Another New Bond Girl is Rumored to Play Opposite Daniel Craig’s 007

Back on May 26 we posited the question as to whether or not Daniel Craig would well nigh impossible to replace as James Bond—given the actor’s sterling performance in the series thus far. In that same story we reported that Hollywood was apparently showing interest in Israeli model-turned-actress Esti Ginzburg, and that the production staff of Bond 23 had contacted her representatives and invited her to audition for the role of “an exotic woman.”
There’s been no further news on that particular front, but today comes word from the British tabloid News of the Worldthat actress Naomie Harris — who many may remember from Danny Boyle’s 28 Days Later and Pirates of the Caribbean— is being considered to star the as yet untitled Bond 23.
According to the report, Harris will play 007′s (Daniel Craig) “sexy sidekick” and would mark the first new female casting for the movie, set to begin filming in September for a November 9, 2012 release.
Normally, this would be like every other early Bond rumor that shoots forth from a British tabloid — dubious at best — were it not for the fact that additional, more respected outlets such as EW andIndiewire are confirming through their own sources that the actress is indeed in talks.
Still no word yet as to whether either Ralph Fiennes or Javier Bardem have been locked to the film as villains…though we can only say we fervently hope so.
Does Naomie Harris strike you as a good choice for a “Bond girl”? Tell us below.

Sony’s Big ‘Risk’ Finds a Scribe as Studios Race to Adapt Board Games

We’ve reported frequently on the sheer volume of games that are being adapted into feature films. Not video games, mind you, but board games. It’s not a new idea, of course, for those who remember Paramount’s 1985 film, Clue, but it has gained significant momentum recently.
Peter Berg is turning ‘Battleship’ into an alien invasion thriller. Ridley Scott’s ‘Monopoly’ movie is purportedly going to a scorching satire about the real estate market (perfect timing). McG will adapt ‘Ouija’ into an Indiana Jones-inspired action-adventure film. And, last, but we suspect not least, ‘Candyland’ is being described by its screenwriters (Jonathan Aibel and Glenn Berger of Kung Fu Pandafame) as Lord of the Rings with candy.
That leaves the classic Parker Bros. board game ‘Risk’, which Sony/Columbia began developing into a feature film back in 2009.
Originally created by French filmmaker Albert Lamorisse (The Red Balloon) and released in 1957 as ‘La Conquête du Monde’, ‘Risk’ is a war strategy game, whose players’ principal object is “world domination,” or “to occupy every territory on the board and in so doing, eliminate all other players.” If you haven’t played it, doubtless you’ve heard of it.
So, how to adapt that into a movie then? According to Risky Business, Sony/Columbia have brought in writer John Hlavin (The Shield, forthcoming Underworld 4) to pen the adaptation. The report suggests that it will be turned into a globe-trotting action thriller, a major project for a writer who has gained most of his experience in television.
While these adaptations often bare little resemblance to the game (partially due to the necessity of the transition and partially due to creative license), studios nevertheless benefit from the brand recognition that comes built-in, while the board game makers see an infusion of new interest in their properties, and perhaps even an opportunity to evolve them or adapt them into electronic, interactive versions.
In Hollywood’s quest for inspiration, some might argue that it’s a cheap tactic, but in reality, talk to any writer and they will tell you there are only seven story ideas out there, and the real quest is to find new, innovative ways to tell those stories. We’ve lamented adaptations here on CinemaSpy — and will probably continue to do so — but the fact of the matter is that inspiration can quite literally come from anywhere.
Books and novels have always been popular choices for adaptation (and remain so), yet rarely, if ever, do they closely follow the original material; a common problem. Bram Stoker’s “Dracula”, for example, still has not been done correctly…yet Peter Jackson’s “Lord of the Rings” was a remarkably successful adaptation of what many considered material that simply could not be adapted to the screen.
The trick, therefore, is in the execution of the material.
The fact of the matter is as long the story is well-crafted and the acting strong, you can make a movie concerning just about anything. Implementation is always at the foundation, regardless of whether it’s Bard or ‘Battleship’.
That said, we’re still more generally receptive to filmmakers who try to launch an original property—Neill Blomkamp’s District 9 being one such example.
In the meantime at least, board games will remain the latest ‘go-to’ source material for an industry cognizant of its bottom line.

