While Fox has commented on the action fuelled films of Bay, he has returned with some rather churlish and ego filled comments himself, proving that both are playing the same age in the back and forth comments about the film.

Michael Bay films are full of action and explosions and concentrate more on the big, over the top, special effects scenes rather than the acting. Can you seriously disagree with that?

Even Bay himself hints at it in the same article in the Wall Street Journal through MoviesOnline that he has a go at Megan Fox in.

"I've been talking to some big actors right now about something that is totally different. A small dark comedy, a true story, with actors just acting, no effects. I'm done with effects movies for now...

...I've heard that some people can't even see 3-D and, moreover, that a major side effect of watching it is feeling exhausted. Can you imagine how you'd feel watching one of my movies in 3-D?"

It does feel a little as though he's saying he is heavy on action and effects, and you just have to watch one of his films to see that, there's no way around it, Megan Fox was spot on.

However Michael Bay decides to take that as a hugely negative comment:

"Well, that's Megan Fox for you. She says some very ridiculous things because she's 23 years old and she still has a lot of growing to do. You roll your eyes when you see statements like that and think, "Okay Megan, you can do whatever you want. I got it." But I 100% disagree with her. Nick Cage wasn't a big actor when I cast him, nor was Ben Affleck before I put him in "Armageddon." Shia LaBeouf wasn't a big movie star before he did "Transformers"-and then he exploded. Not to mention Will Smith and Martin Lawrence, from "Bad Boys." Nobody in the world knew about Megan Fox until I found her and put her in "Transformers." I like to think that I've had some luck in building actors' careers with my films."

Wow, that's someone seriously on the defensive and a couple of hundred nerves seem to have been struck there.

I'd agree though, Megan Fox was made through Transformers, although I'm not so sure she wouldn't have come to the fore without it.

Nicolas Cage though? Before The Rock he was in the following films, oldest first, Fast Times at Ridgemont High, Rumble Fish, The Cotton Club, Birdy, Peggy Sue Got Married, Raising Arizona, Moonstruck, Wild at Heart, Honeymoon in Vegas, Red Rock West, It Could Happen to You, Kiss of Death and Leaving Las Vegas. Phew...Now are you telling me that Michael Bay made Nicolas Cage after all that? Some would argue that this is where Nicolas Cage's career went downhill.

Shia LaBeouf isn't so clear cut, but he still had Holes, I, Robot, Constantine, A Guide to Recognizing Your Saints, Bobby, Disturbia and Surf's Up. Although there's not as many leading roles and big roles as Cage, the example shows that he was already being noticed, on a big rise in Hollywood, and was making a varied career of it already.

Will Smith and Martin Lawrence do fit into the argument of Bay much better, although for both they were very well known beforehand, and Smith did have the amazing Six Degrees of Separation before he took to the action, and now he's come back to acting once again.

So I don't think he can really claim credit for Cage or LaBeouf, one was big before and career undoubtedly dipped since, and the other was growing by the film. To be honest there's a fair amount of arrogance and ego in his words too.

I'm not defending or destroying either, I just think that the facts speak very loudly for themselves, and I do believe Fox was speaking truthfully, I certainly agree with her. However action packed, effect filled, action light films are still entertaining, and they can be good, I enjoy some Bay films just as much as the other person, when we can see what's going on of course.

Ong Bak 2 has gone through it's fair share of troubles, as has Tony Jaa the man in front and behind of the camera, but it seems to have come through the other end unscathed, and perhaps even better for it. Have a look and see for yourself.

Twitch, who have the trailer for the film, speculate that the argument between himself as the director and himself as the actor about getting in a pit with a live crocodile is the reason that he disappeared in the jungle for two months. I know who I would be listening to.

Frankly though, if the film is this good then who cares what happened with those two months?

Already it would seem that M. Night Shyamalan is writing the second outline and it looks like they're going to go back to back, sharing the productions, and delivering the three films over six years.

"We’re shooting them one at a time, because they’re being written one at a time...Night is now working on the script for the second movie, but he hasn’t had time to write the second or third ones. He’s looking at the arc of all three...We’re not waiting. There just isn’t enough time. Night will finish this movie, then the script and then we’ll prepare for the next one. I think it’ll probably happen over six years."

