OK, I know what you're going to say before you even say it: "Dude, it's a big guy in a hockey mask. Don't exactly need a snapshot to envision a big guy in a hockey mask." And that's a fair comment, but I work for this blog and weekends are really slow so here we go:

Our first look at the new Jason Voorhees! A big bulky guy in torn clothes and a hockey mask: Yep! Snark aside, the big guy looks pretty solid. No silly changes or anything, although his NECK sure does look sort of extra-thick. It's the close-up shot of horror-dom's supreme stalker that the fans want to see, but I'm quite a bit more impressed by the "far off" shot. The lake is a grungy shade of green and the shadows are trickling through the forest quite creatively. Anyway, the new Jason will be played by Derek Mears, who's played more crazies, creeps and killers than just about anyone.

The pics come from a recent EW article that Erik covered right here, but it took the hardcore horror fans to get a bigger shot of the serial stalker. Expect a lot more Friday freakiness once Comic-Con starts next week. And if director Marcus Nispel can do as good as job as he did with the Texas Chainsaw remake, that'll be good enough for me. (Yes, I quite like the Chainsaw remake. A hell of a lot more than any of the TCM sequels, anyway.) The next Friday the 13th arrives in February of next year.

[ Thanks: BD.com ]

Yes, the horrifying idea is true. Spooky Dan over at Bloody-Disgusting.net sat down with Rob Cohen, ostensibly to chat about The Mummy: Tomb of the Dragon Emperor and a startling bombshell was dropped. Cohen revealed that Paramount has snagged the rights to the 1987 cult classic The Monster Squad, and plans on remaking it in fairly short order. Cohen is going to produce, but isn't interested in directing.

The Monster Squad is a delightful horror-comedy about a group of middle school students obsessed with Stephen King, werewolves, and vampires. In a tidy plot twist, Dracula suddenly appears in their calm suburb, calls forth a few familiar minions, and makes plans to take over the world at midnight. It's the movie that proved, once and for all, that Wolfman has "nards." After languishing in cultish obscurity (and imprisoned on VHS), the movie had a resurgence once all us children of the '80s came of age, and is now available in a wonderful DVD package.

All of this is why the flick ... doesn't need to be remade. It's the perfect product of the '80s, one of those snarky movies the decade was rich in. Obviously Paramount is thinking that its ongoing popularity makes it an instant hit; I'm sure they will lamely explain this as a way to introduce the movie to the younger generation. But that's why we have DVD. I can introduce it to my future children just fine, thanks.

I never thought I would live to see the day when my entire childhood was remade. Surely Space Camp and The Goonies can't be far behind. What does that leave? Only Flight of the Navigator and An American Tail. Surely, the latter is being tossed around. I mean, two-dimensional animation doesn't speak to today's youth. Make it stop, Hollywood! Make it stop!

It's official! According to Variety, the School of Rock band is getting back together. Jack Black is returning to reprise his role as Dewey Finn, Richard Linklater will be sitting in the director's chair again, and Mike White is writing the script. Talk of a sequel has been flying for weeks, so this really comes as no surprise.

In School of Rock 2: America Rocks, Finn will lead a group of summer school students on a cross-country field trip that delves into the history of rock and roll. Expect lots of cameos as the students study the roots of blues, rap, and country. I'm putting my money on B.B. King already and Snoop Dogg. Maybe Bono and Bruce Springsteen, too. (Actually, that would be pretty cool.)

I'm of two minds on this. I was surprised at how much I enjoyed the first movie; in fact think it was probably the first Jack Black movie I actually liked. But does it really lend itself to a sequel? While it's encouraging that the entire team is coming back, we all know that's never a guarantee of comedic success. How many awesome comedy sequels can you name?

Plus, there was that whole story about White weeping as he wrote the script. I'm still weirded out by that. Barring a fiery schoolbus crash, or the children discovering that Britney Spears was allowed to cover the Rolling Stones, why would you shed tears? Hmm. I think my official position has shifted from lukewarm to DO NOT WANT. What about you?

Gotta respect a producer who "takes his ball and goes home" when a studio balks at his chosen subject matter. Frankly I think there's way too much compromise in the movie biz, especially when you consider that film is supposed to be a balance between commerce and art. Lately it seems like the commerce has taken over. Like cancer.

Anyway, I just fan-ranted for a minute, but that's what happens when the name David Fincher comes up. For a while now, the director of fine films like Seven, Fight Club, and Zodiac has been planning to produce a new adaptation of the famous Heavy Metal magazine. If you're even slightly familiar with the publication (or this 1981 movie, which is highly uneven but certainly worth seeing -- and hearing!) then you know that any sort of Heavy Metal movie would inevitably be rated R. Sex, violence, profanity, monsters, huge barrels of cleavage ... Heavy Metal trades in all that stuff big-time. (Plus it's the home of several fantastic artists.)

But according to Hollywood Insider, Paramount got a little skitchy about the project's subject matter. "Too risque for mainstream audiences" is how EW's Nicole Sperling describes it. Mr. Fincher and his collaborators (Kevin Eastman, Steve Niles, and several others) are now offering the project around Hollywood, and it shouldn't take too long for the guys to find a buyer: I can't imagine that an animated feature like this would cost all THAT much, plus it's probably good politics to be pals with David Fincher. Plus, and most important, this project would certainly make some sort of a profit. Obviously it's not a 4,000-screen mid-July tentpole release, but dang ... there's plenty of room at the multiplexes for something different.

Even if that something different is actually based on a 35-year-old magazine.