Has Ridley Scott Found a Writer for his Blade Runner Sequel?

After the recent announcement of Ridley Scott’s intention to revisit the world of his science fiction noir masterpiece Blade Runner, we now have word of the prolific director’s choice to pen the screenplay of the highly-anticipated sequel. Twitch is reporting that Scott’s first pick is screenwriter Scott Burns, who has previously worked on Steven Soderbergh’s current hit Contagion, The Bourne Ultimatum, the upcoming Man from U.N.C.L.E. reboot (again, for Soderbergh), and 20,000 Leagues Under the Sea: Captain Nemo (for David Fincher).
It is a puzzling turn of events that the screenwriter for the original film, David Webb Peoples (Unforgiven), is not mentioned as a possible contender as his impressive track record suggests that he would be ideal for the job.
Little is known about the plot for the sequel, but given Blade Runner‘s everlasting appeal and director Scott’s reputation as a solid filmmaker and detailed visual stylist, we are intrigued to know more…

Before the age of twenty much of what I believe

Before the age of twenty much of what I believe, then one becomes don't believe.

Used to believe in the power of civilization, known later, the original human ignorance and barbarity not because of the progress of civilization and disappeared, just ignorant savage has many different appearances: simple farmer workers, deep intellectual, confident political leaders enforce justice on behalf of heaven, Wang Shi, may have different forms of vast ignorance and big savage, and barbarism and civilization, was only the extremely subtle, can always erase line between.

Used to believe in justice, then that, while completely original can exist two kinds of justice, and conflict, and should not be. Choose one of them, at the same time means not justice justice. But, you see, some people at a particular time warmly advocated a particular justice, of which there have no bottom injustice.

Once believed too idealistic, later learned, the idealists are often cannot afford the powers of the test: a power, he became that of their opposition to the death or the" evil", or, in his realistic field cannot withstand a single blow, it will be down to them, there is no chance to realize his ideal. Idealists have character, can not be power corrupts; idealist to ability, can be the ideal into practice.

Used to believe in love, then love must know, into a family can be lasting, but into a family love, like the cup of water into ice, or ice cubes?

Used to believe in forever as the eternal characterization, was later known, the original sea is actually very easy to dry, the stone, originally easily. It may not rain, to the sea, never become Kuwata. Originally, my feet are on the earth, is easy to be destroyed.

Before twenty years old, believe a lot of things, some of it till today there still believe.

For example, China may be cute, but the land and man can love. For example, history may not believe, but for the truth can be endless pursuit of. For example, civilization may be fragile, but we don't really have to rely on civilization. For example, justice may extremely suspicious, but care about justice than do not care to safety. For example, perhaps idealists achievement not major events industry, but not their social will not. For example, disillusionment of love always, but firefly glows at night were never designed to keep the light. For example, lasting forever may not exist, but if a grain of sand, and infinite universe, while there must also have a constant does not shift time.

So, what, I don't believe it until the age of twenty, but the letter?

Some, however, are some of the most ordinary a commonplace talk of an old scholar. Don't ever believe "character is destiny", believe now. Don't ever believe that" form is emptiness", believe now. Don't ever believe" ship directly to the natural bridge", now a little faith. Once do not believe can not empirical thing, it isn't ready to believe, however, some independent positive feeling, I understand, such as Li Shutong died before the final written:" friendship between gentlemen, its light like water. They like to ask, in inches, in miles. Ask He Shi, I remember words profile. Hua Zhichun full, full moon day of the heart."

Believe it or not, as if there is a faltering depth.

We always believe it or not struggle between.