But things got a little sketchier late Wednesday as Ball and source novelist Alicia Erian each issued statements responding to the CAIR kerfuffle, invoking their minority status to deflect the charge that Towelhead is anything but a cynical tug on the pantleg of jaded viewers everywhere. Their two cents is after the jump, along with a few reasons you should see right through it.

This ultimately comes down to the principals hanging themselves by their own ropes, starting with race-card shark Arian:

As an Arab-American woman, I am of course aware that the title of my book is an ethnic slur. Indeed, I selected the title to highlight one of the novel's major themes: racism. In the tradition of Dick Gregory's autobiography Nigger, the Jewish magazine Heeb, or the feminist magazine Bitch, the title is rude and shocking, but it is not gratuitous. Besides the fact that the main character must endure taunting about her ethnicity (including being called a towelhead), so much of the novel's plot is fueled by the characters' attitudes toward race. ...

This is not to say that I don't find these concerns legitimate — I absolutely do. We live in a racist society, one in which people continue to use ethnic slurs to delineate those who are different than they are. Realistically speaking, though, these people are neither the audience for my book, nor for the film. They will continue to use whatever language they wish whether or not a movie called Towelhead is released. For this reason, I am pleased that Warner Bros. is standing by the title.

Got it. Then Ball got loose with his homo creds:

As a gay man, I know how it feels to be called hateful names simply because of who I am. Therefore, I felt it was important to retain the title of Alicia Erian's novel, in which she so effectively dramatizes the pain inflicted by such language, something many people of non-minority descent never have to face. I believe one of the unintended consequences of forbidding such words to be spoken is imbuing those words with more power than they should ever have, and helping create the illusion that the bigotry and racism expressed by such cruel epithets is less prevalent than it actually is, which we all know is sadly not the case.

WIP threw in some spin for good measure ("Good Night, and Good Luck drew criticism from some as well") along with a few "experts," but first things first: The film was never called Towelhead until after it was roundly brutalized at Toronto under the title Nothing is Private; Warners lay low for a few months, quietly reclaimed the title of Erian's novel, and traveled with it to Sundance last January for a reboot of sorts.

Alas, Towelhead's intellectual and aesthetic qualities (or lack thereof; you be the judge Sept. 12) — not its name — continued to precede it through its abortive fest cycle, with WIP's pulled plug soon contributing as well to an early-fall dump. It's an institutional thing, really: Its sister company Picturehouse issued The Women the same fate, with Warners promoting both films in New York opposite each other two weeks from today — when 90 percent of film journalists are still up north covering Toronto.

So anyway, when Ball, Erian and the WIP brigade as a whole say they know about discrimination, we can't necessarily argue. But we can — and should — point out for the record that their exploitation artistry exceeds their sensitivity, and whatever lipstick they want to slather on their pig in advance of its release back into the wild is ultimately a waste of perfectly good makeup. Did CAIR miss the point? Maybe. But Towelhead got what it wanted. So, no — apology not accepted, gang. Off you go.

“Of course we are concerned about the fans; however, any disappointment from the core fans should not be directed toward Fox. What we are doing is seeking to enforce our distribution rights to Watchmen. Legal copyright ownership should not just be swept under the rug and ignored.”

We can appreciate this to a point, of course, but really: What can one's chances be against an opponent who'll sacrifice anything — starting with grammar ("I wont make any difference to [Rupert Murdoch's] bank balance because there are plenty of uninformed sheep out there for his rabidly, right wing, keeping the populous afraid of their neighbours so they'll vote that way, brainwashing agenda, for him to fleece of their hard earned, tax paying cash") — to make his moral stand? Watchmen seems the least of your problems, guys; watch out for those lethal, legendary dangling participles on the way to your cars tonight.

• The 'Watchmen' war: Fanboys furious with Fox [EW]

Which won't happen (at least we don't think so) but that doesn't make matters that much better. But whatever — we love a good Hollywood blood feud as much as anybody. Follow the jump for a morning-after summary, a few pressing questions and a bit of quick-and-dirty handicapping.

We can start by thanking Larry Gordon for both the vision and the legal gaps that first got Fox (the original studio to sign on for Watchmen), Paramount (the international distributor) and Warner Bros. (the studio that nabbed the film for Snyder as his 300 came together in late 2006) into this imbroglio. Deadline Hollywood Daily yesterday offered a helpful timeline of events that started with Gordon placing Watchmen at Fox in the late '80s and finally reclaiming it in 1994 when the studio nudged it into turnaround: "The 'turnaround notice' gave Lawrence Gordon Productions 'the perpetual right . . . to acquire all of the right, title and interest of Fox [Watchmen] pursuant to the terms and conditions herein provided.' "

And that should have been that; if and/or when Gordon took it elsewhere, he and his new partners cut a check. Alas, it never happened, says Fox, and while Judge Gary Feess didn't rule one way or another Monday, he denied Warners' request to dismiss its rival's claim to the rights that Gordon allegedly never bought back.

