Over on the website TNMC (via AICN), they have up a review of the Star Trek shooting script which picks out and describes the scenes that didn't make the final cut -- scenes that were probably shot and cut for a number of different reasons (pacing, running time, etc ..), but will hopefully arrive on the DVD. It's a shame, too, because some of these scenes seem to address my main problem with the movie: the boring villain, Nero (as played by Eric Bana). The scenes in question (which involve an entire Klingon subplot!) appear to give Nero more depth as a character, so hopefully we'll get to see them eventually. Here are a few descriptions from the site:

"The opening sequence, which sees the destruction of the USS Kelvin at the hands of Nero and his mining ship the Narada, has an extra bit we didn't see. While the Narada is trying to recover from being rammed by the Kelvin, bunches of Klingon warbirds decloak and surround it. This leads to a major subplot entirely removed from the final film."

"Next we go the Rura Penthe Klingon Prison Asteroid where Nero and his crew are being held. The Klingons catch someone trying to smuggle Federation maps to him. The Klingons begin to interrogate Nero, during which we learn that he has been there for ten years and hasn't said a word that whole time. The Klingons have a notebook of his that is full of drawings and calculations relating to Spock and his Jellyfish ship. They decide to use that slug thing we saw Nero using on Captain Pike in the finished film."

Read more at SciFi Squad

Back at last year's Fantastic Fest, I was privy to a conversation between Scott Weinberg and screenwriter Marcus Dunstan about the latter's latest project (he'd just done some Saw sequels and was in town for his Feast follow-ups). It was called Midnight Man at the time, and if I could remember what it was about, I'd tell you. (Honest!) I just remember being vaguely psyched for it.*

Well, the film's done now, under a new name of The Collector and accompanied by a bunch of solid buzz from genre sites all over and none other than Alamo Drafthouse head honcho Tim League himself. Thusly, Fantastic Fest and our own Horror Squad have teamed up to bring an early screening of the film to Austin before its July 31st theatrical run.

For more details on this free (!) sneak peek, head on over to Horror Squad.

*"Vaguely psyched!" - Go ahead, put that on the poster.

A new adaptation (I refuse to use the word remake here) of Fahrenheit 451 has been in the works for ten years now. I was very excited by the news that Mel Gibson was planning it as a Braveheart follow-up, as it seemed like that would mark a new and serious phase of his directing career. I wish that was something I could have been right about.

Frank Darabont was the next one to take it on, and he's been attached to it since 2001, rewriting Terry Hayes' script and being delayed by everything from Indiana Jones IV, Mission Impossible III, The Mist, and Law Abiding Citizen. SciFi Wire caught up with Darabont at the Saturn Awards, and the director / writer declared that it was really time to get on with it already ... and that it might actually get underway this time, depending on whether or not the Big Name Actor he wants signs on.

"Fahrenheit is the thing I'm trying to get up next, which is casting-dependent, so it's one of those. I'm out to somebody at the moment, fingers crossed, because, boy, do I want to make that movie. I'm not giving up. I'll die in the traces before I don't make that movie ... It's not one of those movies that are vastly expensive by any contemporary standard, but money is still money, and it's of a price that requires somebody that will justify that investment. This is definitely going to be more than The Mist, so those other considerations do come into play."

You can go crazy wondering just who that Big Actor who can pull in the money and box office might be. Could it be someone that rumors have long attached, like Tom Hanks (Darabont's pick for years), Brad Pitt, or Tom Cruise? Or could we be looking at someone newly bankable, like Johnny Depp?

Our good friends (and partners) over at Moviefone have just debuted the first trailer for Richard Kelly's (Donnie Darko, Southland Tales) much-anticipated freaky little sci-fi thriller The Box, starring Cameron Diaz, James Marsden and Frank Langella. Due in theaters on October 30th (just in time for Halloween), the film follows the story of a couple who receive a mysterious box that grants them one million dollars, but with one catch: once they open the box, a person who they do not know will die. Pretty catchy premise and based on the trailer alone, the movie definitely looks to bring the thriller-ish vibes. I've always loved the look of Kelly's films, and The Box is no exception (something about it -- the cold, stark wintry chill, perhaps -- reminded me of The Shining). Perhaps a more commercial tale will help heal Kelly's former box office woes. He's a darn good filmmaker, and so I hope that's the case here.

Check out the trailer after the jump (or in HD over on Moviefone) and let us know what you think.

With so many disappointments this summer, it's easy to forget that we'll finally get to see Harry Potter and the Half Blood Prince, and that we'll finally start hearing more about the final chapter as it makes its way to the big screen.

