* Bryan Singer will be producing, not directing, the next “X-Men” prequel. He’ll be directing “Jack, the Giant Killer” instead. And another Mike Fleming story, an exclusive this time: “Paranormal Activity 2” has a director. He’s Tod Williams, best known for “The Door in the Floor.” Sounds to me like Paramount is keeping things modest, wisely.

* The very ill Dennis Hopper got his star on the Hollywood Walk of Fame today.  Amy Kaufman has video of the ceremony which included Hopper rather gently chiding the paparazzi for an incident which caused him to fall. The video itself ends with photographers yelling “Viggo!” and “Jack!”

* Ridley Scott’s “Robin Hood” with Russell Crowe as Robin will be opening Cannes this year. The plot description put me somewhat in mind of the angle the great director Richard Lester and writer James Goldman took on the legend in a film I’m quite partial to, “Robin and Marian,” which starred Sean Connery and Audrey Hepburn.

* Like most serious film lovers, I was very sorry to hear of the cancellation of the newly revitalized “At the Movies” with Michael Phillips and A.O. Scott. Andrew Wallenstein, however, sees a ray of hope for newspapers. Roger Ebert sees more than a ray of hope for the format and the Internet.

* My friend, cartoonist Randy Reynaldo, writes about his encounter with the late Robert Culp, who was attempting to launch a film version of the classic comic strip, “Terry and the Pirates.”

* Angelina Jolie might, or might not, be Maleficent at some future point, or not in a movie that might, or might not, be made by Tim Burton at some point. Sometimes, the Internet can just wear a guy down.

* Here’s a story I like. It looks like David Cronenberg, Viggo  Mortenson and writer Steve Knight will be reteaming for a sequel to a movie I really liked a lot, “Eastern Promises.” Nice to see a sequel happening not just because the prior film was profitable but probably mostly because there’s a legitimate further story to be told and because the makers work well together.

* The rumour mill is touting both Carey Mulligan and Colin Firth for the upcoming redo of “My Fair Lady” which I understand is supposed to be a bit less of a romanticized take on George Bernard Shaw’s “Pygmalion.” Emma Thompson is writing the adaptation (and I hope playing at least a small role in there someplace) and John Madden directing. Anyhow, it sounds good to me.

* I’m trying to keep an open mind, but this story about a “lost” audio recording by Orson Welles of a self-published book by a friend of his becoming the basis of a new family movie gives me the creeps. If Welles is such an all-fired hot property still, why not make “Chimes at Midnight” available in the U.S. again, for God’s sake? The film, which starred Welles as my favorite Shakespeare character, Sir John Falstaff, and used material by Shakespeare from several of the plays featuring the character who figures prominently in the Bard’s greatest history plays, is thought by Wellesians to be as good or better than “Citizen Kane.” I don’t know, but the fact that it hasn’t been available or shown theatrically in the U.S. for, I think, about thirty years or so is a true cinema crime. The idea that all been held up by some legal issues is kind of loathsome. Who profits by keeping the film hidden all these years?

* Your daily dose of meta, as Variety reportedly struggles and strong-arms as it attempts to survive by putting itself behind a marginalizing pay wall, Ms. Nikki Finke has managed to make herself the story in an affair involving the other big trade, The Hollywood Reporter.  It’s actually too long and dull a story to go into involving her rivalry with Sharon Waxman of the Wrap, but the short version is that she’s claimed she was offered a house to become Editor-in-Chief  of THR. though the paper has denied making any offer at all. I’ve said it before under similar circumstances, but the most disturbing part of this story is the idea of Nikki Finke being somebody’s boss. Terrifying.

Variety has gone behind a pay wall. Jolly Carl DiOrio of The Hollywood Reporter is either taking a night off or filing later. Still, this is one week when, if I may paraphrase Bob Dylan, I don’t need a weatherman to tell me which way the wind’s blowing. As a science-fiction adventure sure-to-be blockbuster, James Cameron‘s “Avatar” has pretty much everything going for: huge ballyhoo, much of its centered on its groundbreaking use on “performance capture” (not mere motion capture) and what everyone seems to be describing as a new and more immersive 3-D, strong advance sales (skewing male as of right now), and solid reviews.  Sure, it’s actors aren’t precisely A-listers, but we all know what good stars are these days. I’m sure people will eventually remember that Sam  Worthington, Zoe Saldana, and Sigourney Weaver were in there some place.

The latest from James Cameron at this point has racked up an 82% “fresh” on the Tomatometer and a whopping 96% from the usually harder to please “top critics,” with only Village Voice‘s exacting J. Hoberman submitting a mildly negative review that is actually about as positive as a bad review can be.