But how bad is it? Bad enough for Fox to publicly toe the hard line in stopping Watchmen's opening on March 6, 2009:

"Warner Bros.' production and anticipated release of The Watchmen [sic] motion picture violates 20th Century Fox's long-standing motion picture rights in The Watchmen property," Fox said in a statement. ... "We will be asking the court to enforce Fox's copyright interests in The Watchmen and enjoin the release of the Warner Bros. film and any related Watchmen media that violate our copyright interests in that property."

Yeah, right. Cooler heads will prevail here, especially with Warners and Legendary Pictures about $120 million in (plus at least $150 million in marketing to come, starting with its recent success at Comic-Con) and Fox not wanting to start World War III with an avoidable throat-slashing.

That doesn't mean someone won't bleed, of course — but who? Will Paramount, which itself had Watchmen ready to go before Brad Grey cleaned house in 2005, be edged out of some or all its foreign entitlement? Will Warners cut Fox in on gross, and how much will be enough — especially with a surefire franchise on its hands? David Poland crunched some messy, guessy numbers over at The Hot Blog, but we can't argue with his conclusion: "Don’t expect them to go away for anything less than $25 million. And they will take an amount like that now… because they don’t want to gamble either. 100% of WB’s profit could be $0."

But that's just where our questions begin. Would someone at Warners let us know what's going on in legal? This same thing happened with Dukes of Hazzard four years ago when the studio shelled out more than $17 million to an original producer. We know how boring it can be to do due diligence, but last we checked, it's still a job requirement, especially on 20-year-old projects in turnaround — twice.

Also, how much of Warner Bros.' sudden Harry Potter move to '09 anticipated Feess' decision? If Warners could conceivably lose money on Watchmen after factoring in Paramount and Fox's cuts, and its only summer tentpole, Terminator 4, is just something it's distributing for someone else, then Harry's switch may not be a matter of money it doesn't need in '08 but rather a cushion for money it planned to lose in '09.

That may be the most telling sign of its strategy to come — that and the spike in empty liquor bottles recycled on the lot this morning. And at least Fox finally got the really big summer hit it needed. Kudos, gang, you earned it.

• Warner's 'Watchmen' In Legal Peril... [DHD]

Fans have been clamoring all over the web—and on this blog—for a complete reboot. And within the halls of Warner Bros. the same debate rages on.

They too believe that the last movie didn't break the mold and wound up in some kind of middle limbo. Today I was told that it is a priority at the studio to find the right direction and if Bryan Singer is willing to do that, fine, but if he gets in the way, he may not stay on the project. There are no writers working on a Superman script now. The studio wants to figure it out. "It might be better to start from scratch," one exec admitted.

It's an intimidating creative dilemma for Warners. Were it only as easy as one commenter's suggestion that they "make it more darker and not commerciallize [sic].. just like THE DARK KNIGHT the writer and the director make some risk to the movie and look what happen??" Indeed, look what happen. But the addition of a mutilated, lip-licking villain and surgically-implanted detonation devices won't necessarily guarantee that audiences seeking a jolt of unabashed and patriotic optimism will warm to a cynically repackaged Rottenguy: The Shadowy Kryptonian Prince Returns.

• Superman Status Update [Variety]

1. Titanic — $1,842.9*
2. The Lord of the Rings: The Return of the King — $1,119.3
3. Pirates of the Caribbean: Dead Man's Chest — $1,066.2
4. Harry Potter and the Sorcerer's Stone — $976.5
5. Pirates of the Caribbean: At World's End — $961.0
6. Harry Potter and the Order of the Phoenix — $938.5
7. The Lord of the Rings: The Two Towers — $926.3
8. Star Wars: Episode I - The Phantom Menace — $924.3
9. Shrek 2 — $919.8
10. Jurassic Park — $914.7
11. Harry Potter and the Goblet of Fire —$896.0
12. Spider-Man 3 — $890.9
13. Harry Potter and the Chamber of Secrets — $879.0
14. The Lord of the Rings: The Fellowship of the Ring — $871.4
15. Finding Nemo — $864.6
16. Star Wars: Episode III - Revenge of the Sith — $849.0
17. Spider-Man — $821.7
18. Independence Day — $817.4
19. The Dark Knight — $800.1

(*Grosses in millions)

And this is after what's characterized as another strong frame for TDK at the international box office. But just in case the guy on the other side of the cubicle wall is trying to sway you with wagers with over-unders less than $1 billion from the No. 1 spot — it's a trick! Fire back with something involving a Roland Emmerich film in the Top 20; we wouldn't have believed it either, fancy house or not.

