In a world where Don LaFontaine will no longer lend his voice to any trailers, and where floating heads and Photoshop skills are what passes for the 'art' in 'poster art', the prospect of Drew Struzan's retirement is almost too much to bear. The guys over at Ain't It Cool News got the initial news from TheRaider.net, and they get the fact that this makes the sun shine just that much less in this industry of ours.

In a message posted there, Struzan said: "Having been working at not working has produced a guy who could never return to illustration again. It took a lot to attempt the idea of retiring from my 40 years of effort and sacrifice but now that I have, I am delighting in life as never before. I had forgotten how to rest, to smell the proverbial roses and to see the future as opportunity. I am grateful and honored to have had the opportunity to do all the work I did. I am well pleased to have been able to give a gift of beauty and peace through my artwork to so many throughout the world. Now I have laid down the burden and have peace and happiness as the reward for my day's labor."

AICN aptly directs readers to Struzan's official site, and even if they hadn't, I'd advise the same course of action in an attempt to appreciate what iconic images he crafted a career out of.

Though nothing has been made official yet, Nikki Finke over at Deadline Hollywood says the deal is done to bring both Tobey Maguire and Sam Raimi back for Spider-Man 4 and 5. Not only that, but Finke also claims the exclusive on a story we broke right here at Cinematical months ago (thanks for the credit Nikki) -- that Sony plans to shoot both films back to back, not just because it's cheaper, but also because we were informed that James Vanderbilt's (Zodiac) script included a story arc that encompassed two films, not one.

As far as Kirsten Dunst goes, she currently does not have a deal, but Finke claims her character will return and Sony is not interested in recasting her. Villains? While there's been no announcement yet, a source claims that "once you find out who the villain is, you'll know who's playing him." Naturally, that leads everyone to believe that Dylan Baker will reprise his role and ultimately become The Lizard. Should they continue along the same path Spider-Man 3 went down, one imagines another villain (or two) will show up, perhaps as a way to tease us into the fifth film. I'm sure more will arrive online soon, so until then ... are you happy about Maguire and Raimi returning to the franchise?

Spider-Man 4 is currently scheduled to arrive in May, 2011.

UPDATE: The Hollywood Reporter confirms the Spidey story today.

Look, I'm thinking the same thing you are: Here comes Hollywood to screw up another one of our beloved franchises by re-imagining it for this new, hip generation. Whenever they try to mess with nostalgia, it always comes back to bite them in the ass -- but could things be different with a franchise like Ghostbusters, which gave us two films ... and, let's admit it, only one real classic? Here are five ways to make a cool Ghostbusters sequel ...

1. Get the Apatow crew involved

When you look back at the original Ghostbusters, you see names like Bill Murray, Dan Aykroyd, Harold Ramis, Rick Moranis and Ivan Reitman. Back in 1984, these were the folks who made us really laugh. These were the young-ish voices of the time; the guys you wanted to pay money to see because you knew they'd be worth it. Today, the same can be said for guys like Seth Rogen, Paul Rudd, Jason Segel, Steve Carell, Jay Baruchel, Jonah Hill, Michael Cera and Craig Robinson. At least a few of those names should show up in the sequel in order for it to have a really good shot of succeeding with fans.

2. Get a director who understands the franchise (ie: Harold Ramis or Ivan Reitman)

While there's a very good chance we'll end up seeing Judd Apatow's name tossed around as producer (no way he's directing this), the best way to hold on to what we love about Ghostbusters is to bring on a man who was there for the first two and knows what, exactly, makes this franchise work. Ramis has been working with the Apatow clan a lot lately (directing Year One, appeared in both Knocked Up and Walk Hard), and is perfectly capable of directing and acting in a film (Hello Egon cameo!). He'd by my choice for this, and, I'm sure, will also lend his voice to the script.

Gerard Butler may have once sported the greatest eight-pack in the history of mankind, but his punishment for it (besides all the puking and crying I assume happened in the shaping of it) will be to answer questions about a 300 spin-off until the end of his career.

