If you have a girl between the ages of 4 and 12 in your life, chances are pretty good you've heard of American Girl. The wildly successful franchise has spawned a whole series of high-end dolls, doll clothes, doll furniture and accessories, books, cookbooks ... and, of course, movies. American Girls are enormously popular with both girls and parents seeking a wholesome alternative to the freakishly-thin Barbie doll image or the hooker-in-training look of those wretched Bratz dolls. As an added bonus, they encourage girls to learn a little history, without even realizing it .

The whole thing with American Girl is that each of the dolls comes from a different time period: there's Kristen, an immigrant girl from Sweden; Felicity, an American Revolution girl whose father is a Patriot, while her best friend's father is a Loyalist; Samantha, being raised by her wealthy grandmother in the 1920s, when women's suffrage and class difference were big issues; Molly, a girl whose father, a doctor, is off serving in the Second World War; Addy, who escapes slavery with her mother to search for her father and brother, and so on. Each doll has her own set of books: there's the intro book, the birthday book, the book where so-and-so learns a lesson, the Christmas book, and even a line of mystery books.

At yesterday's press day for Hellboy II: The Golden Army, the eloquent, elegant Guillermo del Toro had plenty to say about crafting the sequel to 2004's Hellboy, which we'll have at Cinematical closer to the film's opening; he also dropped a few facts and thoughts about his upcoming job helmingThe Hobbit. On the 'facts' front, del Toro mentioned that The Hobbit (which may be two films, one adapting the original novel and the other bridging The Hobbit and The Lord of the Rings with new material) will have a very different look than some of his other films: "The Hobbit will be (presented) in 2.35-to-1. ..." Translating cinematographer to English, that means that The Hobbit will be presented in widescreen, all the better to capture the hills and dales of the Shire.

Del Toro also spoke about the potentially tricky task of making his two Hobbit films in the wake of Peter Jackson's wildly successful trilogy, as well as what kind of material he might bring to a second movie -- and the tricky question of what Tolkien-created material Peter Jackson has the rights to (and can be used to create the two Hobbit films) and what material Jackson does not own the rights to (and can't use in a film). Del Toro's answers may have been short on detail, but they were long on vision. "What we're talking (about) is, obviously, utilizing the materials that are available to us, and the discipline has been to try and know, for my part, everything else -- not to know it and use it, but to know it and not step on those things.

For whatever reason in the fall of 2005, I had missed out on the initial local press screening of Terrence Malick's latest epic, The New World, and the reactions that followed were decidedly ... less than appreciative. Shortly thereafter, word had come our way that an alternate cut would be opening instead, and so it was this second screening that I did attend.

For the first half of the film, I was fairly fascinated by the tale of John Smith (Colin Farrell) and his conquest of both what is now America and what was then Pocahontas (Q'orianka Kilcher). However, somewhere around when Smith disappeared and John Rolfe (Christian Bale) all but replaced him, I found my interest waning at a considerable rate.

It's difficult to deny that there were those who still thought the film to be one for the ages, even in its 135-minute incarnation. Those who lucked into the earlier screenings or lived in New York or Los Angeles could briefly get a glimpse of the original 150-minute cut, before certain scenes had been abridged, excised, or even replaced. Now, come October 14th, fans will get the chance to devour a DVD release of 172 minutes in length.

Earlier that same year, I'd found myself fairly unimpressed with the theatrical cut of Ridley Scott's Kingdom of Heaven, only to eat my words once the engrossing three-hour-plus director's cut hit DVD after a similar NY/LA bow. Maybe almost three years after the fact, I can bring myself to give Malick's masterpiece another go. Will you?

[via DVD Active]

According to The Hollywood Reporter, Gears of War is on a fast-track to the big screen, thanks to New Line. Len Wiseman (Live Free or Die Hard) has been given the directing job, and will be developing the story alongside Chris Morgan.

Based on the hugely popular video game, Gears of War tells of an elite Delta Squad who are charged with the task of saving the planet Sera from the vicious Locust Horde. Of course, the question on everyone's mind is whether or not this video game adaptation can succeed where so many have failed? Gears of War will probably be even more problematic than most, as the appeal stems from being plunked into the action, not because of the storyline. (Though, to be fair, it has no thinner a plot than Commando.)

