OK, so just before we start, I want you to know that I'm going to try very hard not to make any jokes about the French in this post (even though a certain line of dialog from The Last of The Mohicans keeps running in my head). But, back to the news at hand: Variety is reporting that more than 2,000 French movie theaters will be turning off their lights between 6 and 7PM in protest of a new anti-piracy law, and since Wednesday is new release day in France, exhibitors thought that would be the most opportune time to make their point.

So what is their point exactly? Well, it turns out that French movie distributors are starting to feel the pains of rising services like VOD competing with first-run movie theaters for business. Originally, movie theaters were granted a six-month window of exclusivity before a flick could move on to other distribution channels, but under their new anti-piracy law, the home entertainment market will now only have to wait 4 months before a film becomes available for the DVD and VOD market. French cinema owners claim that this law is, "degrading of theater owners' economic conditions." (Even though, according to statistics, the box-office is up 3.4% from last year).

After the jump; French movie theaters aren't the only ones suffering...

Given the topic at hand, I'd like to make it clear up front that neither I nor Cinematical are taking sides in this story about Roland Emmerich's forthcoming All Landmarks Must Die opus, 2012; I just find it a curious insight into the mind of the man who knows how to make a building fall over but good.

The trailer for 2012 plays like a highlight reel of civilization falling apart all over the world, but it's religion that gets the brunt of Emmerich's digital pounding: A Buddhist temple gets hit by a tidal wave. The Sistine Chapel crumbles to pieces as a split tears right down the middle of Michelangeo's painting of God touching Adam's finger. St. Peter's Basilica rolls over onto a crowd of devoted worshipers. Rio de Janeiro's iconic Christ the Reedemer statue falls to earth as its wracked by shockwaves. The White House is even crushed by, of all things, an aircraft carrier. But eagle eyed fans of watching organized religion get its disaster porn comeuppance will have noticed that there are no Islamic landmarks on the CGI chopping block.

That wasn't always the plan, however. Emmerich explained to SCI FI Wire that he had originally hoped the Kaaba, one of the holiest sites in the Islamic religion, would join the visual wrath of 2012, but that his co-screenwriter Harald Kloser talked him out of it:

The Messenger opened the 12th Savannah Film Festival with a bang: a sellout crowd, international press, and Hollywood stars Woody Harrelson and Ben Foster in attendance to rub elbows all night. Even without the glitz, though, Savannah was a smart place to screen the Iraq drama. Oren Moverman's film is a character study about a soldier (Foster) dealing with the aftermath of war, but like Kathryn Bigelow's Iraq film The Hurt Locker, it's about the personal toll Iraq leaves on soldiers who survive and the families of those who don't; the politics of war are hardly an issue. And so, in a city that supports two military bases and the men and women who serve them, The Messenger played like gangbusters.

Foster stars as William Montgomery, a recent Iraq returnee dealing with serious leftover issues and a new assignment to play out his final three months of service: informing families that their loved ones have been killed on duty. As Montgomery's partner, Harrelson provides moments of levity, but there were plenty of sniffles throughout the film just the same.

While it was pretty easy to figure out what the general consensus was, there were three figures in particular I was watching for a reaction – the only three uniformed soldiers in attendance, who may or may not have been connected to the production. (The film has been screened for military personnel, and Harrelson and Foster personally met soldiers at Hunter Army Airfield prior to the night's screening.) When asked what military folk have thought of his film in the post-screening Q&A, director Moverman deferred to one of the officers in the audience to share his reaction with the crowd. What follows is the unnamed soldier's impromptu review of The Messenger.

Normally, we don't run stories about the personal lives and religious beliefs of celebrities. The exception to the rule is when they have some kind of impact (positive or negative) on a film or a career. So when Paul Haggis gives the finger to the Church of Scientology, we have to run it. As Haggis himself admits, "I am fully aware that some of my friends may choose to no longer associate with me, or in some cases work with me."

According to Village Voice, Haggis has been a member of the Church of Scientology for 35 years. But he found himself questioning its practices and beliefs, particularly after its San Diego branch openly sponsored California's anti-gay Proposition 8. Haggis asked Scientology's spokesman, Tommy Davis, to denounce the branch. Davis skirted the issue, and Haggis went on the offensive with a confrontational letter that has made its way online on Mark Rathburn's anti-Scientology blog. "The church's refusal to denounce the actions of these bigots, hypocrites and homophobes is cowardly. I can think of no other word. Silence is consent, Tommy. I refuse to consent."