While at the Toronto Film Festival, where many of my lucky colleagues are, Butler was asked again about the franchise potential of 299 dead Spartans by Superhero Hype. "I've heard some backroom chatter, but nothing more, so I don't know if it would be a sequel or a prequel. I don't want say anymore than that, because I really don't know. I haven't read anything. I can't see it myself -- sequel for me absolutely not, but I just mean the idea generally, I'm really not sure which way they would go with that."

He was asked this same question at RocknRolla's ComicCon junket, and his answer then suggested he'd actually been approached with a more solid idea. "No. They mentioned it, and we'll leave it at that. It's a very interesting idea, I have to say."

By "interesting" idea, I keep imagining that the story involves King Leonidas being resurrected by a necromancer to fight an unspeakable evil. (That's actually going to be written into a spec, I just know it.) But honestly, it really must suck to be Butler sometimes. He's got his own production shingle, he's going to be directed by Frank Darabont any day now, and everyone just wants to know when Leonidas is going to be resurrected by a necromancer.

Why doesn't anyone direct the question to Frank Miller? He's supposed to be the one writing it.

(Thanks to MoviesOnline for their transcript of the RocknRolla junket -- I still curse my tape recorder.)

"One night in Bangkok and the tough guys tumble..."
-Murray Head

Don't ask me what happened to the real Nicolas Cage, because I don't know where he is.

I don't know what happened to the man who left Las Vegas, or the man who made Donald Kaufman into such an endearing figment of imagination, or the man who stole diapers as he stole hearts. All I've seen of late is a face, a name, a profile, a character, the artist formerly known as Nic Cage, an entity on auto-pilot and damn near self-parody that knows what he looks like and sounds like and makes do with that alone.

In Bangkok Dangerous, a remake by the Pang Brothers of their own 1999 thriller, Cage-Or-Something-Like-Him plays an assassin, perhaps the most laconic one this side of Forest Whitaker in '99's Ghost Dog: The Way of the Samurai, and he is so reliably aloof throughout, so divorced from the proceedings that it almost becomes its own form of entertainment... which is certainly helpful once genuine entertainment refuses to show up to any other degree.

We've stayed away from all the Ghostbusters rumors these past couple days because last time we crossed this road, we were told nothing existed. Well, seems that's not at all true: Variety reports that Lee Eisenberg and Gene Stupnitsky (The Office, Year One) have been asked to write a script for a Ghostbusters sequel (reported earlier today by Pajiba.com) that may or may not "pass the torch to a new group of ghost chasers." Funnily enough -- and even though he flat out told us he had nothing to do with it -- this is totally in line with those early rumors that "The Apatow Clan" would be involved in some capacity; namely Seth Rogen. When we asked him about it during the Pineapple Express junket, however, the man denied knowing a thing. Then again, he's an actor ... and he's paid pretty damn well to pretend.

The Apatow connection is also there in that these two writers are behind the Apatow-produced Year One, which, ahem, is being directed by Harold Ramis -- who, in case you forgot, played Dr. Egon Spengler in both Ghostbuster movies. No word from Columbia Pictures on the project, and Variety is simply throwing out all the same fluff that's been reported on other sites for months now. Could we see a reunion and a torch passing? Will the Apatow folks take over the Ghostbusters franchise? I'd certainly be down for it.

You?

(And now we shall continue to run circles around this monster until someone finally caves ...)

After the unpleasantness that was You, Me and Dupree, Anthony and Joe Russo are looking to explore a different kind of darkness -- the gritty and corrupt city of Ciudad del Este. According to Variety, they're set to direct Ciudad, which will be based on a graphic novel they're writing for Oni Press.

The story will follow a battered hostage negotiator, who travels to Paraguay and the above mentioned city to rescue a kidnap victim. They've been researching the story for years, traveling to crime-infested cities across the world to flesh it out more. Ciudad del Este is next on the travel agenda, a city labeled by the U.S. government as "a threat to national security" that shelters terrorists, drug runners, and all manner of scary people. So stay safe, you two.