Chris Bleszinski, one of the brains behind the video game, is optimistic as long as Hollywood takes it seriously. "Disney made a great movie out of a theme park ride, and somebody is sooner or later going to make a great one out of a video game. Having someone like Len really helps the odds. I think we're going to create something special here."

Sadly, Len Wiseman is only marginally more popular with fanboys and girls than Brett Ratner, so his name alone could sink this project when it comes to the geeks. However, he has a knack for over the top action, so perhaps this could be the ideal film for him. Sound off, Gears fans -- do you think this has potential, or is it destined to be another Doom?

Earlier this week, we learned that Jason Voorhees will be wearing both the burlap sack and the iconic hockey mask in the new Friday the 13th remake (or is it technically a remake of the first three movies?). Now, in honor of today being 2008's only Friday the 13th, MTV (one of the new film's co-producers) also shares a report from the set of the movie. They don't have anything as interesting to tell us as IESB.net did with the headgear news, but they do have video coverage, which you can watch above.

Any fan of the franchise should be excited after watching this footage. We get to see a hot young actress (Amanda Righetti) running through the woods, a dilapidated cabin, a sign telling us its Camp Crystal Lake and an overlong view of the hockey mask prop. That's almost all the ingredients needed for a Friday the 13th movie (it sounds so easy to do, right?). Oh, and finally we get to see the actor portraying Jason (Derek Mears) wearing ... a t-shirt and no make-up.

Before we get the sequel to and the potential copiers of Sex and the City, we're in for a summer of comparative marketing. Already we've seen a new trailer for The Women, which arrived well-timed on the heels of the Sex in the City box office reports. Now, thanks to some insightful reporting from the New York Times, we find out that Kit Kittredge: An American Girl is just like Sex and the City, only its for little girls. Like the recent hit movie, Kit Kittredge comes with a built-in audience thanks to the successful American Girl property, which consists of dolls, books and TV movies. Also, yes, it's mainly for females. Oh, and it's a Picturehouse release, meaning its pretty much being released by the same studio (New Line, now a division of Warner Bros.) that brought us Sex and the City.

Interestingly enough, The Women is also Picturehouse, and this summer's other big female-geared movie, The Sisterhood of the Traveling Pants 2, is Warner Bros. Hopefully another article can point out that the sequel is just like Sex and the City, only for teen girls. Then all we'd need is for Warner Bros. to make my desired big-screen Golden Girls movie (with original cast, of course), because it'd be just like Sex and the City, only for older girls. Unfortunately the series was produced by Disney, who'd likely hold on to the film rights.

Who else is preparing a Friday the 13th marathon this Friday? If you are, you'll be reminded that baddie Jason Vorhees does not wear the iconic hockey mask until Part III. He barely even shows up in the first installment (it's his mom, Pamela Vorhees doing the killings, remember?), and then in the first sequel he's wearing a burlap sack over his head. Finally, in the third film Jason acquires the hockey mask when he kills its original owner. So, here's the question that's been burning inside all horror fans since the announcement of a Friday the 13th reboot: what will Jason be wearing to cover his face? And here's the answer: both sack and mask.

The surprising yet satisfying answer was found out by IESB.net during a visit to the Austin, Texas set of the movie. Producers Brad Fuller and Andrew Form admitted to condensing the events of the first three films so that we can see the moment when Jason puts on the mask for the first time. But apparently there will be an actual switch from sack to mask, which will make the sequence different from the events of Part II and Part III. Another reporter on set referred to this new switch sequence as Jason's "Darth Vader Moment." Also, IESB learned that the switch will be shot twice, once from behind and once from the front, revealing Jason's ugly mug. However, it supposedly has not yet been decided which one (if not both) shots will end up in the final cut.

The remake/reboot of Friday the 13th arrives in theaters on the next Friday the 13th to occur after this week: February 13, 2009.