• Time Warner's `Dark Knight' Nears No. 2 All-Time Film [Bloomberg]
• All Time Worldwide Box Office Grosses [Box Office Mojo]

The real story? Harry Potter star Daniel Radcliffe will be right in the middle of his sensational, highly publicized run on Broadway in the play, "Equus." Radcliffe appears naked in the play, on stage, and has sex in it as well. That's not the image Warner Bros. wants associated with bespectacled Harry, who remains chaste and virginal.

Indeed, posters for Equus are up all over New York, of Radcliffe's naked torso superimposed on a horse's head. This is not the sort of thing that's taught at Hogwarts. For the movie to open on Nov. 21, Radcliffe would have to do publicity entailing answering questions about blinding horses and having sex with them vs. flying around and making potions.

There's just one thing, Rog: this whole Equus brouhaha? Warner Bros. has already been through it. When Harry Potter and the Order of the Phoenix came out last summer, it was right on the heels of Radcliffe's first (underage!) Equus run in London, where the production began. By now, the nudity is old hat — in fact, reports are circulating that Radcliffe's Broadway run isn't causing as big a fuss as promoters had hoped. Forgive us, but for once we're going to believe the official line from the studio heads; after all, we can think of another dark installment in a long-running franchise that did gangbusters business in its mid-July release date this year...

• Harry Potter Scared by Horse [Fox News]

“The release date change does not alter the production schedule for this or future Harry Potter films. Post-production on Half-Blood Prince was completed on time, and the studio’s release plans for the two-part Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows will not be affected by this change. We know Harry Potter fans are eagerly anticipating seeing the final chapters unfold onscreen. In fact, the good news for them is that the gap will now be shortened between Half-Blood Prince and the first part of Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows."

Indeed, ecstatic Potter fans around the world rejoiced at having to wait another 11 months for the series' next installment — particularly those at MuggleNet, where glowing reactions ranged from "I AM SO PISSED RIGHT NOW YOU HAVE NO IDEA. 2008 is officially the "WORST YEAR EVER" to creatively spelled calls for a Warner Bros. boycott. And of course, feel free to sign the inevitable angry petition for an earlier release date.

Now Variety reports that Disney is moving its own animated fall tentpole Bolt — which would have opened opposite Potter on Nov. 28 — back to July 17 as well. Universal and Will Ferrell, meanwhile, which previously had that day to itself for Land of the Lost, were last spotted scouting downtown window ledges at lunch. Send our apologies if you see them.

• 'Half-Blood Prince' moves to July [Variety]

We think this falls into the "content is king" model evinced recently by Alan Horn, Barry Meyer and the higher-ups at Time Warner — as in, "This content is kind of terrible... Do we really have to release this?" At least that's the impression Horn apparently left with LAT BFF Patrick Goldstein:

Horn was honest about his assessment of the film. "I think it's a well-made picture, but while it's funny in spots, it's very English," he said. "I don't think it's broadly commercial. It feels like a film that deserves a spirited release, but not a wide one. Joel has an 800-screen deal, which we'll honor, but we might not be willing to spend the marketing money he wants us to."

Horn shrugged. "I guess I'm in a shocking state of equanimity," he said. "The filmmakers have every right to do what they think is best in support of their movies. But we have the right to do what's best for Warner Bros. Sometimes the pursuit of those interests results in a disagreement. For now, we're preparing to release the film in October, but I don't see it starting out on 800 screens. If Joel is thinking there is someone out there willing to spend twice as much money as we're willing to, I'm sure he will pursue that."

Director Danny Boyle's Indian adventure Slumdog Millionaire is apparently also on the block after a $5 million acquisition last year by Warner Independent, but Horn insists Warners isn't backing up the dump truck just yet: "I'd like for us to find a way to release movies like Slumdog Millionaire, but we keep coming back to the same question — can we really do it justice?" Translation: "Throw this negative in Joel's moving truck on your way off the lot, will you?" Sure, Alan — anything for you, babe.

• Warners' films: Movie overboard! [LAT]

It’s not the look or design that pushes it over the top into stereotype, of course, but the voice (performed by Corey Burden), a lispy, high-pitched twang purposively reminiscent of Truman Capote. So how did a character who wasn’t even supposed to speak English wind up sounding like that? Because George Lucas insisted on it, Clone Wars director Dave Filion confessed.