That's an aggressive schedule, but definitely a positive one. I think they've got the right idea by continually moving from one film to the next and making sure that the audience are retained between each as well as everything used on the film. As Marshall says on Starlog through LastAirbenderFilm and ComicBookMovies:

"One of the things we’ll be doing is using the sets, ships and elements for each different nation in this film and incorporating them into movies two and three."

He also talks about a little about the tone of the film, and addresses something that I thought might be a problem for them trying to address the balance between the messages underlying the story and the intended audience demographic.

See if you can work out which way it's going to go by what M. Night Shyamalan himself has to say:

"THE LAST AIRBENDER will be a very entertaining movie, a really fun summer film...But underneath that, it’s serious and talks about genocide, balance, our connection to the planet and all those things that interest me if you’ve seen the other movies that I’ve made. It felt like an important film."

I think the blend between the two is really going to work, it's just the question of whether Shyamalan can turn around a film that pleases the audience too.

However there are some interesting reveals to be had and we learn a few things about the planned story, and despite how many different writers have been rewriting this since, many major threads will remain the same. So read on for the review.

The main thing to remember is that this script review from CC2K through AICN is, by their own admission, based on an old script. Their draft is entirely credited to Richard Jeffries however we know that another draft has had Edward Kitsis and Adam Horowitz working on it and that there have been discussions of major changes from this script, particularly the change of lead character.

So this review is based on an old script and it could have been heavily improved by then. However the review kicks off pointing out that they seem to have dropped some of the clever ideas of the first film in order to go for more Hollywood.

The reviewer says that there's a lack of technical literacy and intelligence, the subtlety of religious themes and real world and digital world interactions have faded, and it hasn't evolved from the original as time should have allowed.

Of course there's far more detail in the actual script review, but I'll leave that to you to work through if you want to, for there are a lot more detail and huge plot and character reveals. The overview though is that Tron 2 a typical sequel, and in that mind that probably means it's not as good.

"A look at an early draft of Tron 2 reveals a script filled with problems and potential.

It's a sequel in the Die Hard 2 sense of the term. Meaning, it's less a pure continuation of the original narrative – like The Empire Strikes Back – and more a dutiful remake told on a larger scale and with a bigger budget. You know, like most sequels."

Oh dear, in the Die Hard 2 sense of the word that's not very good at all in comparison and some of the comments about characters in the digital world surfing on waves of data (that's data surfing if you're not getting it, Hollywood likes to make things complex) and memory leaks shown as green sludge, just seem a little cheesy and ill thought through.

However remember it's the first draft and I really hope it isn't as bad as some of this makes out, especially as I still remember the day I broke the TRON 2 trailer way back in July of 2008, and looking back on it now it still looks fantastic. I do hope they can live up to the original and not Hollywood-ise it too much.

Here's that trailer I got back then and managed to chase round the world as it was shut down site by site and copy by copy.

Brødre starred Ulrich Thomsen, whom I really do like as an actor, Connie Nelson and Nikolaj Lie Kaas, and it really is a powerful, thoughtful and provocative film with Thomsen giving a great performance.

However Maguire it is, and actually it looks like he's going to be playing this all out to forget Spider-Man, and I think he'll have done it.

The original story, which I think the remake is going to follow very closely, begins with Nikolaj Lie Kaas' character coming out of prison and trying to get back involved with his family. His father is somewhat dismissive, believing that he has wasted his life, but his brother is close and supportive.

His brother, played by Thomsen, heads off to Afghanistan for another tour, leaving his wife, played by Connie Nelson, and children behind and asking his brother to look after them while he's gone. He does, and he begins to integrate in real life for a while.

Then the news comes that his brother's helicopter was shot down and he's missing in action, presumed dead. The surviving brother feels a strong calling to look after his brother's widow and family and does just that, except they become closer and closer and begin to form an emotional and physical relationship.

It's then that we begin to find out that the brother is still alive, captive deep inside Afghanistan and being tortured by the enemy.

I really liked the story and enjoyed the way it played out, particularly the concentration on relationship building and the subtlety of some of the story.

What does strike me about the trailer here though is that it appears to be a little heavier handed, spelling things out just a little more than expected, and perhaps too much. However it's certainly a good line up and looks strong from the trailer, even if it doesn't seem to have changed that much from the original.

The trailer comes through The Playlist.

Yes, View-Master is set to be the next big thing for the film merchandising people, and the script is set to be written really soon. What form the script will take is a good guess, but the writer has revealed what it's all about.