I was, admittedly, a bit of a latecomer to the Sex and the City craze. For years, I staunchly refused to watch the show, convinced from what I knew of it that it wasn't for me. It struck me as self-absorbed and superficial, episode after episode of successful, independent women who should have been perfectly content with their lives, endlessly bemoaning what they didn't have -- Prince Charming and "happily-ever-after" -- over endless rounds of Cosmos. Who wants to listen to four women talking about nothing but fashion and men? Not me, said I. I didn't even drink Cosmos for the longest time, just because I associated them with the show.

And then, one day a few years ago I was going nuts being confined to bed rest with my last child. I'd watched everything on Court TV and more sappy Lifetime movies than any one person should ever have to stomach, I was desperate for something else to watch to pass the time. And there, right by the DVD player, was my oldest daughter's most prized possession: Season One of Sex and the City. What the hell, it couldn't be any worse than re-watching Tori Spelling in Mother, May I Sleep With Danger, right? I slipped the first disc into the DVD player ... and didn't stop watching until I'd watched every episode of the first season. And then I was hooked on the adventures of Carrie, Samantha, Miranda and Charlotte.

Sometimes I feel like my cultural literacy is shamefully limited. I watch a lot of movies but somehow I rarely watch many television shows. I only have the most basic cable, so I could tell you all about the most fascinating shows on Austin community access but nothing about, say, Sex and the City. I saw the movie Sex and the City without ever having watched an episode, with an unfortunate tendency to refer to it as Sex in the City, and with such an ignorance of pop culture that I kept mixing up Carrie Bradshaw with Carrie Underwood. I brought a friend to the screening who was well acquainted with the TV show, in case I needed help, and whispered things like "Is that the theme song?" and "What's the joke?"

Fortunately, for those of us who are encountering Sex and the City for the first time, the movie's opening sequence provides compressed backstories about the four characters so we don't feel lost and confused. But even if we didn't know who had done what and whom and where, the storyline -- set five years after the TV show's end -- is not difficult to follow.

Moviefone has debuted the trailer for He's Just Not That Into You, due in theatres October 24th (watch it above or over on Moviefone in HD). While it's a charming trailer, I cannot help but feel that every man in the world is actually really into one or more of these actresses (especially Scarlett Johansson) so it automatically loses credibility. Plus, it's a movie based on a dating guide. How will that work out? Happily ever after, I suspect.

The star power in this movie is pretty impressive, though! It was indelibly associated in my mind with Drew Barrymore (who I like; she is impossible not to). I had no idea it boasted the likes of Jennifer Connelly, Scarlett Johansson, Jennifer Aniston, Ginnifer Goodwin, Ben Affleck, and Justin Long. That speaks well for it, actually, as Connelly especially tends to do the more serious scripts. And I really want to see Affleck make a major comeback, so I hope his mere presence in a romantic comedy doesn't condemn him to Gigli level again. What do you think -- perfect date movie or too reminiscent of real life to be amusing? I think I am in the latter category, myself. The scene with Barrymore at the end of the trailer is like every interaction I have ever had with the opposite sex. Sad, but true.

But they aren't going to tell us who it is! Guillermo Del Toro spoke to Empire and revealed a few more Hobbit details. We can all breathe a bit easier because according to the director, it will be "at least a year before we announce any casting." So, this may be the last story you read on The Hobbit for quite awhile.

That doesn't mean they aren't hard at work trying to find the main hobbit himself. Says Del Toro: "We are writing based on [Ian Holm's performance], but other than that, we have ideas [of who could play him]. I can tell you that it's down to a few names that we all agree upon. And that our first choice ...completely, magically, we said the same name. All of us!"

Somewhere, there is an actor who has no idea he's in the running. And it is obviously not an unknown if the entire team came up with the same individual. Who are you, future Bilbo? My old pick was Martin Freeman, who I always thought resembled Ian Holm a bit, and could do befuddled really really well. Jamie Bell always ruled the day with my geek friends, but I think he's become a bit too chiseled for a hobbit. Let's hear your own picks. And toss out some impossible, mind-reading guesses as to who the LOTR team could have landed on. Remember, it will be the last Hobbit story you have for awhile -- especially if Christopher Tolkien wins his court case.