“Zero, Jabba’s uncle, originally spoke in Hutt-ese, like Jabba and then he had a different sluggish voice just like Jabba, and then George one day was watching it and said ‘I want him to sound like Truman Capote.’ He actually said that and we were like ‘Wow!’” Filion revealed. “It’s a hybrid of it but the inspiration is definitely there on Capote. It’s one of those things that takes him from being an interesting character and I think really does put him over the top and does something. He’s a favorite among the crew here.”

Filion bafflingly stopped short of acknowledging Ziro's sexual orientation, however ("He’s of questionable [sexuality] at least as a slug. They tell me that these slugs can be either male or female depending"), leaving it to Lucas to wait and see how the currently developing Great Sissies of History trilogy does on its own before permuting it for a more fabulous galaxy far, far away.

• Is Zero the Hutt The First Gay Alien In ‘Star Wars’ History? [MTV Movies Blog]

And while we can't and/or wouldn't argue any of these points, a ceremonious Warners rimjob also seems untimely. After all, what did Meyer do with his Speed Racer faxes on opening weekend? That and a few more pressing questions after the jump.

1. What about Speed Racer? Warners' legacy is one of adventurous flops and sturdy gambles, not messianic cultural events like TDK. If the point is a "content" state-of-the-union, then it's worth noting that the studio also dropped the summer's biggest bomb. For which, by the way, we love them; Where the Wild Things Are isn't likely to fare much better, but it is nice to know it's there.

2. What about Warner Independent and Picturehouse? The slimmed-down New Line earns a cursory mention, but its return to genre-junk roots is one of Time Warner's signature (and slightly desperate) content revisions since the AOL merger. And the axed Picturehouse — which had a strong summer of Mongol and Kit Kittredge after winning three Oscars in February — was all about "content" that's hit and missed just as regularly as the mother ship.

3. What about Get Smart? Again, the sturdy gamble is the thing: A hit that's grossed $200 million worldwide, will land equally hard on DVD and VOD and has sequels on the way. Screw TDK, really — Bewkes needs more like this, and he needs them recognized.

4. Did you know that Charlie Sheen makes $800,000 per episode of Two and a Half Men? A bit of rehash of an earlier question here at Defamer, we know, but a phenomenon we've come to now grudgingly accept knowing that T&HM is the flagship of a $4 billion television empire. Not that we get it; feel free to continue discussing below.

5. Whither questions and actual answers about new media revenues? Just because Tim Arango is writing all about Warners' precious "content" doesn't mean Bewkes can get away without answering his own query, "[T]he consumption of entertainment products is growing rapidly... The question is how do you offer it, and how do you get paid for it?" And this guy wonders why TW stock still hovers around $16. Come on, Jeff.

• Holy Cash Cow, Batman! Content Is Back [NYT]

The series appears to have abandoned all pretense of being anything less than an adolescent conjurers' dirge, eight shades darker than the previous murky installment. (Deathly Hallows we imagine will be nothing but a black screen with occasional flashes of finger-tip-produced lightning bolts.) We see no Trainspotting touches like heroin-flavored jelly beans or soiled invisibility cloaks, resulting in mysterious floating poop stains. Rather, we get that old scary-movie standby—a creepy kid with pyrokinetic powers and mental command over an army of snakes. Watch out behind you, Harry! Flaming cobra!

• Let the 'Potter' Hysteria Begin ... Again [AOL]

Seriously — $400 million in two weeks. But as we note after the jump, that last hurdle might be taller than it looks.

Observers attribute the record haul-to-date in part to the same repeat viewers who bumped Titanic to No. 1; turnouts among "older moviegoers, families, Latino and African American audiences" are higher than normal as well. And last weekend, anyhow, The Dark Knight enjoyed the advantage of weak competition. Those days are over, though, with the execrable Mummy 3 nevertheless looking at a $50 million opening this Friday and Pineapple Express and Tropic Thunder set to usurp their own cuts of DK's marketshare in the weeks to come. By comparison, Titanic had 15 weeks at number one — most in the late-winter studio dumping grounds of early 1998, as Horn points out, and aided heavily by its inexorable march to Oscar glory.

Similar factors could dovetail in unique ways for The Dark Knight, though, as its proximity to both the fertile July market and this fall's more prestigious film crop means Warner can revive its Terry Gilliam-endorsed Oscar chatter just in time to stretch DK's long tail into awards season. Call it Phase 2, even if Warners distribution boss Dan Fellman takes the high road with Horn: "We are honored to be considered in that company. But I think Titanic will hold that record for eternity."

Don't sell yourself short, Dan! Or, more importantly, don't underestimate a James Cameron sabotage campaign — we're already seeing evidence of a conspiracy online. That's when you know you're a phenomenon.

• 'The Dark Knight' enters 'Titanic' territory [LAT]

• Mario Lopez to host 'Extra' [Variety]

Warner Bros. has acquired Capeshooters, a comic book adaptation that will be produced by Bryan Singer's WB-based Bad Hat Harry banner.

