By far, one of my absolute favorite movies is Stephen Frear's adaptation of Dangerous Liaisons. So, you can imagine that my expectations will be pretty high for Frears' latest French period piece, Cheri. The Hollywood Reporter announced that Rupert Friend (The Young Victoria) and Kathy Bates have joined the cast of Frears' take on the book by famed French novelist Collette. Friend will play the male lead, and Bates is in negotiations to play his overbearing "maman".

Originally published in 1920, Chéri was the story of an affair between an aging retired courtesan, Léa, and a pampered young man, Chéri. When it comes time for Chéri to make good on the promise of an arranged marriage, he is forced into a loveless union and then I would assume it's your usual array of romantic suffering. I mean, just look at the guy, he's got that 'romantic squint' down pat.

Just last month, Michelle Pfeiffer signed to play the aging courtesan and Friend's love interest, Lea de Lonval. Frears also wrote the adaptation with Liaisons screen writer, Christopher Hampton, which means it really is a Dangerous Liaisons reunion (if only they could have gotten Uma Thurman, Glen Close, and John Malkovich; making it the complete set). Now that all the distribution deals between Pathé and Miramax have been sorted out Cheri is ready to start production in France early this April.

While I've been itching for Uma Thurman to do more period work, there's another famous tow-headed actress hopping in a time machine. Variety reports that Miramax and Pathe are about to close a deal on a big-screen adaptation of Colette's Chéri, for Michelle Pfeiffer to headline. What makes this project even better -- it'll be a Dangerous Liasons reunion. Aside from its star and sexy material, Christopher Hampton penned the script and Stephen Frears will direct it.

Set in 1920s Paris, Chéri focuses on the affair between an older, retired courtesan and a young man some 25 years younger than her, one who is the son of a fellow courtesan. For 6 years they are together until they must part for Chéri to make good on an arranged marriage. However, he doesn't get over his older lover, and as Variety describes it, he "retreats into a fantasy world." Madame de Tourvel has come a long way!

There have been some bumps in the road, but as things stand now -- the deal will give Miramax North American control, and Pathe will get the overseas territories -- much like the deal made for Frears' last film, The Queen. Should everything move along from here, production will start this April in France. Now we just need a young man itching for Pfeiff. Any ideas?

Every year at Telluride, they do three Tributes. In recent years, at least, they've tended to have one film person who's well-known in his or her own country, but not widely known and appreciated, one film person who is well-known pretty much everywhere, and one person who's made a significant contribution to film, even though you may not recognize their name. This year's tributes are Indian filmmaker Shyam Benegal (first category), French composer Michel Legrand, and actor Daniel Day-Lewis, whose tribute was held tonight at the Sheridan Opera House.

Thankfully, I had a Patron Pass to get into it, because the venue only holds 250, and between the patrons and priority line (for the Sheridan, every pass has two numbers shaded in that correspond to the film's program numbers -- a shaded number means you get priority seating there for that particular show) the house was packed. I doubt very much that any passholders who weren't lucky enough to have the number "1" shaded on their passes made it into this event.

Daniel Day-Lewis doesn't do a lot of interviews, so the chance to see him in person and hear him speak was too good to resist. I lucked out and got a perfect seat on the floor, thanks to a fellow journalist who had an extra seat next to him that he very kindly offered to me. The evening kicked off (after an intro by fest co-director Gary Meyer -- who, like all the staff at this fest, is so nice and engaging, you just want to sit down and hang out with him over coffee) with a one-hour compilation of clips from Day-Lewis' impressive filmography, from his uncredited role as a child vandal in Sunday Bloody Sunday (1971) to The Ballad of Jack and Rose (2005), which his wife, Rebecca Miller, wrote and directed. The clips were nicely edited, showing Day-Lewis' range as an actor and the wide variety of roles he's chosen throughout his career.

More on the tribute, plus some pics, after the jump ...

It might be the strangest description I've ever heard, but right now they're calling this one "Butch Cassidy and the Sundance Kid meets Snow White." Apparently, a new book about Princess Diana was all the rage in Cannes last week, sparking an all-out, balls-to-the-wall bidding war with plenty of folks (including Paramount, who is said to be "desperate for the rights") itching for some of what got Helen Mirren that Oscar. Diana and the Paparazzi, according to its cover, reveals "the true stories we have never dared tell, until now ... " Dun Dun Dun! And, as the title of this post suggests, Keira Knightley's name is currently circling atop everyone's wishlist. That said, this is tough ground to cover as it's so easy to fall into made-for-TV territory; a fear a lot of critics (including me) had when first sitting down to watch The Queen. Thus, pic's cast will depend heavily upon who ultimately ends up with the rights, as well as who decides to step behind the camera.