Just when you thought it was safe to get excited, a possible wrench has been thrown into The Hobbit works. According to London's Sunday Times, Christopher Tolkien, the son of J.R.R., is attempting to stop the movie from being made altogether, calling for "one last crusade" in the long running court battle.

Regrettably, the issue at large is still money. Tolkien asserts that the family is still owed £80 million from New Line Cinema, under the 1978 sale of the rights that promised them 7.5% of the profits. Of course, that studio is now defunct, and Warner Bros has no comment on the financial problems.

On June 6th, Tolkien plans to petition a California judge to back his claim to terminate the film rights.

Why would you hold the splashy world premiere of a movie that celebrates Manhattan on a different freakin' continent? A few weeks ago, Eric Kohn reported on the rumor that Sex and the City would premiere in London; as he wrote, SatC is "automatically a quintessential New York film ... Considering all that Sex and the City owes to New York -- its entire legacy, really -- the idea of fleeing to Europe first sounds a little confused."

The rumor was true; the premiere was held in London last night, and now Sarah Jessica Parker finds herself defending a decision she did not make. The Telegraph describes her as being "diplomatic," stating simply: "This is where New Line Cinema decided to do it, so we started here. We are thrilled to be in London and we will be thrilled to take it to America." Cynthia Nixon downplayed the event, calling it "kind of [a] smallish premiere," and said that last night's show and another in Berlin on Thursday are "building" to the New York premiere, which will be held in two weeks, three days before the film opens on Friday, May 30. Kristin Davis told the Los Angeles Times: "Everyone is upset about it and I just don't understand why ... It's saving the best for last. No offense to London."

Sarah Jessica asked the audience to keep the plot secret; The Telegraph promptly posted a teasing "review." I'll let you decide if you want to click through and read it.

Near the end of last week, Defamer spread the rumor that Picturehouse, once the indie arm of New Line Cinema and currently dangling from the edge of the hulking entity known as Warner Bros., has its days numbered. Now that New Line is history and Warners, like many studios, has faced increasing cutbacks, it may give short shrift to the shingles responsible for handling artier fare. Along with Picturehouse, this also includes Warner Independent Pictures, whose recent release slate includes David Gordon Green's magnificent Snow Angels.

Defamer suggested that Picturehouse president Bob Berney might wind up at WIP or head up a new, currently anonymous company. On Friday, Variety's Anne Thompson put it in more coherent terms: It appears quite likely that WIP and Picturehouse will merge together as a single company, with current WIP president Polly Cohen working alongside Berney. Whatever happens, let's just hope that the final result still leaves room for the sharp selection of independent and foreign titles that Picturehouse has handled since its birth three years ago. Defamer points out that Marion Cotillard's unexpected Oscar win for La Vie en Rose matters less than the flop of Run, Fatboy, Run, while the John Simpson-directed horror film Amusement might get dumped on DVD. It was just last year, however, that the company helped edgy fare like The Orphanage and Rocket Science get the sort of release most studios would never try. Let's hope that bravery lives on, somewhere.

New Line might not be the company it once was, but they're continuing to pick up projects. The Hollywood Reporter posts that they've made its first purchase since downsizing, putting $500,000 against $1 million on the line for a comedy spec by Chad Kultgen (Average American Male) called Dan Mintner: Badass for Hire. Oh yes, it's just as it sounds.

Producer Beau Flynn says: "It's a homage to Cobra, Predator, Missing in Action. The baddest dude in the world in supertight jeans, chewing on a matchstick, stuck in the '80s but kicking ass in the present day." Being a fan of a good comedy/spoof mixed with action, this could be oh, so good, if it's teamed with the right music. It would also be awesome to see some cameos by the tough men of yesteryear (not just dudes like Van Damme or Lundgren -- I'm thinking the A-Team).

What confuses me, however, are the comparisons used in the piece. Flynn says it's an R-rated comedy in the spirit of Harold & Kumar Go to White Castle and the Wedding Crashers. Huh? Well, at least H&K made perfect use of a certain, grating infamous song. But the kicker in this -- who could play Dan Mintner? I'd think he has to be old enough to remember the '80s, yet young enough that it isn't just some old dude trying to be bad. Any ideas?