I guess I'll be better equipped to comment on this after I watch Indiana Jones and the Kingdom of the Crystal Skull on Sunday, but George Lucas has told Roger Friedman that he envisions Shia LaBeouf, playing Indy's maybe-son Mutt, taking over the Indiana Jones franchise from Harrison Ford. Speaking about the "more than a strong possibility" (Friedman's words, not Lucas's) of a fifth film, Lucas says: "I have an idea to make Shia [LeBeouf] the lead character next time and have Harrison [Ford] come back like Sean Connery did in [Last Crusade]. I can see it working out." I note this without comment for now. Next week, once a bunch of us have seen Mutt's debut, we'll go nuts.

Lucas did say something else to Friedman that I found a bit offputting. In an attempt to brush off the mixed buzz on Crystal Skull, he said: "This movie is the exact same experience as the other three were. The difference is, the novelty of discovery is gone." The "exact same experience"? Why, it's almost as if the movie were a Kraft cheese stick rather than a piece of pop art! Dammit, George. We may all know it already, but some of us like to pretend otherwise. Why don't you let Spielberg do the press rounds from now on, whaddya say?

%Gallery-20866%

[hat tip: CinemaBlend]

It wasn't Darby O'Gill and the Little People that brought Sean Connery to superstardom. It was his many gigs as James Bond, stretching from Dr. No in 1962 to Never Say Never Again in 1983. But that era is over. These days, Daniel Craig is 007, and he's gearing up for the 22nd Bond installment with Quantum of Solace. So, what's that have to do with Connery? Well, according to Ace Showbiz, a new press release says that the actor has considered returning to the franchise as the big baddie.

Connery is quoted as saying: "I wouldn't mind coming back as a Bond villain. But I don't think they would pay me enough. They don't pay the money for other parts, only for the Bond character, although that wasn't the case when I was doing it." Ouch! I would think they might want to add Connery in to at least save some face. Sure, things change, but what production wants to be considered penny pinchers that only care about Craig?

Ace goes on to say: "Allegedly, the 77-year-old Academy Award-winning actor has been involved in negotiations to land a villain role with the film's producers since Daniel Craig has been tapped to bring Ian Fleming's agent back to the big screen with Casino Royale."

Could this be true? Would they ever pay enough for this to really happen? We'll have to wait and see. But in the meantime, what do you think? Should Connery return to the world of James Bond?

Should Sean Connery be a James Bond villain?

Yes!!!No way. He should leave it in the past.I don't know...I don't care...Vote

Maybe the most irritating thing about Roland Emmerich's generally unwatchable 10,000 BC was leading man Steven Strait's bizarre accent. Totally indeterminate -- he trilled his r's and drawled occasionally -- it was clearly meant to indicate in some uncertain way that what we're watching takes place a Very Long Time Ago. Hello? The movie is called 10,000 BC and the characters are already speaking English. Making them speak weird English isn't exactly adding verisimilitude. I don't know who Emmerich thought he was fooling.

I always find this sort of thing annoying, and sometimes vaguely insulting. I'm perfectly fine with characters who speak English even though they're not supposed to -- it's easier that way, and I can suspend disbelief. But if you're going to go that route, why add constant, pointless reminders of the very fact you're trying to dodge? Part of the reason I admire The Hunt for Red October is that John McTiernan said "screw it" and let Sean Connery keep his Scottish brogue as a Soviet submarine captain.*

If you're old and boring like me, chances are you're not heading out to some paradise for Spring Break this year. It's cool, though, because Moviefone has got you covered. They've had the unfortunate job of combing through thousands of photos, searching for the top shots of our favorite female AND male movie characters wearing their most beloved, adorable swimwear.

On the girls side, we have one of the more geek-famous shots of Princess Leia rockin' her slave bikini. (A personal favorite, if I may say so myself.) There's Halle Berry, Jessica Alba, Elizabeth Hurley, Ursula Andress -- trust me, you'll want to check out this gallery. The men also get their time in the spotlight (though none of them beat my rock-solid abs). Let's see, we have dudes like Matthew McConaughey (who takes his shirt off in every film just so he can wind up on a list like this later in the year), Jesse Bradford, Sean Connery and, of course, Daniel Craig. You be the judge of which Bond looks better in a bathing suit.