Our own Jamey Codding is positive, but not quite ecstatic. Ken Turan, a critic I respect but often disagree with for his rather schoolmarmish tastes — don’t get him started on Tarantino — waxes poetic and compares the technical breakthroughs to “The Jazz Singer.” I personally hope that isn’t quite the case. 3-D is cool as an occasional treat, but I just don’t see how it’s necessary for every movie. Of course, there were people who said that about sound movies too, but don’t laugh too much because there are still people who thought they were right! (Not me. Being a word guy, I like talkies. My fogeyosity has limits) In any case, Roger Ebert might be summing things up nicely when he writes:

There is still at least one man in Hollywood who knows how to spend $250 million, or was it $300 million, wisely.

So, we know that “Avatar” will, baring apocalypse or a mass, blindness-inducing plague, win the weekend. The real question is, by how much? Well, considering it’s opening in 3,453 theaters and probably taking up nearly every higher priced regular size and Imax 3-D screen in the country, I’d say the sky is the limit for the moment. Beyond that, I really don’t have the kind of information to make these kind of assertions, but fortunately there is Daniel Frankel of The Wrap who says that the gurus have agreed the Fox film will do over $60 million at least and possibly as much as $90 or $100 million.

As for the long term prospects over the coming weeks and months for “Avatar,” as far as I can tell there’s now reason to expect anything but some large degree of success. The good reviews, I think, bode well for far stronger than average word-of-mouth for an effects-laden blockbuster. Indeed, as word gets out of the film’s love story, more females will likely want to check this one out. Of course, as with Cameron’s extremely female-friendly “Titanic,” a backlash of some sort is inevitable.  “Titanic” is probably the most hated widely beloved movie ever made, though that sure didn’t hurt its commercial or Oscar prospects. I sort of suspect that won’t be the case here, but given the “Dances with Wolves”-style story and scenes that are being seen as referencing the more venal lowlights of the Bush Administration, some blowback and/or beneficial controversy from Sarah Palin’s idea of “real America” may be in the cards.

Still, this is the movies and spectacle always trumps ideology. According to Frankel, the really good news for James Cameron and company is that they have most of the nation’s 3-D screens to themselves until March. He’s a got a huge budget to recoup, but something tells me things will be just fine for Cameron.

There is another wide release this weekend and, with its appeal to adult women, “Did You Hear About the Morgans?” should theoreticaly have some counter-programming hopes for Sony and Relativity Media. However, I have a theory that movies with complete sentences for titles almost never do very well. In fact, things don’t appear to be too rosy for this marital comedy in which Hugh Grant and Sarah Jessica Parker are an unhappy married couple whose marriage is given a new lease on life when they wind up in witness protection. Forecasters are not bullish and the film is expected, as per Daniel Frankel, to make only about $8 million. The problem appears to be that people don’t think it’s funny. My PH colleague Jason Zingale certainly doesn’t seem to have found much to laugh about.

Perhaps aided by ever-lowering standards for rom-coms, the last film that teamed Hugh Grant and writer-director Marc Lawrence, the just kond of okay “Music and Lyrics,” did surprisingly well with RT’s “Cream of the Crop” critics especially. “The Morgans” however, have  so far generated a pretty lousy Rotten Tomatoes rating of 11%. Michael Phillips of “At the Movies” and the Chicago Tribune has my favorite RT pull quote of the week:

It’s not just the sound of crickets you hear watching this movie. It’s the sound of dead crickets.

I guess that’s like the sound of one hand, not clapping.

“Morgans” appeals to an older audience that, while not likely directly swayed by reviews, is a bit more discriminating with their movie going dollar. Let’s just say that, things are looking very, very good right now for “The Princess and the Frog” to hit the #2 spot this week.

There’s some Oscar activity — to widely varying degrees — in limited release. “Precious,” “Up in the Air,” “The Road,” and “Me and Orson Welles” are expanding to 1003, 396, 175, and 134 screens respectively.  The first two films’ Oscar hopes at this point seem a lot stronger than the latter’s. Rob Marshall’s highly touted Fellini-via-Broadway musical adaptation, “Nine” will show up in three theaters while the country music drama “Crazy Heart” with Jeff Bridges — definitely the man to beat this year so far for the Best Actor Oscar — will play in four houses. And, for aging romantics and the fogeyish-in-heart comes a historical romantic costume drama,  “The Young Victoria,” opening in 44 theaters. Oscar hopes are pinned on the lovely Emily Blunt in the title role.

* Summit has acquired the North American rights to distribute “The Ghost Writer,” a political thriller starring Ewan McGregor and Pierce Brosnan. And why is this the top item? The director is Roman Polanski. Wait for this film to benefit from a lot of free publicity generated by people who think it’s wrong to see any movie in which someone involved with it once did a very bad thing. If you follow that rule, you’ll miss a lot of movies.

* Not too surprisingly, that report I mentioned on Wednesday that James Cameron‘s next movie is going to be an outer space redo or homage or what have you of The Seven Samurai was all wet. Instead, quoth the Playlist, he’s producing, but not directing, a remake of the not-so-great (at least as far as I can remember it) sixties sci-fi hit, “Fantastic Voyage.” It could work and will probably be at least a little bit fun in 3-D.

