Maybe the villain in Hancock 2 will be someone Will Smith farts on

You know what the lamest part of Hancock was? No, not the costume. No, not that it devolved into the EXACT same comic book origin story the novel it was based on was designed to spoof. No, not the absolutely batshit crazy backstory about Gods who somehow sap each other's powers because people don't believe in them (basically, they are powered by the Tinkerbell theorem). No, not the fact that the love between Charlize Theron and Will Smith's characters that had lasted many centuries was thwarted by Jason Bateman's nerdly charming. No, not the fact that the first half was actually quite fun and fresh and the end was collectively (see above) a total Cleveland steamer. Nope, it was the fact that the bad guys, the villainous foils for the God (literally) that was Hancock...were the guy who got his hand cut off by Hancock in a bank robbery and a guy who had his head shoved up someone's asshole by Hancock in prison. Seriously. There's no reason to have a second Hancock movie...so, they're making a second Hancock movie. Director Peter Berg rambled to Sci-Fi Wire about possible ideas (all of them suck), including another God being out there for Hancock to deal with (ooooh). What we're left with is a run-of-the-mill superhero movie that just happens to star Will Smith, who can make anything passably entertaining. Don't worry, though, they hired Adam Fierro and Glen Mazzara to write it, and between them they've worked on several episodes of television shows, including the beloved "Nash Bridges." So, yeah....

Dune to feature 100% less Sting, 200% more action

I have to admit that I am not into "Dune." To go all Dr. Seuss on you, "I did not read it as a book, I did not give the film a look, I did not watch the mini on TV, I did not care to spinoffs see." I know that it has something to do with "spices" and giant phallic worms. That's what I know. So when Peter Berg, the poor bastard tasked with directing the remake-reboot-whatever, spoke with Sifiwire, I was also struck with a sense of total and complete ennui. Now, supposedly, Berg sees some promise in the adaptation, noting that "To me, I think my interpretation will feel significantly different from [the Lynch version] and the [Syfy] Channel miniseries that aired...[The Book] was much more muscular and adventurous, more violent and possibly even a little bit fun." First of all, I like how he makes it sound like the book is a male escort ("muscular and adventurous"). I also likes that he goes out on a limb and thinks that it is "possibly even a little bit fun." Whoa, whoa, slow down there Berg-man, I don't know if "Dune" fans can handle a little bit of fun. They may have a seizure. I mean, this is what they last saw on the big screen:
If he had a "little bit of fun"the film would get an NC-17 rating, for God's sake. Look, I love sci-fi as much as the next nerd, and I've been told for years that this is a universe worth visiting. I know damn well that the previews for this "little bit of fun" film will make me jones to see it (despite the fact that, you know, there's no script yet), but I retain the right to be suspicious about anything that once had an adaptation where Sting wore those panties.