Head over here to check out the ladies, and over here to check out the guys. And make sure you vote for your favorites at the end.

Seeing as we'll finally get to watch the first Indiana Jones and the Kingdom of the Crystal Skull trailer later this week (it will officially air on Good Morning America this Thursday, then arrive online right afterwards on IndianaJones.com), I figured we'd take a look back in this week's Monday Morning Poll and attempt to find out which Indy flick the fans most enjoy. On paper, it seems the obvious choice is Raiders of the Lost Ark, however throughout the years I've met folks who adore Temple of Doom and some who thought the addition of Sean Connery rose The Last Crusade up above the rest. I'll probably revisit this topic once Kingdom of the Crystal Skull arrives in theaters (on May 22), but for now let's take a look at the Indy films already available to us.

It's hard not to absolutely love Raiders of the Lost Ark. It's the original -- first time we met Indy -- and this adventure established all the themes and character traits we'd go on to see in the sequels. But then you get Temple of Doom; the odd one of the bunch. It's still Indy, he's still fighting with some gal, and it includes who is perhaps Indy's most beloved sidekick (Short Round), but it's really nothing like the other two films in the franchise. Some people like that about this film -- how it's different, unexpected. What about you? The Last Crusade brings us back to the type of Indiana Jones film we saw in Raiders, except the love angle isn't as strong. But there's no denying the superb buddy chemistry Ford and Connery displayed on screen as father and son.

So, as we await the trailer for what could be the last Indiana Jones adventure, I ask you: What's your favorite Indiana Jones film?

I just love those lists that are supposed to represent the fandom of the general public. This is probably because my preferences rarely converge with them. Sure, some of my tastes are a little off the beaten path -- I'd pick Danny Huston over Brad Pitt, or Julie Delpy over Julia Roberts. That being said, I still love me some good mainstream. Yet I still find myself raising my brows when I read these lists, just as I did today when I saw the annual Harris Poll for America's favorite movie stars, which Hollywood.com put up today. The order is surprising, as is the one lone oldie to the group.

Their results, counting down from 10 to 1:

10. Bruce Willis
9. Sandra Bullock
7. (tie) Matt Damon & Sean Connery
6. John Wayne
5. Will Smith
4. Julia Roberts
3. Johnny Depp
2. Tom Hanks
1. Denzel Washington

Yes, that's John Wayne there at number 6. Apparently he is the only actor to nab a spot on the poll every year since its inception in '94. Also, Depp is quickly working his way up the ranks, having moved up four positions from last year. Personally, I find the list surprising, and a bit sad in the realm of women in cinema. What say you?

Well he might not have his Capone yet, but Brian DePalma is still determined to bring his Untouchables prequel to the big screen. MTV Movies Blog reports that DePalma will likely make The Untouchables: Capone Rising his next film. DePalma tells MTV that they still have not cast their Capone (played by Robert De Niro in the original film), but that he was looking for an actor with "...that street animal sexuality" -- and this just might be me, but Nicolas Cage is not the first person to come to mind with that particular description (although, I guess it doesn't matter now). Gerard Butler (300) is attached to play Jimmy Malone -- a role made famous by Sean Connery (I can still picture the overacting 20 years later... "You wanna know how to get Capone? They pull a knife, you pull a gun. He sends one of yours to the hospital, you send one of his to the morgue. *That's* the *Chicago* way"). But, it did get the man his only Oscar, so you can never tell.

DePalma told MTV that the story will focus on "[Jimmy Malone]'s relationship with Capone during Capone's rise". News of a prequel first emerged around this time last year; so here we are a year later, and not all that much has been accomplished. DePalma did make assurances that the film would be keeping as much of the original feel of the 1987 flick as possible, saying, "I would like to use a lot of the original music from 'The Untouchables,' (which means the amazing score from Ennio Morricone will return) and the original locations in Chicago." I wonder if that will include giving the cast some snazzy costumes from Armani again. Until DePalma finds his Capone, though, he probably won't be 'rising' anytime soon.