The church's bigotry encouraged Haggis to do a little digging, and he found an online interview with Davis, who claimed that the Church doesn't force its members to cease contact with anyone who forsakes the religion, or openly criticizes it. "I was shocked. We all know this policy exists. I didn't have to search for verification - I didn't have to look any further than my own home." Haggis' wife was ordered to "disconnect" from her parents because they resigned from the church.

Continued below the jump...

As you may have seen, Nicole Kidman is the focus of some ridiculous headlines today, with everyone from the AP to The Hollywood Reporter and E! blaring that Kidman "conceded" to Washington that Hollywood contributes to violence against women. It's the kind of headline I hate: Attention grabbing, anti-entertainment, and completely misleading.

Kidman is a Goodwill Ambassador for UNIFEM, and was testifying before a House Foreign Affairs committee. Her goal was funding and resources, and to discuss violence against women overseas. The committee is currently debating whether to pass legislation for humanitarian relief. In true government fashion Rep. Dana Rohrabacher ( R-Calif) decided having A Real Hollywood Star was a chance to shift the discussion into shallow ground, and ask Kidman whether or not the movie industry had played "a bad role." Kidman, who probably came prepared to actually discuss humanitarian efforts, gave a fairly bland answer: "Probably." She hastily added that she didn't feel her own roles had, that she was through with roles that portrayed women as weak or as sex objects. "I can't be responsible for all of Hollywood but I can certainly be responsible for my own career," she added, and argued that Hollywood had also "contributed to solutions."

Undoubtedly, many will blame Kidman for making a shallow statement, and poke fun at her poorer script choices, but surely the blame falls on Rep. Rohrabacher for such an inane question. While Hollywood's portrayal and treatment of women is hardly stellar (if you read Cinematical regularly, you know we complain about it on an obsessive basis), and is certainly harmful socially and culturally, I would hardly blame it for violence. That's just the usual government claptrap that loves blaming the big, bad movie industry for glorifying sex and violence, and would now attempt to dodge humanitarian obligations by blaming Moulin Rouge.

Over at Moviefone's Inside Movies blog, a lively discussion is going on about animated family films. Jason Newman is concerned that many recent movies like Wall-E, Battle for Terra and the upcoming Astro Boy may be presenting young audiences with a hidden left-wing agenda.

I've watched a fair number of children's films for someone who has no kids of her own, and I'm not seeing the "blatant socialist themes" to the extent Newman is. For one thing, I disagree about Wall-E. Saying that Wall-E promotes liberalism is insulting to conservatives, as though they are the equivalent of the slothful humans on the spacecraft. "Don't be wasteful" isn't a liberal agenda, it's something most parents try to teach their kids. Astro Boy won't be in theaters until Oct. 23, so I can't say if it really contains "Marxist" themes and story elements. However, Newman says these story elements are played for laughs, and it strikes me that laughing at Communism is traditionally a right-wing practice.

Ricky Gervais's The Invention of Lying is taking hits in some places -- and earning praise in some other places -- for sneaking an unabashedly atheistic message inside a fairly conventional rom-com structure. I agree that the movie is astonishingly gutsy in this respect: in a country where a politician cannot publicly avow a lack of belief, a movie that declares religion to be a sham to comfort the gullible got a major distributor and a 2,000+ screen release how? (The obvious counterpoint is Bill Maher's Religulous, but that was a niche documentary that preached to the choir and was honestly marketed as anti-clerical; The Invention of Lying is a mainstream comedy whose ads did not contain a hint of where it was heading.) But is Gervais's movie really as anti-religious as it seems?

Consider that Gervais's portrayal of a world without religion is hardly utopian. His Mark Bellison lives in a shallow, blatantly classist society, obsessed with material wealth and physical appearance. His quest for romantic companionship is consistently undermined by his portliness and his "snub nose" -- obstacles in most civilizations, to be sure, but here the grounds for denying him sex and companionship are downright eerie. It's not just that the beautiful, successful Anna McDoogles (Jennifer Garner) isn't physically attracted to him. It's that, she tells him time and again, the two of them are not an optimal "genetic match." Mark's hunky colleague (Rob Lowe), on the other hand, is a far better "genetic match" -- and thus a better mate despite being, by all accounts, a huge douchebag.

The complicated story of Roman Polanski and his flight from the US over 30 years ago is starting to get very, very simple – at least when it comes to the law. The NYT reports that Polanski (and his legal representatives) have lost the appeal to have the director released from a Zurich jail following his arrest for a 2005 international warrant. The appeal was rejected by the Swiss Justice Ministry and a spokesperson for the ministry was quoted as saying the reason they rejected the request was that they felt "there is a high risk of flight" -- and it's not like you can blame them, the man does have a habit of disappearing when in the middle of a sticky situation.