" Almost official -- after the alien movie I'll be writing a movie for D'works based on a famous toy we all played w/ as kids. Any guesses?"

"Clue: it's a "classic" toy in the vein of etch-a-sketch and barbie. Been around since the 40s or fiddys."

"Clue: not a game. Just a toy. Requires ur eyes."

"Clue: you look into it"

"Someone got it!"

"Viewmaster!"

"Writin it for the Kurtzman/Orci boys! It'll be like the old 80's Amblin movies: Goonies, Young Sherlock... In that vein."

Greekgeek.de carried the story from Brad Caleb Kane's twitter account which I found through Coming Soon. You can read more about the View-Master over at Wikipedia, if you don't know about it already and the image hasn't sparked your memory.

So it's going to be an old action/adventure type film that will tie in the kids. How is that going to work and how is it really going to make a feature of the View-Master? Doesn't sound like there's going to be a lot more than the item featured as part of a clue on a quest or as the prize itself, maybe as the map to find the treasure, who knows.

Right now it's just another crazy merchandising tie-in that Hollywood has thought up in order to try and sell View-Masters and film related goodies.

She does keep talking about a Heathers sequel, but people need to realise that this is what actors do a lot, they see a potential starring role for them and they start pitching or leaking the idea through the available media channels, the hope being that the more they talk about it, the more likely the film will be made and they'll be considered.

"There's Heathers in the real world! We have to keep going!"

…and then in May this year she said…

"Whatever you hear, there is a sequel in the works. I swear to God...But for some reason Dan and Michael don't want to talk about it. I've been wanting to do a sequel forever."

Yeah, so she's keen on the idea and she's pushing it for all she's worth, and why the hell not? However let's not just stick this all at Ryder's door, Christian Slater has been playing the same game, although a little less since he has a bit more his career. In October of last year he said…

Yeah, sometimes I see Winona and she's like, 'Are you ready to do Heathers 2?' And I'm like, 'Sure!' I would do it in a heartbeat. I would totally love to do that character again -- J.D. We'd have to have a scene in there where's he's watching The Shining or something, you know? We'd have to see that he's collected all of Nicholson's movies. Just to really make sense of it all. [Laughs] That would be like a dream come true for me. So we'll see -- if they want to put something together, I'd be thrilled.

Although to be fair that comment does show that it's Ryder suggesting it to Slater, still they're both keen.

However Movieline got to interview Michael Lehmann which I found through Empire, and since he was the original director it seems he would know about a Heathers sequel if there was one in the works, apparently though there's not.

"Winona brings it up every once in a while and Dan Waters and I will joke about it, but as far as I know there's no script and no plans to do the sequel…I never thought it made sense to see a sequel to a movie which took place in a specific time and specific place and in which many of the characters got killed off."

He even went as far to say that he talked to the writers and they had no idea of what was happening with any potential project either, i.e. nothing or it is very, very secret. Considering the amount of remakes and sequels being announced these days I don't believe that they'd need to keep a Heathers sequel secret, do you?

Still that leads me to the question of why not? I mean we're seeing studios making films about Battleships, Asteroids, sequels to films that don't need them, remakes of films half the age of me (and I'm not that old!), why wouldn't they even consider doing a new Heathers?

Well I guess there are some film-makers and studios out there with some decency and intelligence, some that want to make good films rather than just appeal to audiences and pull them in for their hard cash.

Of course the other reason could be that there's just no audience interested in a Heathers sequel, and with the appeal and rating of Christian Slater and Wynona Ryder as actors at the moment perhaps they just don't see anyone that interested in it?

I hear the director though, the film was a self contained film. Why would you want to see where the leads are now? There's no real reason, and no reason to go through it all again?

The first could be a documentary about his preparation for the This Is It tour, a documentary that has over one hundred hours of footage and is being considered as a possible feature.

Of course we don't know how much of the footage is good, but imagine they've captured the rehearsal performances of every single song, straight away we have a performance documentary of a tour that never happened. Now that would be huge.

There's also the draw that there may be footage behind the scenes, and with a hundred hours worth I think there might just be a little, and this could provide for some additional insight into the man.

The Associated Press story through Yahoo News tells us that Randy Phillips, the CEO of the concert promoter AEG, has revealed that they are sitting with over one hundred hours of footage from the rehearsals for the London performances of the This Is It tour, and the article claims that he said there's...

...talk of turning that material into a motion picture or a pay-per-view event.