After that big plot leak this morning from an extra, I didn't think I'd ever again see another spoiler about Indiana Jones and the Kingdom of the Crystal Skulls. But then, thanks to Movieweb, I came across an interview with George Lucas, himself, at TV Guide.com. And guess what? The Indiana producer shares some new information about the seemingly secreted blockbuster. Mind you, he doesn't really technically share any plot points or spoilers, but he does confirm one major thing: Sean Connery will not be making a cameo. All our hopes that somehow Connery had taken the role without it getting out to the media are now over. Turns out that Connery would rather stay retired and "play golf." But that isn't all. It turns out Lucas actually replaced Connery with another actor.

Say what? Don't worry, Lucas assures us that not only was Connery substituted, but so was his character. So, the replacement isn't Henry Jones (aka Indy's dad), it is some other minor character who somehow fulfills the same narrative role. In the end, Lucas claims it was better this way, because fans would have seen Connery early on and then hoped he was going to appear throughout. The original script, though, had Henry Jones show up only for a short part. Could this substitute character be Jim Broadbent's academic colleague at Yale? Makes sense. Check out Lucas' exact reasoning for why the switch was better in TV Guide's interview.

In more tune with this morning's leak, MTV Movies Blog yesterday posted some words from Cate Blanchett regarding her character. Of course, the actress was more tight-lipped than Tyler Nelson, and only confirmed that regretfully she was not a romantic interest for Indy and nowhere in the script did it call for she and Harrison Ford to share a kiss. So, before today's spoilers, it was already speculated with strong evidence that Blanchett would be playing some sort of villain.

James Bond -- when played by Sean Connery, Pierce Brosnan and now Daniel Craig (and a bit less so when played by Roger Moore, Timothy Dalton and George Lazenby) -- has long been the gold stanard by which all other cinematic spies have been judged. He's smooth, aloof, quick-witted and charming. Guys want to be like him and women with names like Pussy Galore want to sleep with him. But these days, 007 has some serious competition from a more reserved, grittier and -- dare we say -- more likeable amnesiac spy named Jason Bourne (Matt Damon).

When The Bourne Identity came along in 2002, it pretty much reinvented the action-spy genre, placing its hero, Jason Bourne, squarely in the real world (where things like Bond's invisible car do not exist) and dealing with the unheard of (in the Bond world, at least) issues of moral accountability, character metamorphosis and even vulnerability. Clearly influenced by his neophyte rival, a new Bond was born in 2006's Casino Royale, with Daniel Craig stepping into the tux of a more down-to-earth, relatable and gadget-free 007. Even so, the gap between these two men remains enormous.

From the cars they drive to the villains they battle to the way they fight to the women they bed, Moviefone compares the two most badass spies ever to grace a movie screen in a Jason Bourne vs. James Bond gallery. Check it out and then tell us: Who do you think is the more super spy?

Now that he's back in the spotlight with another Rush Hour movie, producer Arthur Sarkissian has some new projects to announce. One is a remake of Sidney Lumet's The Anderson Tapes, which originally starred Sean Connery and a young Christopher Walken. The new movie won't exactly be a remake of the earlier film, though; it will just simply also be based on Lawrence Sanders' novel, which Sarkissian has optioned. One thing that will be different about Sarkissian's version is it will be set in Miami instead of New York. It will have the same plot, about a thief released from prison who hatches a plan to rob an entire apartment building. Unbeknown to him, he's under constant surveillance, a topic with more relevance today then in 1971 (coincidentally, though, the original The Anderson Tapes opened on the same day as Watergate, only one year prior). Also significant these days is the movie's idea of different government agencies not knowing what the others are doing. Like the recent redo of The Manchurian Candidate, this could be one of the few remakes that are on-point rather than wholly unnecessary.