That hasn't stopped his legal representatives from asking Switzerland's highest criminal court to free Polanski, but representatives from the Justice Ministry even submitted letters explaining their opposition to freeing the director. However, there is still a chance the director could be freed, and according to the NYT, "The Federal Criminal Court has said it will rule in the case in the "next weeks," and a verdict in either direction can be appealed to the country's highest judicial body, the Federal Tribunal."

If you've been arguing with your friends and family about the arrest and detainment of Roman Polanski in Switzerland last week, don't feel bad -- you're not the only one with an opinion. There's a debate brewing in Hollywood over the acclaimed director and his current legal predicament, and everyone has jumped into the fray. Polanski fled from the US after a conviction for unlawful sexual intercourse with a minor back in 1978, and with his recent arrest some of the biggest names in Hollywood have been publicly showing support. Recently, filmmakers like Michael Mann, Darren Aronofsky, Terry Gilliam, and Woody Allen (ahem, yes, even Woody Allen) signed a petition demanding the filmmaker's release from a Zurich jail. On the other hand, there is a very real possibility that not everybody is on board the love train, and the problem is that those people aren't talking.

Hollywood is a business, and just like in any other business, reputation can be everything. If you think of Hollywood as the world's biggest high school, then you can see how nobody wants to be excluded from the 'cool table' -- and it doesn't help that the pro-Polanski faction has Woody Allen and Martin Scorsese, and the opposition has Sherri Shepherd and 'Nellie Olsen'. In a piece for the LA Times, writer/blogger Melissa Silverstein said, "I think people are afraid to talk in Hollywood. They are afraid about their next job." Sure, that might sound slightly paranoid, but power players like Harvey Weinstein are writing op-eds in support of the director, so maybe she's not completely off the mark.

After the jump: making excuses and Hollywood vs. Middle America...

Following a solid opening in only four theaters last week, Michael Moore's latest documentary, Capitalism: A Love Story, is going nationwide tomorrow. And in true Michael Moore fashion, he wants to share it not only with ticket buyers, but with the people for whom he made the film: the jobless and homeless of America. So for Thursday night only, theaters in ten cities will give free tickets to anyone who shows up, no questions asked. Spread the word.

"To kick off the national release of Capitalism: A Love Story, I've asked the studio to offer a number of screenings in the nation's hardest hit cities -- the ones with the highest unemployment rates and highest foreclosure rates -- where those who've lost their jobs or who are in foreclosure (or have already been evicted) may attend my film free of charge," Moore said in a statement. "They've agreed, and so tonight (Thursday), the night before our opening day, ten cities will grant you free admission if you have fallen on hard times."

Publicity stunt or no, Moore's heart seems to be in the right place. He's not just bringing the free screening to major metropolitan areas, but places like Elkhart, Indiana, a manufacturing city that had an unemployment rate of 18 percent just last spring.

If you live in one of these cities and have fallen victim to economic woes, lost your job, struggle with foreclosures, or know anyone who has, check out the list of participating theaters and be Michael Moore's guest tonight:

It seems like you can't swing an Ewok without hitting some kind of fan-made Star Wars art, toy, or collectible, but have you ever wondered what would have happened if the Rebels had started a grass-roots movement rather than mounting up and chucking an explosive down the thermal exhaust port of the Death Star? Well, Derrick Jensen has and the result is a funny video called If 'Star Wars' Was Made By Environmentalists. In *Jensen's video, the activist and author of A Language Older Than Words takes us through the 'original screenplay' for the sci-fi fantasy classic as it was written by a group of environmentalists ... and Eco-Tours to Endor are only the beginning.

The video takes plenty of jabs at the Left's inability to come to a decision, and the absurdity of trying to stop a murderous force with harsh language and touchy-feely slogans. But keep in mind that Jensen is what you could call a hard-line 'tree-hugger', and his philosophy is based on the idea that civilization is inherently unnatural and based on violence. But don't let that scare you off; there are jokes a-plenty for Star Wars fans, including relegating Luke, Leia, and "some robots" into minor characters and Vader's inability to produce accurate paperwork. But no matter what side of the political spectrum you fall on, the beauty of this particular video is that you don't need to share Jensen's views to find it funny, you just need a healthy appreciation for absurdity.

After the jump: a world where Ewoks sell designer coffee and Luke and Leia are only background...

*CORRECTION: The video was created by Frank Lopez of Submedia

MGM has been plagued by financial woes for much of their long and illustrious career, but their most recent crisis could end up costing them two of their biggest titles. Nikke Finke of Deadline Hollywood Daily is breathlessly reporting that the studio is teetering on the edge of bankruptcy with over $3.5 billion in debt. MGM held a very long conference call with their creditors, pleading with themto waive their interest payments until February 2010, and allow them the cash they need for the rest of the year, particularly to fund its upcoming slate of films. Naturally, some of those are highly anticipated, such as Robocop, The Hobbit, and the latest James Bond installment.