I think that in the case of Michael Jackson, pay-per-view is extremely limiting the potential audience, and if there's enough good footage I would be inclined to make a performance documentary of the tour that never was.

We're promised more details today, and if AEG has the quality of footage it won't really matter if they are the first on the block with a film about the man, as this will be the last performance ever, the unseen tour.

So after films link Le Donk, Dead Man’s Shoes and This Is England, he's still talking about making a horror film, Beware the Devil, a film that's going to be one of his “bigger ones”.

”Yeah, I’ve got the rights sorted now, so it’s not such a hidden thing...It’s based on a book of the same name, based on the life of a guy who, by getting involved with ouija boards and the occult by trying to disprove it, trying to take the piss out of it, got possessed, had to be exorcised, and later became an exorcist himself. The guy it happened to has died, but his son’s a novelist, and he helped him turn it into a book before he passed away, and now I’m working with him to turn it into a film.”

It sounds an interesting idea, and an even more interesting book (Amazon.co.uk / Amazon.com).

The hints coming from Meadows through the Empire interview through Twitch is that this will have a bigger budget than he's been used to, and will be pretty damned scary. Meadows is hardly taking things easy and sticking to what he knows.

Or is he? In the interview he also reveals that he's making another Le Donk, but it won't be a musical one, kind of like a British Bubba Ho-tep I guess!

”Yeah, the big news is that we’re already thinking about doing another Le Donk. It’ll be another ‘Le Donk And...’, something completely not music based. We’ve come up with a few ideas, and we might just go straight back and do another one, because we had such a laugh doing this one. Not like a sequel in terms of trying to be like the other one, but he’s got his missus and his kid’s a bit older, and a whole different set of events. So maybe before I do this next big film, might just go out, grab five days somewhere and knock another out so we can come back (to Edinburgh) next year.”

I'd love to see another Le Donk at the Festival, but much as I'd like to, I have to say I'm fascinated by the idea of Shane Meadows making a seriously tough horror film, aren't you?

Planet 51 tells the story of an astronaut from Earth who heads off on a mission to investigate a far off planet. When he gets there he finds that the planet is inhabited with what he would class as green aliens, but they're living in the equivalent of 1950's Earth.

The crux is that he's being chased by the authorities of the planet and has to get off the planet to his spaceship and return to Earth before it leaves without him.

Sounds a fun story, but have a look at the actual trailer and see what you think because that's what's selling it. The trailer comes through Twitch.

The film stars the voices of Dwayne Johnson, Seann William Scott, Jessica Biel, Justin Long, Gary Oldman and John Cleese, a cracking cast.

What do you think? Has this something to offer other than just the big moralistic tale. I'm liking it, and it has a nice style, even if you recognise some moments from other animated tales.

However that argument holds no water when you hear of Hollywood spending millions to get the names of video games like Asteroids to adapt for film. Yes Asteroids, I mean what is there in that game to make into a film?

So the world from The Hollywood Reporter through /Film is that Universal have won a bidding war in order to get the rights to get the name, something they've done a couple of times already with the Hasbro games, just like Battleships.

Lorenzo di Bonaventura is the producer behind it, you'll recognise his name for many big blockbusters, and Matthew Lopez is set to write. He's come through the Disney writing program and has just re-written The Sorcerer's Apprentice.

I don't hold out much hope though, put the title to the side for the moment, and we're going to see Lopez come up with a brand new script, all he has to tie him down is the fact that there has to be something about ships blasting asteroids to hell.

Still, why are Universal so willing to spend money on such a name to attract in an audience? I mean it's not like the title Transformers or Halo, they are brand names that bring a huge audience with great anticipation, but Asteroids?

Although he doesn't have a rolling list of credits to his name, his face and distinctive voice will make you remember him immediately, and if you were ever a fan of the television show The Streets of San Francisco, then you'll definitely remember him.

However there's much more to him than leading that television series for some one hundred and twenty episodes from 1972 to 1977.

Another Oscar came his way, although only in the nomination, for his role in On the Waterfront alongside Marlon Brando, whom Reuters have quoted as saying he was...

"...the most brilliant actor I've worked with."

Call me sentimental, but Pollyanna was a good fun family film and I do remember his role in that. His demeanour always seemed to be of a warm and accessible actor, and this definitely came through in his more family orientated films such as this one.