A second project Sarkissian has announced is an adaptation of part of William Stadiem and Mara Gibbs' book Everybody Eats There: Inside the World's Legendary Restaurants. Apparently the producer has a passion and knowledge for haute cuisine and he hopes to turn one of the book's chapters into a comedy about a very picky eater. This guy is notorious throughout the world, and makes enemies of top chef's, who conspire to get rid of him. Hopefully by the time the movie is made, Americans will still be obsessed with cooking shows and movies (the disappointing box office for No Reservations suggests the trend is already on its way out). Up next for Sarkissian is his remake of Jean-Pierre Melville's Le Cercle Rouge, which starts filming in October with Johnny To directing. He's also producing Prince Test, the directorial debut of ER's Noah Wyle.

Talk about stumbling onto the Holy Grail -- this is a bit like finding an unpublished F. Scott Fitzgerald novel in your grandmother's attic, or peeling back some old wallpaper and discovering an unknown Mozart composition stuck to the wall. That's exactly what author Robert Sellers found during a clandestine meeting with an unnamed friend of Kevin McClory while researching his book "The Battle for Bond." If you aren't familiar, Kevin McClory is the man who wrestled legally with the Broccolis over the right to the James Bond movies, and eventually was awarded the right to remake Thunderball, which eventually became the (somewhat painful) film Never Say Never Again.

Hardcore Bond fans know we're talking about Warhead, the James Bond movie that never was. It would have starred (and was co-written by) Sean Connery and would feature James Bond batling robotic sharks, skiing on the Hudson River, terrorists bent on exploding a nuclear warhead underneath Wall Street, and helicopter attacks on the Statue of Liberty. According to Sellers, "It would have been the most extravagant Bond film ever." It might sound corny now, but to me it's already better than A View To A Kill, which is one of my least favorite Bond films.

It would have gone before the cameras in 1977 with a budget of $22 million, but the Broccoli's started legal proceedings against the film and things ground to a halt, never to be revived again. Check out some exclusive photos from inside the book over at Commander Bond, and think about what this could have done, for better or for worse, to the franchise.

Look, I love Sean Connery's Papa Jones character just as much as the next guy, but to create a website and ask people to sign a petition in an attempt to convince the man to make a cameo -- I'd say that's a tad much. But it's also exactly what a group (maybe not a group; maybe a few or a couple) of people have done, and if you head on over to the newly created BringBackConnery.com, then you can support their cause by signing on the virtual dotted line. When enough names are gathered, the folks in charge will then forward this petition along to "the studio" and maybe -- just maybe -- Sir Connery will say, "Ya know, f*ck it -- bring me a horse!"

And then I woke up and realized I was in the middle of some high school-set comedy from 1987. It was late in the second act; our main characters were trying to come up with a way to save their favorite (insert memorable spot) from being turned into a parking lot/strip mall, and from out of the back shouts a voice -- a familiar voice -- is it Johhny? It is Johnny! He's back! He really does believe in us! But he's not alone -- oh no, he has an idea. "Let's start a petition, gang!" he yells. "We'll show them just how much Sam's Swell Shake Shack really means to this community." And so they start their petition. And they gather their names. And then someone like me comes along with sarcasm and a reality check. Not gonna happen. But I like the spirit and enthusiasm. It's cute. And you never know ... maybe he'll do it. Then again, I'm convinced his whole strategically-placed "I'm not participating" statement was a lie in the first place -- so what do I know.

[via Raider.net]

According to an official press release, John Hurt has joined the cast of Indiana Jones 4, while at the same time Sean Connery has officially turned down an offer to reprise the role of Indy's father. There's no word on who Hurt will be playing, but I imagine he'll most likely take on the role of villain or "guy you think is good until you discover at the very end that he's been playing for the other team all along." Either that, or we're looking at Indy's new father (even though Hurt is only two years older than Ford; I'm sure they can age him up if need be). Hurt joins Cate Blanchett, Harrison Ford, Shia LaBeouf, Ray Winstone (and Karen Allen?) in the currently untitled film, which will be directed by none other than Steven Spielberg.