Singer, who has directed films about virtuous superheroes with the first two X-Men, X2 and Superman Returns, is interested in exploring the darker side of the subject. He will only be producer on the project.

In Capeshooters, two slackers become paparazzi who specialize in shooting covert videos of superheroes find themselves on the run after they stumble onto evidence that a revered superhero is actually a villain.

The competition for titles is such that Capeshooters isn't even a written comic book yet; ex-Marvel artist Rob Liefield is still developing the property for his own Image Comics, leaving Singer to twist in Valkyrie's wind a little longer while his return to form takes shape. No rush, Liefield — just as long as it can be made for $200 million and pushed back six months to a year, Singer can hit it out of the park.

• Warner Bros. acquires 'Capeshooters' [Variety]
• Comics-Based Movies Keep on Comin' [Wired]

Follow the jump for their respective two cents — mostly spoiler-free for even the most casual followers of the film, and naturally among the finest criticism available anywhere online.

STV: We should probably go into this acknowledging that the film is review-proof and completely saturated with things too interesting to spoil.
STV: That said, I just thought it was pretty good.
SA: I thought it was excellent!
STV: Yeah, yeah, fine. It's fitfully brilliant, but so heavy-handed. Did I miss something?
SA: Nope. This was the summer 2008 superhero movie for people who enjoy feeling awful, and thinking about feeling awful, and expressing what makes feeling awful so gosh darn wonderful.
STV: Iron Man this is not.
SA: It's misanthropy porn. It's also the bluest superhero movie I've ever seen, in every sense of the word.
STV: Right. From the start, too — those billowing blue flames, the Hong Kong horizons, Gotham at night.
STV: And yeah, everyone's depressed as hell.
SA: But that said, I don't think a single scene passed by that I didnt feel worked. And it was a long movie.
STV: What about the story? I was lost.
SA: The story was fine. Corrupt city government. Crime infested streets.
SA: It was sort of The Departed with bat-gadgets.
STV: But the Joker shows up wanting a piece of Teflon goombah Eric Roberts, the Russians, the blacks, and a Hong Kong money-laundering syndicate.
SA: Its the Mafia Olympics!
STV: Even if Gotham City is totally corrupt, it's the most equal-opportunity corruption in history, which I guess should be commended.
SA: Speaking of the Joker, what did you think of Heath?
STV: Heath was annoying.
STV: It's not his fault. Nolan couldn't rein him in.
SA: I was prepared for him to be annoying, but I actually really enjoyed him.
SA: I mean, its The Joker! This isn't a portrait in subtlety. You want hyena cackles!
STV: But look — and this is my problem with the whole movie: The audience is overwhelmed with moralizing.
SA: Yes, I'll agree it got bogged down in speechifying.
STV: The Joker is the default "Man, this world is fucked" mouthpiece, but his actions — just his very look — defy the monologues, the hamminess.
STV: He needs an origin story like the Burton Joker, right? Who the hell is this guy?
SA: Yeah — their not committing to his backstory was a strong choice, but I'm not sure it really helped them.
SA: But I think they were trying to say, "What does it matter where he came from?" Like, what does it matter where any psychopath comes from? He's chaos. But then you have no psychological in, so he's less interesting.
STV: Alfred the Butler touches on it: "Some people just want to watch the world burn."
SA: Yeah, but that doesn't satisfy dramatically.
STV: Even that was kind of overbearing.
SA: Nolan was reaching high with this. He obviously wanted the monologues.
STV: He's a great director, though, right? I mean, this film looks, feels, sounds amazing.
SA: That's why your quibbles don't bother me. This is his ride, and it's spectacular, and if he wants his speeches about human nature, I'll listen to them.
SA: He chose great actors to deliver them.
STV: But he's so much better at subterranean truck chases and high-altitude kidnappings. I want overturned big rigs!
SA: Well, luckily there's tons of those. And 180-degree, wall-flipping Bad Pods.
STV: And the Bat-Blobile. What was that? The Batmobile was a hulking blob of scrap on wheels.
SA: It was batass.
STV: OK, give me one-line summaries of the following actors' performances: Christian Bale.
SA: Obscene caller voice.
STV: Aaron Eckhart.
SA: Boringly delicious!
STV: Maggie Gyllenhaal.
SA: Made the most of the whiny token female.
STV: Michael Caine.
SA: Should have let him out of the fluorescent Batchamber more.
STV: He's basically a cockney Jiminy Cricket serving breakfast. How about Morgan Freeman?
SA: If God and Q had a kid.
STV: Gary Oldman.
SA: He gets swallowed up in it. He's one of the best actors ever.
STV: I think he's the best thing about it.
SA: Is he?
STV: He's a guy pulled 15 different ways, very flawed, vulnerable, and at his best when things are out of his control. He gets to work when shit hits the fan, while everyone else just sort of... talks.
SA: What did you think of Batman's voice?
STV: I didn't quite get it.
SA: Me neither. It was silly.
STV: He never closes his mouth when he talks, either! It lets all the air out of the big, portentous balloon.
STV: Is Heath Oscar-worthy?
SA: He'll definitely get a nomination.
SA: I sort of think the movie itself deserves a Best Picture nomination. It's just so ambitious and epic and so expensive-looking.
STV: This movie is going to make a fortune, right? I'm calling $140 million for the weekend plus $2 billion in damage caused by rioting fans worldwide.
STV: And I am a believer in IMAX.
SA: Oh, definitely. Those scenes were so cool.
STV: Bad format for preachy screenwriter moralizing, excellent format for hospital implosions and 10-minute chase sequences.
SA: OMG — that hospital. Yeah, I really loved this movie.
STV: It's not bad. I'll stick with Iron Man.
SA: Iron Man was fun; this was a nice compliment.
STV: The Dark Knight: Nihilism for the whole family.