He also starred in big films such as Birdman of Alcatraz, How the West Was Won and Patton, but his last most memorable role was, for me anyway, in Meteor alongside Sean Connery.

Oh yes, without a doubt it's a cheesy film, but there's something I love about it, especially with the huge actors playing it like it was much bigger.

Karl Malden was an impressive and indeed an iconic actor and the thoughts of all of us at Filmstalker are with his family and friends.

Today more rumours are out suggesting that the film might be hitting cinemas at the end of next year, and that the fourth, or fifth, film in the series has a title, Resident Evil: Afterlife.

There's not much more in the rumour than that, although they do talk about the ending of the last film and the setting pointing towards Japan. However the last we heard on the project was that they were considering moving the film to Alaska for the last instalment.

The story comes from Bloody Disgusting, but from one of the commenters on the post you get directed to a YouTube video of poor Milla Jovovich being stalked by "reporters" as she tries to get to her car, looking nervous and a little uneasy but being a star and playing along, she gets asked a bunch of irrelevant and personal questions until we get to the important one.

At about 1m 25s you get to hear that she's filming Resident Evil 4 (that must mean they're ignoring the CGI films in the numbering) at the end of the year, and that definitely means she's in it. Here's your proof.

So Resident Evil 4, the end of the year, the final one, and with Jovovich. More as it happens.

You might be thinking who's he? Well let me say Control (Filmstalker review), Vacancy (Filmstalker review) and Armored. Okay you may not have seen Armored as yet, but I can tell you I was rather taken with Vacancy, despite the film getting a chilly reception.

Speaking to AICN, Robert Rodriguez reveals a few reasons why he chose the man to head up Predators, and what he thinks Antal will bring to the production:

"I always loved Kontroll, where he proved himself to be a very resourceful and original filmmaker. When I saw Armored, I could tell he's also great with action and has a keen eye for casting. He reminded me of Quentin with how he was able to work with a group of very strong, singular actor talents and make it look effortless. I know he'll be able to get the most out of what we want to be an outstanding cast. We really want to go with a character driven action movie, because that's what we all remember about the original Predator, and we want to take it even further with this."

There are issues facing them, not least from the studio label of Fox itself, something that Rodriguez tries to brush off saying that the film is being made at his studio, not Fox, so there shouldn't be any problems.

Now for the biggest part of the story, and I hope you've stayed with us for this, he's revealed a little about the story itself, and it sounds exactly like the plot of Predator mixed with Aliens, just what we've been speculating about since the beginning.

"...it still involves a very intense group of people stranded on a Predator planet discovering unspeakable horrors (that are not always from outside their group). So like the original movie, the title does have a double meaning.

Aliens was a different take on the Alien idea, and an original movie in it's own right, and that's what we want to do with this."

So that's what we're looking at for the set-up of Predators, but it's interesting to see that the script is still being written, or rather re-written, and that's a good thing, especially as the director has just arrived. This means that it won't just be a story handed to the director to say get on with it, he's going to be involved from the re-writes, hopefully, and that's a good thing.

You know the signs are good, I won't say perfect, but they are good. I'm glad Rodriguez is not directing and I'm even excited that they've pulled in Nimród Antal to direct, I think that's really bold and strong move, and suggests nothing but good for the film.

It also gets to capitalise on the notoriety of Chris Pine now that everyone who's anyone has seen him in Star Trek (Filmstalker review), and I think that's a damn good thing, especially now I've seen the trailer.

Here's the blurb for Carriers which I wrote about back in January:

"A deadly virus has spread across the globe. Contagion is everywhere, no one is safe and no one can be trusted. Four young attractive people race through the back roads of the American West to the pounding beat of a vacation soundtrack. Their aim is to retreat to secluded utopian beach in the Gulf of Mexico, where they could peacefully wait out the pandemic and survive the apocalyptic disease.

Carriers follow their getaway through a surreal and dangerous world where laws and rules no longer apply.

Their plans take a grim turn when their car breaks down on an isolated road starting a chain of events that will seal the fate of each of them in an inexorable and horrifying voyage of hell through a western landscape populated by only the hideous dead or the twisted living.

Their desperate retreat south turns into a deadly battle against infected children, homicidal doctors, crazed survivalists, rabid dogs, and, finally each other. The virus is the least of their problems as horrible choices must be made in the face of lost humanity."

Right, now all that's over, let's get to the trailer and see what you think of this film which has sat for so long without an audience.