As far as Connery goes, here's his full statement: "I get asked the question so often, I thought it best to make an announcement. I thought long and hard about it and if anything could have pulled me out of retirement it would have been an Indiana Jones film. I love working with Steven and George, and it goes without saying that it is an honor to have Harrison as my son. But in the end, retirement is just too damned much fun. I, do however, have one bit of advice for Junior: Demand that the critters be digital, the cliffs be low, and for goodness sake keep that whip by your side at all times in case you need to escape from the stunt coordinator! This is a remarkable cast, and I can only say, 'Break a leg, everyone.' I'll see you on May 22, 2008, at the theater!"

Now, I don't know about you, but I wouldn't be surprised if those involved had a few tricks up their sleeves regarding Connery. I'm not saying this statement from him is just a way to throw us off course so that we're utterly shell-shocked when he briefly appears on screen -- or wait, maybe that is what I'm saying. Regardless, however, chances are that Connery is not returning. It stings, it sucks and it stinks, but life will go on. You'll notice that Karen Allen's name still wasn't mentioned even though it's been reported that she's involved and playing Shia's mother. The film begins production this week, and apparently will be making a pit stop in San Diego for Comic-Con at the end of July -- hopefully to provide some much-needed answers (give us a damn title!) to those most talked-about questions. In case you're interested, I've included the full press release after the jump.

The intense secrecy surrounding Fourth Installment of the Indiana Jones Adventure is finally starting to let up. Ryan reported spoiler-laced details of the plot this morning, along with the information that Shia LaBeouf's character will be a Fonzie greaser type. And now Chud is reporting that -- hallelujah! -- Karen Allen will be returning to one of the all-time great "girlfriend of the hero" roles: Marion Ravenwood. Growing up, Allen was my dream girlfriend, what with the classic love interest trifecta of National Lampoon's Animal House, Raiders of the Lost Ark, and Scrooged -- three movies that meant a lot to me as a kid. She's beautiful (but not too beautiful), and exudes charm, humor, and intelligence. She also seems to put up with a lot, which is something I tend to require in a mate.

Paramount is not commenting on the casting news, so there's no official confirmation. But sources are reporting that it is a done deal, and we all know "sources" are never wrong. It looks like Marion will be, as long suspected, the mother of the Lebeouf character. And assuming the word on the street is true that Indy is the father, well...you know what that means. (It means they did it). (And by "it," I mean "sexual intercourse.") (And that the sexual intercourse in question led to the creation of Shia LaBeouf's character). Allen has acted steadily since her debut in Animal House, but the last performances of hers you probably saw were in 2000's The Perfect Storm and 2001's In the Bedroom. Allen is 55 years-old, which I think will go a long way toward chilling out the age-bashing of Harrison Ford that is sure to be the subject of many a late-night monologue joke in the coming year. With Hollywood the way it is, I'd been worried they'd pair him with Jessica Alba or something. I've resisted it as long as I can, but I'm officially losing my concerns that this thing will suck. Viva Allen!

At the tail-end of a lengthy and politically-oriented interview piece in The Scotsman, Sean Connery was asked about the status of his involvement in Indiana Jones 4. Unfortunately we're getting the same old story, but if you read between the lines it seems pretty obvious that the legendary actor will be back on board the series. "I've got their script," says Mr. Connery, which means that the Henry Jones character is definitely still a part of the story. (Otherwise why would Connery have a script?)

As the illustrious Chris Campbell told us last month, Connery made a "show me the money" comment when asked if he'd want to play James Bond Sr., which tells us the casting delay might be more financial than artistic in nature. But to hear Mr. Connery tell it, the hold-ups might be on the screenwriting end ... or he's still playing a little hardball.

"They're still working on it," he says, although it's not clear if that really means anything. "Working" could mean "haggling with my agent because I've said that I want a big paycheck for this gig." When asked if he could divulge any plot details, Connery (of course) refused: "You know they're paranoid about it." Well, gee. Maybe "working" on the script actually means "They could very well be writing the senior Jones out of the equation entirely." Here's hoping that Mr. Connery does decide to reprise his very amusing role in the third Indy sequel, but if he chooses not to ... he better not cause any production delays. I'd love to see this movie hit the screens before I'm Connery's age.