elected officials, government workers, and corporate executives accountable for their actions?
• Will anyone be prompted to come up with viable solutions to sustain and support a valuable profession before it's gone forever?

Ridley Scott's Robin Hood has added so many people that we've actually fallen a bit behind in reporting them all. Shortly after Cate Blanchett came aboard as Maid Marian, the film added Mark Strong as Sir Godfrey, Alan Doyle as Alan-a-Dale, Scott Grimes as Will Scarlet, Kevin Durand as Little John, and Bronsen Webb as someone named Jimoen.

Deserving its own mention is my favorite casting (so far) -- Vanessa Redgrave as Eleanor of Aquitaine. I think she's possibly the only actress who can be as formidable in Eleanor's crown as Katharine Hepburn.

Now, The Hollywood Reporter says that William Hurt is joining up as William Marshall (or Marshal if you keep the historic spelling), a man described as "the greatest knight who ever lived" by his contemporary, Stephen Langton. He rose from obscurity to become a knight, who made his living in jousting tournaments a'la The Knight's Tale. He joined the court of Henry II and subsequently served the three following Plantagenets, including King Richard I, and his brother, King John. When he died, he was one of the most powerful men in Europe, and was known simply as "the Marshal."

You ever get the feeling that a film is going to have a rocky road in front of it, no matter what? This certainly seems to be the case with Ridley Scott's Nottingham. Call me an optimist, because I still have faith that Nottingham (or whatever it decides to call itself) has a shot at being one heck of a flick. Things first started to look up when it was rumored that Cate Blanchett would be taking over the role of Maid Marian, and today Variety has confirmed that the Aussie actress has officially signed on. Speaking as someone who puts Blanchett alongside Meryl Steep as one of the coolest chicks working today, I'm thrilled that Crowe is getting a co-star that can hold her own.

But that's not all, because Scott and company finally decided to open up, and new story details have been revealed. The original script was written by Kung Fu Panda's, Ethan Reiff and Cyrus Voris, but Brian Helgeland was later brought in for a rewrite. According to Variety, "Crowe plays Robin of Loxley in an original story that hews close to historical facts of the period. Abandoned as a child, he finds community with the common people of Nottingham. Robin's abandonment and trust issues hamper his ability to fall in love. He meets his match in Marian, a strong, independent woman." The film is now being pitched as Gladiator meets Robin Hood -- I guess Crowe and Scott figured the formula worked well enough the first time, so why not capitalize on some of that 'Maximus magic'?

So now that we have a brand new Maid Marian and a look at what is in store for Crowe's man of the people, who's with me when I say that it's about time we give Scott's re-boot a fair shake?

It was last night's Meryl Streep chit-chat that got me to thinking; Hell, 15 nominations is impressive enough, and she's even won the dang Oscar twice! For Kramer vs. Kramer and Sophie's Choice. But while in the lovely land of Hollywood that's a track record to be amazingly proud of, the simple truth is that, in the land of baseball, Meryl Streep would be batting a lusty .133. I've seen American League pitchers who can bat .133!

And that silly thought led to the next logically silly one: If Meryl Streep is batting .133, who ELSE is batting poorly? And conversely ... who's leading the league? Now, I've got to limit eligibility to those who've been nominated at least three times, because otherwise we'd have Anna Paquin as Mickey Mantle. And I'm limiting this project to actors only, because that way one can squeeze another post or two out of this lame concept if people actually like it.

1.000* -- Hilary Swank (2 for 2); Kevin Spacey (2 for 2)
.500 -- Daniel Day-Lewis (2 for 4)
.400 -- Sean Penn (2 for 5); Tom Hanks (2 for 5); Denzel Washington (2 for 5);
.333 -- Maggie Smith (2 for 6); Tommy Lee Jones (1 for 3); Helen Mirren (1 for 3); Philip Seymour Hoffman (1 for 3); Marisa Tomei (1 for 3); Alan Arkin (1 for 3); Renee Zellweger (1 for 3); Kathy Bates (1 for 3); Geoffrey Rush (1 for 3); Julia Roberts (1 for 3); Russell Crowe (1 for 3)
.285 -- Michael Caine (2 for 7)
.250 -- Jack Nicholson (3 for 12); Julie Christie (1 for 4); Cate Blanchett (1 for 4); William Hurt (1 for 4); Frances McDormand (1 for 4); Morgan Freeman (1 for 4); Ben Kingsley (1 for 4); Diane Keaton (1 for 4); Holly Hunter (1 for 4); Jon Voight (1 for 4);

More after the jump

All this week we'll be highlighting some of our favorite scenes from Oscar-winning films and performances leading up to this year's Academy Awards on Sunday night.

Even though there are plenty of people who think Ridley Scott and Russell Crowe may not have deserved Oscar gold back in 2001, I will respectfully disagree ... and the opening scene of Gladiator is why. Say what you will about the film's hyped-up machismo, uneven pacing, or cavalcade of accents, but you have to admire a flick that in under 10 minutes can make you feel like you're ready to charge into a battle to the death. Not to mention that this scene is responsible for making the phrase "Hold the line!" something a lot cooler than just a song by Toto.

The success of Gladiator mainly rests on the shoulders of Crowe, who manages to make you give a damn about a relatively 2-D character. So even though the box-office and the Academy rarely agree, I still think Ridley and company deserved the Oscar for creating a 'thinking man's action hero'. Gladiator might not be a perfect film, but thanks to this opening scene, it has earned a permanent place on my list of movie favorites.

Gladiator trivia (via IMDB)

• Among the chanting of the Germanic hordes at the beginning of the film are samples of the Zulu war chant from the film Zulu (1964).
  
  
• The wounds on 'Russell Crowe's face after the opening battle scene are real, caused when his horse startled and backed him into tree branches.

• Mel Gibson was offered, but turned down the part of Maximus.