He bugs his eyes and licks compulsively at the gashes that extend his mouth. He tries on different voices. First he sounds like Cagney in White Heat, then slides into a prissy singsong like Al Franken's Stuart Smalley, then throws in some fruity Brando flourishes and a dash of Hannibal Lecter...I couldn't take my eyes off him, but in truth, I found the performance painful to watch. Scarier than what the Joker does to anyone onscreen is what Ledger must have been doing to himself—trying to find the center of a character without a dream of one.

• The Dark Knight [Rotten Tomatoes]
• Bat Out of Hell [New York]

And while the release has now been postponed indefinitely and Horn assures us that Jonze is staying on the project, tell us if Horn's comments after the jump read as one of the less emphatic endorsements you've seen from a studio boss this year:

"We've given him more money and, even more importantly, more time for him to work on the film," Horn said. "We'd like to find a common ground that represents Spike's vision but still offers a film that really delivers for a broad-based audience. We obviously still have a challenge on our hands. But I wouldn't call it a problem, simply a challenge. No one wants to turn this into a bland, sanitized studio movie. This is a very special piece of material and we're just trying to get it right. ... The jury is still out on this one. But we remain confident that Spike is going to figure things out and at the end of the day we'll have an artistically compelling movie.""

Goldstein brings up a good point that for better or worse, Warners gambles (or used to, anyhow) on directing talent more aggressively than most studios are prepared to do, but that for every Christopher Nolan franchise reboot there's a Darren Aronofsky (The Fountain) or Oliver Hirschbiegel (The Invasion) lurking in the distance. The worst thing Horn and Robinov could do, though, is nudge Jonze somewhere toward the middle — somewhere ostensibly "safe," where the edge and the bloom wear off in short, mediocre order, leaving everyone dissatisfied.

Which, of course, is where it's headed considering Warners' recent hard right turn. Thanks a pantload for the pep talk, Horn.

• Can Spike Jonze save 'Where the Wild Things Are'? [The Big Picture]

Then, right on cynical cue, Relativity Media and the vampires who brought you 300 announced they had attached Tarsem Singh to direct some fucking "mythology epic" called War of Gods. So confusing, Hollywood! Is it a clash or a war? And must we really have it both ways?

Michael Fleming has more heart-pinching details at Variety:

The original 1981 Clash of the Titans starred Harry Hamlin as Perseus and Laurence Olivier as Zeus but is best remembered for Ray Harryhausen's visual effects that brought to life Medusa, the Kraken and other creatures. ...

[Gods producer Gianni] Nunnari said his film has the goods: "Gods, titans, warriors and a fantastic script. An incredibly visionary filmmaker like Tarsem and a partner like Relativity who fought and won already in a battle in getting the package that everybody wanted."

Making matters worse, the duel recalls Deep Impact v. Armageddon, Volcano vs. Dante's Peak, Vice Versa vs. Like Father Like Son, Capote vs. Infamous and countless other cutthroat genre races to the release-date finish line, reminding us that only one of these titles can ride its bad greenscreen, CGI and oil-slicked abs to the summit of Mount Blockbuster. As Kasdan has earned our ever-dwindling benefit of the doubt, we'll grudgingly call our shot early. But without Harryhausen's signature cheese or the late Burgess Meredith's guest spot as Perseus' Athens-by-way-of-Brooklyn sidekick, it's just another day for us in the development trenches, sobbing for our childhoods.