The brothers are said to be aiming for a return to their indie roots with this one -- they were formerly behind Pieces, and the seedy George Clooney outing Welcome to Collinwood. (That's a bit of a lost film, isn't it? Weren't those the days when people were still screaming he should have stayed on ER? How things change.) I wish I could say more, but the graphic novel won't be out until 2009, and there's nary a preview on Oni's website. All we can do at this point is give them props for their research, wonder if George Clooney liked them enough to play the weary hostage negotiator, and make glib comparisons to Proof of Life or even Man on Fire.

Under no circumstances is Ji-woon Kim's The Good, the Bad, the Weird a great movie, but I found myself genuinely impressed with it. The pitch – "Korean comic spaghetti western" – sounded like the sort of ultra-hip, insubstantial, self-consciously campy Asian actioner I've grown tired of; I kept flashing back to Riyuhei Kitamura's much-hyped but totally useless Versus, an acquired taste I haven't acquired. I needn't have worried. Though Kim's western pastiche may be insubstantial, it's anything but a drag. It's masterfully directed, legitimately funny, and legitimately fun, thoroughly enjoyable even at an excessive 129 minutes.

Though you may think you're here to see how Kim (whom you may remember from his terrific horror entry A Tale of Two Sisters) plays with the western genre, you're really here for the action sequences. There are two spectacular ones: the rollicking train robbery that opens the film, and a later all-stops-out chase scene involving several gangs of bandits and the Japanese army. These aren't the sort of scenes that bring you to the edge of your seat, but rather the sort that put a steady, delighted grin on your face. Unapologetically goofy, absurdly attenuated, brilliantly paced, and backed by a rousing musical score, they alone make the film worth sitting through.

We all know that David Fincher is an uncompromising director (and why shouldn't he be? The guy is one of the best working today). But, even if you don't like the man, you have to admire someone who is truly willing to put his money where his mouth is. In an interview unearthed by The Playlist, Heavy Metal publisher (and Fincher's collaborator on the Metal reboot), Kevin Eastman, confirmed that the reason for the project's move from Paramount to Sony was not because of problems with the sex and violence (as earlier reported), but because of another film altogether. When Metal first jumped studios, there was speculation that Fincher was having trouble getting the green light because of Metal's risqué subject matter. But, it wasn't Metal they were fighting about, it was Fincher's upcoming fantasy tale, The Curious Case of Benjamin Button.

According to Eastman, "We developed it [Heavy Metal] for Paramount in January... And it was time for them to make a decision [about going forward with the project] and they were at odds with Fincher over another project, 'The Curious Case of Benjamin Button,' [because] they wanted him to reduce the running time... and so they said, 'Until you step up to do what we want you to do with Benjamin, we're not going to green light any other of [your] movies.' And David said, 'Fine, f**k you, I'm going to set up [Heavy Metal] somewhere else,' so we jumped over to Sony and set it up there." You can't help but wonder what Paramount was thinking? Maybe the likely answer is that they were not prepared for Fincher to call their bluff.

After the jump ... guess who's directing Heavy Metal???

Matthew Vaughn's Kick-Ass seems to be one of the projects of the moment -- either because it's a super slow news time or because Mark Millar has taken over the Internet. I suspect the latter.

When this movie was officially pushed into gear, much was made of the violence of Millar's book, and how Vaughn refused to tone it down for the film. Studios fled screaming from it. But according to Nicolas Cage, it's not going to be excessive. "When I said 'yes' to this movie, it was to a script," Cage told MTV. "Then I started seeing the comics which are pretty far out in terms of violence. But I think Matthew and the script have a different style to it. I'm not fond of gratuitous violence ... There will be some moments of action that will be violent, but there will be a sense of elegance to it. [Matthew Vaughn] doesn't want to get gratuitous with it. At least that's what Matthew has told me."

Now, perhaps this is all a matter of perspective -- what studios see as over-the-top and gratuitous, Vaughn and Cage don't. But on the snap judgment surface, it sounds as though Vaughn is watering down Millar's book, which is hard to believe when he was so dedicated to the blood and guts that he funded it himself. I want him to stick to his guns (no pun intended) and make the movie that shocked studio executives. My future katana-wielding daughter must be portrayed accurately, in all her foul-mouthed and blood drenched glory. (For the record, I trained her, not her father. As if I would trust such a delicate task to anyone else.)