But of course, the biggest question about Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows still centers on where they'll make the split between Film 1 and Film 2. Director David Yates dropped a hint to the LA Times, and if you haven't read the book, here be spoilers:

"We're here in the forest, we've just finished the scene where Harry, Hermione and Ron are captured by the Snatchers after being chased through the woods. The Snatchers are brutal and scary but they aren't the most intelligent of creatures.They're trying to figure out exactly who it is they've caught ... Things can change when you edit, of course, but the idea now is that it will be not long after the sequence that we are filming here today. That's what we're experimenting with. We've had three or four different ideas about where to cut off the seventh film. Traditionally, the movies have ended with a death or a bereavement, some sort of passage or arrival. This time we think we will end with more a cliffhanger. Again, though, that's the thought as of this moment."

I haven't read Deathly Hallows since it came out (and oh, I still remember pulling an all nighter at ComicCon for fear someone would spoil it) , so I had to go back and check this part out. The book is chock full of cliffhangers, but ending it here would definitely give Part 1 a terrifying conclusion, the kind I'm still disappointed Peter Jackson didn't go with in The Two Towers.

Daniel Craig may have his own limited edition popsicle, but he's having a tough time choosing his next film role. After branching away from Bond with Defiance (a lot less 007 than most people give it credit for) and Munich, his next effort at ducking typecasting might be Jim Sheridan's Dream House. Might.

According to The Hollywood Reporter, Craig is in early talks to star in Sheridan's psychological thriller, which would steer him clear of "Whatever, all he plays are vigilantes" talk. House centers on a family man who moves the wife and kids to an idyllic small town, and obviously the perfect house of the film's title. But you know what happens when you move to those dreamy small towns and those perfect Victorian houses ... they're haunted! Our hapless hero finds himself contending with the former occupants of the house, who hang around thanks to being brutally murdered.

As Craig decides whether Sheridan and Dream House is a proper departure from 007 territory, he'll be appearing on Broadway in A Steady Rain and is rumored to be interested in Kevin MacDonald's Eagle of the Ninth. (Would he be replacing Channing Tatum?) Should any one of these ventures fail, perhaps Craig will sigh, shrug, and just play Steve McQueen already.

Ever since I watched Neil Simon's Murder by Death over the weekend, and subsequently wrote about it, my head has been full of murder mysteries. More specifically, those set at the dinner table.

There's just something about a large feast, a collection of quirky characters, and the need to solve a mystery that works wonderfully again and again. It's no wonder there's a whole business dedicated to murder mysteries over dinner. Do those gourmet flavors like Sharks' Fin Soup inspire mental clarity? Or is it just the fact that sitting at a large table makes it harder to flee when hard truth hits? I've no idea, but again and again, the suspects sit and the truth ultimately comes out -- usually with the help of a clever detective like Nick Charles, Hercule Poirot, or a handful of colorful suspects pointing the finger at themselves.

Murder by Death, Ten Little Indians (and its many adaptations), Clue, The Thin Man, Manhattan Murder Mystery, Gosford Park ... you name it! There's food at every turn. They sit; they eat; they detect. But which is the best? Is there any way to really put one above the rest? There are so many great instances that it seems like the most impossible task to choose just one. Myself, I can't pick -- each has its magic, whether it be slurping soup, serving nonexistant soup, or a clever revelation of the killer Charles-style.

But what about you? Which dinner mystery do you think is the most foul pleasing?

Surveillance may involve three separate interviews about the same event, but Rashomon it most certainly is not. Ascertaining the truth through multiple narratives is certainly central to Jennifer Lynch's long-delayed follow-up to 1993's polarizing Boxing Helena. The three accounts provided, however, aren't juxtaposed or in real conflict; rather, they coalesce to form a tale about the fateful affairs that led FBI agents Anderson (Julia Ormond) and Hallaway (Bill Pullman) to a middle-of-nowhere New Mexico police station to investigate a horrific crime. That offense is initially shrouded in mystery, with details elucidated slowly through the agents' briefing and subsequent interviews – conducted simultaneously by Anderson and local cops, and monitored via closed-circuit video feeds by Hallaway – of the surviving eyewitnesses: traumatized 12-year-old Stephanie (Ryan Simpkins), defiant junkie Bobbie (Pell James) and combative officer Bennet (Kent Harper). It's the set-up for a rather routine procedural. Yet in a development that will stun no one who's seen Boxing Helena or any of her father's films, Lynch isn't interested in straightforward genre mundanity, and even during Hallaway's first appearance – his face twitchy, his speech halting, his eyes nervous and his comportment slightly askew – there's an underlying sense that this ordinary reality is somehow off-kilter, corrupted.

Duncan Jones cut his teeth on the sets of Labyrinth and The Hunger, but for his directorial debut, he opted for something that didn't star his dad (I'll let you guys and girls mull over the common thread).

Rather, Moon is a showcase for star Sam Rockwell, who gives what is surely one of the year's more uniquely layered performances. As the film opens today in NY and LA before rolling out in the weeks to come, Jones spoke with Cinematical about shooting sci-fi on a small budget, releasing an indie in a season of blockbusters, and cracking his skull out of pure giddiness for a movie.

Which one, you ask? We'll tell you after the jump...