• 'Gods' go to War with 'Titans' [Variety]

[T]here was word the recently split couple were planning to have dinner together at Cipriani. "It's very amicable. He still cares for her very much," said a source. The two were staying mum on their breakup while Hathaway continued making TV appearances hawking her new movie, Get Smart.

Melanie Bonvicino, a flack for Follieri, said the Italian businessman is "angered" by "repeated mischaracterizations" of their split. ... "It is worth noting, as you continue to attempt to scandalize a respected businessman and philanthropist, that the Follieri Foundation has vaccinated hundreds of children in Nicaragua and Honduras to date, in addition to recently rebuilding an orphanage in Brazil."

Not to mention his and Hathaway's selfless dedication to the Warner Bros. cause, which anticipates a $40 million donation from the American public in the next three days alone. Dissolved, incriminated, whatever — this is a pair of true saints.

[Photo Credit: Getty Images]

• Broken Duo Play it Coy [Page Six]

But still, Get Smart versus Love Guru is a hell of a quandary. So just for the hell of it, let's hear what the put-upon, overproducing likes of Alan Horn and even Dick Cook are complaining about today:

Adding to their costs, movie companies spend huge sums to globally promote and release their films — as much as $150 million for some big event pictures.

"In order to break through the clutter, we all feel the pressure to spend more in marketing," said Warner Bros. President Alan Horn. ...

This summer, Disney's much-anticipated sequel The Chronicles of Narnia: Prince Caspian, got upstaged by two behemoths opening in proximity, Iron Man and Indiana Jones and the Kingdom of the Crystal Skull.

"There were these giant vacuum cleaners on either side of us, and it took significant amounts of business away for our movie," said Walt Disney Studios Chairman Dick Cook.

In fact, pretty much everyone's a winner in the Times's parallel universe — even the beleaguered Weinstein Company and MGM are piling on! Meanwhile, Picturehouse is winding down its staff buyouts as we speak, and ThinkFILM is still battling rumors of its own demise. "Who?" you ask. Don't worry — the LAT will cover them after they and their, ahem, vacuums are safely liquidated.

[Photo Credit: Paul Duginski, Los Angeles Times]

• Movie release dates become tough for studios to script [LAT]

Time Warner CEO Jeff Bewkes said Monday the media giant has "no agenda" regarding the acquisition of a television network, despite renewed speculation over a possible hook-up with NBC Universal.

"All of us are wondering what will happen to the networks," Bewkes said at a media conference in Gotham. As for NBC, "We'd have a look at that if and when it came up."

"If and when" Universal would be willing to part with their attractive NBC media-holdings portfolio—encompassing a wide array of gladiatorial and celebrity-trapeze entertainments, plus the talent-show-judging services of David Hasselhoff—we're all but certain a merger-hungry Time Warner will be there to swoop in with an extremely generous number, plus some sketched-out logo ideas for the newly rechristened NBC Time Warner Telemundo Television iVillage Bravo Studios. © Time Warner 2008. All Rights Reserved.

• Time Warner dispels NBC rumor [Variety]

Kit Kittredge: An American Girl has no sex and not much of a city.

But this G-rated movie adventure is shaping up as Hollywood's next serious bid for female viewers, some of whom showed their power by pushing the R-rated comedy Sex and the City to surprisingly strong first-weekend ticket sales of more than $57 million two weeks ago. ...

[American Girl]'s mail-order catalog, a primary engine for sales, has a blurb promoting the movie on its May cover. Cities with American Girl retail outlets — New York, Los Angeles, Chicago, Dallas and suburban Atlanta — will get to see the movie early, beginning on June 20. That first round is being helped along on the Web with Kit's movie blog and, at the Grove shopping mall in Los Angeles, with the giveaway of "Kit's Home on Abbott Place," an elaborate playhouse built by Pardee Homes as part of a benefit for the homeless.

The homeless angle! Why didn't Speed Racer think of that? That's hardly it, though; there's the in-store, mother-daughter dining parties and the dynamic approach to the film's G rating, featuring young Kit's (Abigail Breslin) Depression-era spunkiness and "doubts" about her father, played by Chris O'Donnell, upon learning he once voluntarily portrayed Robin in a Joel Schumacher film. WB brass, meanwhile, at least one high-ranking member of which has gone on record suggesting marketing is secondary to the movies it supports, are insisting today that the experimental "poster defacement" phase of its Get Smart campaign is coming along exactly as planned. We can only wonder how Picturehouse would have done it.

• More Girls, Little Ones, Try to Take Back the Multiplex [NYT]

Time Warner Cable Inc. was accused Thursday of lying to Los Angeles subscribers and providing shoddy customer service in a lawsuit that seeks potentially tens of millions of dollars in fines against the city's main provider of cable television.