* Speaking of Cameron, it’s a bit weighted towards the geek press at this moment, but reviews have been leaking all over the place for “Avatar” and, guess what, the critics seem to think there’s something to the hype. At the very least the film is guaranteed to get a bunch of technical nominations and probably win them. Throw some Oscars into the marketing mix of James Cameron’s latest, and a genuinely gigantic hit with massive legs could brewing.

How long before the inevitable backlash? Well, Michael Phillips‘ review encompasses both frontlash and backlash. Putting on her critic hat, Anne Thompson writes a prose poem. She says all us cinephiles are going to have to see it multiple times. Well, I’m sure some of us will disagree there. Contrarians, skeptics, and extra-tough critics, start your engines.

* In a related matter, some in the geek press are going — and this is the only word I have to describe this — apeshit over what Sigourney Weaver said in one of her promotional interviews. Apparently, “Ghostbusters 3” is on; if Weaver will be in it, her part will likely be small; also, Bill Murray might be playing a ghostly version of Dr. Peter Venkman in the new sequel. My world continues to spin on its prior axis.

* A Jim Henson biopic and Aaron Sorkin’s Facebook screenplay (being directed by David Fincher) top the list of the year’s most well-liked scripts.

* The world’s toughest movie septuagenarian Clint Eastwood giving up acting in favor of directing? Directing is actually the harder job, though I guess more cerebrally than physically. My hunch is that maybe he’s just done directing himself in starring roles, which almost everyone whose done it says is ridiculously challenging. It would be fun to see him pop up in supporting roles in other directors’ pictures, though. (H/t Screencrave.)

* Okay, the cynical version of this item is that J.J. Abrams wants an Oscar. Still, why can’t a genre director take on a National Book Award Winner? It’s been done before. True, Mr. Abrams’ cinema skills are not really anywhere near the levels of Steven Spielberg. His strength is in basic storytelling, likable stock characters and humor, but it still could work — if he can only drop the ADHD/herky-jerky camera style and acquaint himself with this thing they call a tripod.

* Mega cinephile blogger The Self Styled Siren is a mystery woman no more. Sorry, single film geeks of the world, she’s taken.

* This guy who most recently played Orson Welles walks into a bar, but not just any bar.

Yes, it seems to be a day when we’re avoiding the worst that the film biz has to offer. Take that Sammy Glick! Maybe.

* Notorious screenwriter Joe Eszterhas, who brought the world such morality plays as “Basic Instinct” and “Showgirls,” is handling the kind of character/person you’d never expect him to write about, or meet. A virgin. Apparently the once severely overpaid, self-aggrandizing writer not exactly known for any particular virtues of any particular sort became a born-again Catholic following a bout with cancer. Naturally, a recent memoir tells of his conversion.

* I’ve never watched the most recent iteration of “At the Movies,” but I’m happy to say that the next version will be hosted by the New York Times‘ A.O. “Tony” Scott and the Chicago Tribune‘s Michael Phillips. They had both been my favorite subs for the still-going-strong but voiceless Roger Ebert during the final days of the old show’s run, and having them both return gives me a small but solid happy. These guys know movies and should be worthy successors to Mr. Ebert and the late Gene Siskel. I’ll be tuning in.

UPDATE: Glenn Kenny weighs in on “when good things happen to good film critics.” He also has something to say about the predecessors…and one of their daddies. It’s critical go-time. A humorous must for fans of critic-on-critic pugilism and praise.

* Too poor to buy scads of DVDs, but too virtuous (or technologically challenged) to steal them via the Internet? Speedcine can take you to places where you can legally watch an ever-increasing number of films online. It’s just in Beta, but this should be a site to watch and a boon to moral cheapskates and poor slobs the world over.

* I would be an amoral blogger indeed if I didn’t give an h/t for item above to Anne Thompson. She also clued me in on the existence of a new trailer for Peter Jackson’s long-awaited return to non-epic fare, Alice Siebold’s “The Lovely Bones.” The trailer includes a brief intro by Jackson who, in his new and far thinner state is starting to resemble Meriadoc Brandybuck‘s long-lost hirsute older brother.

* Speaking of Middle Earth filmmakers who’ve been known to eat their dessert, Guillermo del Toro has made what sounds like a solid and unusual choice to direct the remake of the Spanish-language horror-flick he produced, “The Orphanage.” (Not to be confused with “Orphan,” currently in theaters.) I haven’t seen the original film, not have I seen any of Larry Fessenden’s unusual horror films as a director, but I have a relatively good feeling about this one.

* Mike Fleming makes it sound as if Screen Gems Clint Culpepper is doing the right thing re: incarcerated rapper-actor T.I. I’m sure his dealings with Chris Brown will be far more controversial, however, if he chooses to maintain that business relationship. Weapons charges are one thing, domestic abuse is another.