However, MGM's creditors aren't feeling particularly charitable, and may force the studio to file for bankruptcy. If that happens, they could lose James Bond, The Hobbit, and numerous other franchises as MGM would have to sell them to the highest bidder. Right now, they're trying to convince their Scrooges that bankruptcy is the worst possible option, and that Bond and Bilbo are big enough moneymakers to cover their debt. That's where the situation stands now, and it'll certainly be quite the economic spectacle to watch.

I find the news particularly interesting in light of Peter Jackson's remarks on The Hobbit at ComicCon, when he squashed rumors that the film was in the casting stages, and noted that it hadn't even really been green-lit or had its budget approved yet. It was a douse of cold water after a lot of breathless excitement, much of which seemed to come straight from the filmmakers themselves. Could the brakes have been put on because of MGM's financial woes? Possibly.

Continued below the jump

Even if you don't live in the United States, you've likely heard of Netflix, the Internet-based DVD rental service responsible for ushering in the final days of Blockbusters and Hollywood Videos on every suburban street corner. For those who haven't used it, it's a very simple service: Add movies to your queue and within one business day, whatever is at the top of your queue magically ends up in your mailbox.

Simple service it may be, there's a lot of science (and magic) involved. Aside from the logistical aspect of managing, tracking, and dispersing millions of discs nationwide every single day, Netflix has the daunting task of being responsible for recommending movies based on your taste. However, the corporation's robominds are, to their own admission, fairly linear in their logic... Liked Dawn of the Dead 2004? You'll probably like 28 Days Later... So in an attempt to get a leg up on any future competitors, Netflix created the Netflix Prize in 2006.

The rules were simple: The first person or team to create a new collaborative filter algorithm that improved the recommendation accuracy of Netflix' own algorithm by at least 10% would take home $1,000,000. It may be a testament to how good Netflix' in-house system already was, but it took nearly 3 years for a team to make enough progress to claim the million dollar prize. Even then, deciding the winner came down to the wire; the second place team submitted their bid 20 minutes later than the winning team, which must be maddening in the scope of a 3-year long competition.

Charges that Neill Blomkamp's science fiction blockbuster District 9 was racist began popping up almost immediately upon the film's release back in August. Considering the film features an in-over-their-head South African government that allows a mega-corporation to quarantine and exploit an entire alien race, one may assume the obvious core parable for apartheid was at the heart of the racism charges, but aliens-in-a-concentration-camp was not the bullseye of most accusations. The actual problem some people had was with the portrayal of a Nigerian gang that illegally traded alien technology when not mutilating and devouring unsuspecting aliens in crude shaman-led rituals intended to imbue them with extraterrestrial powers, so to speak.

Nothing much came of the hullabaloo until recently, when the film found its way into Nigerian movie theaters. According to a BBC report on the matter, "The information minister said she had ordered the Nigerian film and video censors' board to ask all cinemas to stop showing the film and to confiscate it. "I have also formally written to Sony Pictures Entertainment, the company that produced this film, demanding an unconditional apology for this unwarranted attack on Nigeria's image," she added."

There's a long-running joke in Hollywood that one of the easiest ways to earn an Oscar is to either 'Ugly it up" or contract a disease. But, in recent years, one of the newer trends that can lead an actor to the podium is for them to take on a role where they play a person of same-sex orientation (a fact that has already become the stuff of satire). Over the past 10 years, plenty of actors have earned Oscars for playing gay roles, and the latest actor to join the club could be Matt Damon, who has signed to play Liberace's lover in Steven Soderbergh's biopic of the flamboyant musician.

So what's the big deal? Don't actors pretend to be different people all the time ... isn't that their job? Well, yes, but it's a little more complicated than that. Gay and lesbian political advocates have long lamented the sad state of affairs where straight actors are getting gay roles, instead of giving 'out' actors their chance to shine. So, while I question the idea that only gay actors could play a gay character, just as only straight actors can play straight characters, the sad fact is that Hollywood is still relatively puritanical when it comes to allowing their actors and actresses to be out and proud -- and that needs to change. But, that doesn't mean I think an actor (gay or straight) shouldn't play role any role they want ... just as long as they're good at it.

So on that note, I decided to give a little credit to five performances by straight actors in gay roles that transcended orientation and, ultimately, are just damn fine performances.

After the jump: my picks for the best of straight actors going gay for pay...