"The company has broken multiple laws, and harmed countless Los Angeles consumers," City Attorney Rocky Delgadillo said in a statement. The suit was filed as a civil law enforcement action and names the people of California as plaintiffs.

The suit also seeks $2,500 in penalties for each violation — and that would be doubled to $5,000 for each violation involving a senior citizen or disabled person, city attorney's spokesman Nick Velasquez said.

The total fine being sought would "conservatively" be in the tens of millions of dollars, he said.

We applaud these bold steps taken on behalf of consumers against corrupt cable monopolies, as we've for too long been the victims of a form of History Channel-robbing, porn-download-depriving rape. If anyone can right this wrong, it's our city's PR-friendly crusading D.A., Rocky Delgadillo. Now if you'll excuse us, we've been on hold with a Time Warner operator for the past 45 minutes, and we're wondering if that cable guy is going to ever show up in the guaranteed six-hour window. If you can read this post, it means the problem may have already been fixed.

• L.A. sues Time Warner Cable, claims shoddy service [usatoday.com]

THE WEINSTEIN COMPANY: Nikki Finke has spent the last two days trying to make something out of the Weinsteins reportedly falling two months behind on their residual payments to the Directors Guild of America. Gasp! Or something: An anonymous, "prominent Hollywood helmer" notified Finke that arbitration could start within "twenty days" if the matter isn't resolved. Harvey Weinstein himself followed up to say he knew nothing about it and that he was looking into the third party that handles the payments. The DGA itself acknowledged the delinquency Wednesday, and it didn't quite sound like the meltdown Finke was praying for:

"The DGA has had a long and productive working relationship with The Weinstein Company and its predecessor. It is sometimes the case, with various companies, that residuals payments are late. We are working directly with TWC to resolve this issue and see that our members receive prompt residuals payments."

So! Scandalous! Now Finke is actively soliciting dirt on other studios who've fallen behind: "I would like to shame them into paying up," she wrote Wednesday. But don't call her a gossip. SCORE: We doubt Harvey Weinstein has ever "honestly misunderstood" anything in his career, and we certainly don't doubt his financial woes. But if the DGA's happy, we're happy.

THINKFILM: Its corporate parent CapCo may have staved off its SAG woes on the set of Nailed, but blogger AJ Schnack issued a "breaking" (if vague) news alert Wednesday that the troubled distributor should brace itself for a flurry of non-payment lawsuits from numerous directions. Variety followed up today with specific litigation in the works and a spirited defense from CapCo boss David Bergstein, who's introducing a new European sales arm in Cannes as we speak:

"I come from a distressed asset background, not the film business," Bergstein said. "When you're dealing with any distressed asset, whether it's a single film or a company, it takes you the first year just to straighten out those issues. You can't have problems for five years and expect them to go away in five minutes."

Variety also notes Bergstein is staying in Cannes on a yacht — named Pegasus. SCORE: Just another schmogul. We love ThinkFilm, but it's not looking promising.

PICTUREHOUSE/WARNER INDEPENDENT: Still dead, but as observed by a deeply skeptical Patrick Goldstein, Warner Bros. president Alan Horn is still trafficking in primo denial about his studio's outlook for specialty film distribution:

"We haven't thrown in the towel. ... If there is a specialty movie that interests us or we find something we want to buy, we'll still do it. But marketing is marketing is marketing. I don't think you need a specialty label to market a specialty picture. The tools just aren't that different. Take Juno. In my view, its success wasn't a function of whether it was at Fox or Fox Searchlight. What made it a hit was the movie itself, not the marketing."

Wow. Like, WOW. We presume Horn is thinking of his own low-budget hit Michael Clayton, which succeeded despite a marketing effort worse than Crystal Pepsi's. Apply the same logic to WB's bomb Speed Racer, though, and he's kind of on to something. SCORE: We're with Goldstein — stick to the franchises, fellas.

"My deal has a year and a half to go. I won't renew it until the deal is up. And my Dark Castle deal has 16 movies released through Warner Bros which are independently funded, and which we have all the money for. And the first one is the Guy Ritchie movie, RocknRolla, which will be in October." ...

"Everyone is disturbed about this. I know there's a long list of Hollywood types right now kinda elated about that. But Warner Bros is my family, I've been there for 22 years, and we're fine. But I can't stop the slings and arrows of the world around me."

Schadenfreude aside, a year and a half is a long time, so please forgive us, Nikki, for playing this one by ear anyway. That said, we tend to think Silver's fairly untouchable even after a succession of bombs at a studio where it's open season on upper management. Nevertheless,anything's possible — especially with a Guy Ritchie movie standing between now and then. Be afraid.

• Not so Fast, 'Speed' [Page Six]

• Joel Silver And Warners Say He's Staying [DHD]