The only one talking the film up to the press has been producer Quentin Reynolds, whose only producing credit to date was as an exec producer on the ultra campy horror flick Evil Aliens. Um, yeah. Said to be among those bidding for the project, Reynolds notes: "Already the word in Hollywood is 'get Knightley!' It's a story that has everything; pathos, tragedy, comedy, adventure ... and Princess Diana. For every pound The Queen makes, a film about Diana would make 10." Really? I don't know if I'd go that far; The Queen made most of its money based off Mirren's Oscar-winning performance. Sure, Peter Morgan's script was exceptional and Stephen Frears always does good work behind the camera, but Mirren enticed people into buying tickets. In order for Diana and the Paparazzi to do the same, it would have to include Knightley (or someone of her caliber). End of story. But even with Knightley, do we even want another Diane-esque soap opera to hit the big screen? Maybe this kind of stuff is like crack for those across the pond, but here in the states the subject is beginning to feel a little played out. What do you think?

The 60th annual Festival de Cannes has concluded, and the Palme D'Or goes to ... not the Coens? Despite all the praise and hype, No Country for Old Men was passed over for the prize in favor of 4 Months, 3 Weeks & 2 Days, an abortion drama that our own James Rocchi called "incredibly affecting, magnificently acted and superbly made." Looks like he called that one. The Grand Prix, which is second prize, went to Naomi Kawase's The Mourning Forest, a French-Japanese co-production that Variety says "had viewers and critics streaming for the exits." The 60th anniversary prize, which is third place, went to Gus Van Sant's Paranoid Park, a drama about a teen skateboarder in denial over having caused someone's death. James reviewed that one too, but wasn't exactly blown away by it. "I have to wonder when -- or if -- the fierce filmmaking of [Van Sant's] earlier career will return," he wrote.

Julian Schnabel took the best directing prize for The Diving Bell and the Butterfly, which has been snapped up by Miramax. Get a load of this line, again from Variety: "Perhaps imagining he was at the Oscars, Schnabel overstayed his welcome at the spotlight at least three times over, shaking the hand of every jury member, making his cast stand up and rambling as he thanked everyone he could think of." The screenplay prize went to The Edge of Heaven, from a Turkish-German filmmaker, while the best actress prize went to Jeon Do-yeon, a South Korean actress who appeared in Lee Chang-dong's Secret Sunshine. Best actor went to Konstantin Lavronenko for The Banishment. The jury prize was a tie vote between Persepolis, a French-U.S. production and Silent Light, about a mennonite community in Mexico.

At the jury press conference following the prizes, Stephen Frears was asked how Javier Bardem didn't win the best actor prize, Frears joked: "He's terrible, absolutely dreadful ... he's a wonderful actor. Why did we not give it to Javier? He owes me 500 pounds." Sarah Polley and Toni Collette were also asked to defend their odd choices, with Polley saying "I've never seen so many people listen to each other so closely." The jury also included Maggie Cheung, Maria de Medeiros, Abderrahmane Sissako, Marco Bellocchio and Orham Pamuk. If you want the full rundown, you can go to Variety and check it out.

Some days I feel like I've spent entirely too much time reading film blogs instead of doing something more productive, like paying bills or watching movies or entertaining the cat . Sometimes I feel like I never spend as much time as I want reading film blogs, much less writing for them myself. For example, I regret I never made time to participate in the Shakespeare Blog-a-Thon listed below, and also that I haven't been able to read all the blog-a-thon entries yet. To lighten my feelings of guilt on all accounts, I figured the best thing to do was to share a bunch of good blog entries out of the ones I read last week.

Normally I prefer to arrange Film Blog Group Hug entries into a neat little category, like "Austin bloggers" or "film festival bloggers" but this week, I decided to post a variety of links, just for fun. Consider it a quick tour of various fun spots in the online world (I can't stand the term "blogosphere"), from Shakespeare to Woody Allen to Spike Lee. After all, this is how most of us read film blogs, isn't it? Dive in and enjoy.

British director Stephen Frears is sticking with the true-life stories. With The Queen in the past, his attention has now turned to the uplifting topic of death and lawyers. Frears is in talks with Screen Gems to direct a courtroom drama called The Burial, a project that was originally housed at Warner Brothers. With a screenplay written by Quills and Bunny Lake scribe Doug Wright, the film is based on a New Yorker Magazine article by Jonathan Harr.

A real-life story that mimics the first few seasons of Six Feet Under, the film will center on Willie Gary, a prominent black attorney who took on the case of Jeremiah O'Keefe, the owner of a small chain of funeral homes who was fighting a big funeral conglomerate trying to put him out of business. O'Keefe won, and he got millions. The twist, which I'm sure will come into play in the film, is that Gary is the son of a former sharecropper, with ancestry who were slaves, while O'Keefe is the son of former slave owners. This is the story just itching to be a movie. Race, drama, the underdog... I can see movie execs salivating at the thought.

There is also a campy, sensationalized end to the story. It seems that while Gary has had immense success as a lawyer, he's got some strife on the family front, just like any true Hollywood story. It seems that his paltry $28,000 monthly child support payments were going towards his ex-wife's tummy tucks, vacations and other niceties. A judge lessened the amount to $5,000, which his ex-wife is appealing. I wonder what the kid's allowance is...

Actor James Cromwell, who is doing press over in London for his role in Becoming Jane -- which won't open here for many more months -- has given a wide-ranging interview to the Telegraph, and had some interesting things to say. He talks candidly about his role as Prince Philip in The Queen, and about his perceptions of the film in general, and how it was received in the U.K. He also accuses screenwriter Peter Morgan of having a strong bias against Queen Elizabeth and the rest of the royal family, and claims that 'a lot ' of The Queen was ultimately cut because it was so strongly anti-royal. Cromwell also says that most of the people working on the film held, to his surprise, similar views. "I was very surprised that the overwhelming majority of the people on the set -- how can I put this -- loathed Diana," he says. "Diana to them is the worst kind of English person you could possibly be."

Cromwell also says that most of his performance as Philip in the film had to be dubbed, with re-looping on every line, because he couldn't get the accent straight. "Oh, Jesus, I worked my ass on it. My problem was that you cannot make a mistake when you are playing Philip in one sound, because if you do, the reality goes out the window." Other topics covered in the interview include Cromwell's role in Becoming Jane, the television show 24, which he says he has "real problems" with, and his political views. He claims to know that America's last two elections were rigged, and says he can't handle living here anymore.

The DGA announced its noms a few moments ago, and I, tragically, had only one right: Martin Scorsese for The Departed. The five official nominees (drum roll, please):

Martin Scorsese (The Departed)
Bill Condon (Dreamgirls)
Jonathon Dayton and Valerie Faris (Little Miss Sunshine)
Alejandro Gonzalez Innaritu (Babel) and
Stephen Frears (The Queen)

Well, well, well. I suppose it's not shocking that the DGA nommed Condon for Dreamgirls -- they did, after all, shell their award out to Rob Marshall in 2002 for Chicago -- but I'm disappointed that they'd nom Condon over Cuaron. Oscar tends to march to the DGA's beat on Best Director (they've been a matched set for five years running), so it's a pretty safe bet that whoever ends up with the DGA's big gold plate will be counting their chickens in the days leading up to Oscar night.

This was largely a crap shoot, but I am rather shocked not to see Eastwood's name up there. Scorsese wasn't a shocker -- every last film journo whose predicitions were listed on Oscar watch had him on their lists.

My other predictions were Clint Eastwood (for Letters, not Flags), Paul Greengrass (United 93) and Alfonso Cuaron (Children of Men), and Guillermo del Toro for Pan's Labyrinth -- I was really hoping the recent critical surge for both those films might give them a leg-up, but alas, it was not to be. The Hollywood Reporter's Anne Thompson came the closest to nailing all five -- she's just that good, folks. She was the only hold out who didn't have Eastwood on her list -- the rest of us had him as a shoo-in, but clearly she pegged that one.

The only thing Thompson missed was the Dayton-Faris nod -- to give cred where its due, only Jeff Wells from Hollywood Elsewhere pegged that one (and no doubt he'll be crowing over it, but we'll grant that he has the right to do so). I'm surprised by that nom (especially in light of Cuaron and del Toro, the other two of the Three Amigos) getting the cold shoulder, but nonetheless delighted for the Little Miss Sunshine gang -- that film is just the little movie that could.

So, now that the noms are announced, who do you think will win? And will the winner take the Oscar, to boot?

**UPDATE: I should have looked closer at the predictions grid (that's what I get for writing before I've had my coffee). A second glance showed me that Thompson wasn't the only one whose crystal ball was in top form. Five other pundits scored 4/5, all of them missing only Little Miss Sunshine. The other top predictors were:

Scott Bowles (USA Today)
Pete Hammond (Hollywiretap)
Kris Tapley (InContention)
Sasha Stone (OscarWatch)
Susan Wloszczyna (USA Today)

Biopics are delicious filmmaker fodder. Why go to the trouble of concocting a story when reality can often out-weird, or out-drama fiction? The sea of history is a bio-pic maker's oyster, and moviegoers always seem to be ready for another helping. But for every long-dead icon that makes his or her way to the screen, there are still-living names who must watch themselves and a version of their life on film. It's one accomplishment to get the approval of a notable name, it's a whole other thing entirely to get a royal seal of approval.

Nevertheless, while the details are mired in fact and fiction, it seems as though Queen Elizabeth II is a fan of Stephen Frears' treatment of her life. While no specific word on the film has been released from the royal icon, Helen Mirren, Frears, screenwriter Peter Morgan and the film's producer, Andy Harries, have received "a discreeet invitation" to have lunch at Buckingham Palace in the New Year. Word isn't clear whether this is a lunch WITH the Queen, or just some tasty treats in the Palace. I guess that giving an un-said seal of approval is much different than face-to-face recorded approval. However, according to some buzz at the Daily Mail, the Queen has claimed the film is her favorite of the year. We'll have to wait until the lunch happens to see if Queen's filmmakers get approving validation straight from the source, or if their contact with the Queen will be restricted to word from her private secretary, Sir Robin Janvrin.