On the heels of the terrible Universal Studios fire comes word of another landmark movie location gone up in flames. San Diego's Kansas City Barbeque, which can be seen in Top Gun (watch one of its memorable scenes, dubbed in Italian, above), was been gutted by a fire that started yesterday in an open cooking pit. According to the AP article reporting on the fire, the restaurant was used for the scene in which Maverick (Tom Cruise) first picks up Charlie (Kelly McGillis) by singing "You've Lost That Lovin' Feeling," but this is incorrect (that scene was shot in Coronado, at the Officer's Club at Naval Air Station North Island). Kansas City Barbeque was used for the above scene in which Goose (Anthony Edwards) and Maverick are singing "Great Balls of Fire," as well as the final scene when "You've Lost That Lovin' Feeling" is playing on the jukebox.

The restaurant had capitalized on the fact that Top Gun was filmed there, and as you can see on its website, people referred to it as the "Top Gun Bar." You could even purchase Top Gun merchandise there and see props from the film, including the piano that Goose plays on and the jukebox from the end. Although the fire was reportedly extinguished in only 20 minutes, the restaurant has been destroyed and apparently those props are now lost forever.

Upon hearing the news that Paramount might be dropping out of ComicCon, my first thought was "Now how much longer will it be until we see Star Trek stuff?" I have an odd relationship with this movie -- I'm not a Trekkie, but I find myself devouring any bit of news that leaks out about J.J. Abrams' reboot. There are thousands of ways it could go right -- and about a million it could go wrong.

But now, an interesting glimpse into the new world of Trek has surfaced over on Ain't It Cool News. AICN founder Harry Knowles made a visit to Abrams' editing room, and is apparently the first person to see any footage of the film. While it always feels a bit cheesy to post someone else's set visit, we're talking about the top secret Star Trek! We take what we can get. From the sound of it, Abrams didn't even want to show or tell this much, so this will probably be the last anyone hears about it for months!

From Knowles' description of the footage he saw, things are still in a very rough stage, which explains why Paramount isn't racing to put it before San Diego audiences. But what is described sounds so very cool that I lament their absence even more. Obviously, a set visit is subjective, and I always read all such reports with skepticism planted firmly in my mind. But read it, and see if you don't feel the same way.

I can't post the entire thing here -- but I will post my (and Knowles) favorite bit. He was allowed to see a scene where a newly graduated Starfleet class is assigned their ships. For those wanting to avoid spoilers, I'll post it after the jump.

Fair warning: This is a slight, trivial, and practically meaningless piece of upcoming movie news -- but it touches on three things we love here at Cinematical: Action movies based on cartoons based on ancient marketing campaigns, horny directors, and fake breasts. Here we go:

According to SFGate's Hot Dish blog, sexy actress Sienna Miller was forced to wear fake hooters so as to accentuate her cleavage in the upcoming G.I. Joe movie. Ms. Miller will be playing The Baroness, and apparently her god-given boobies were not adequate in the eyes of director Stephen Sommers. ("'I'm gonna be honest, I like girls with big boobs," is what the director told her. Strange comment from a guy whose leading ladies have been Famke Janssen, Rachel Weisz, and Kate Beckinsale, three gorgeous women who aren't exactly D-cups.)

Ms. Miller notes that she was "mildly offended" by the breast issue, and I'm kind of surprised that the topic didn't come up before her first costume fitting, but hey ... The Baroness is pretty stacked. Perhaps Mr. Sommers is just trying to remain faithful to the source material -- or yeah, maybe he just likes big boobs. Lord knows the target demographic for G.I. Joe loves boobs. Check out images of Sienna as The Baroness in the gallery below.

...after the jump: more pics!

So, who's going to San Diego Comic Con this year? Are you excited? Pumped up? Mildly interested? Pretending you don't care in order to impress someone of the opposite sex, but deep inside really do care and, as such, are counting down the seconds? It's okay, we're friends -- we can talk. This year, myself, Scott Weinberg and Elisabeth Rappe will be on the ground at Con representing Cinematical, and I think I speak for all of us when I say we're ready to get our geek on.

Aside from the very cool Masters of the Web Panel on Thursday morning (7/24) at 10am (which yours truly will take part in), we've been anxiously waiting to see which studios show up and with what product. Looks like Fox was first out of the gate, as I've been told they'll be there with bells on ... along with panels for Max Payne (Mark Wahlberg, John Moore and Mila Kunis expected to attend so far) and The Day The Earth Stood Still (Keanu Reeves, Jennifer Connelly, Scott Derickson and Erwin Stoff expected to attend so far). There will also be an advanced screening of The Rocker, with Rainn Wilson in attendance for a Q&A. Of course, this is all tentative until everything is finalized next month.

On the other hand, Anne Thompson brings us the unfortunate news that Paramount will not be hosting a panel or bringing any stars to this year's Con. Apparently, a Paramount spokesman told Thompson that "the timing was off this year." Thus, fans will miss out on potential presentations of G.I. Joe, Star Trek, Transformers 2 and The Last Airbender. Sucks. Though you never know ... plans may change and there could still be a surprise or two. Here's hoping we get something, anything, from one of these highly-anticipated films.

UPDATE: Paramount's fishin' around today, so I don't think they're out just yet. More when we know ...

This past Sunday, The New York Times featured a popular City-section story about the first-ever prom held for students of Brooklyn's International High School. In case you don't like to read, you can simply watch the video accompaniment here. And if you don't like to read and you don't like documentary-style videos, and have a lot of patience, you can wait for the feature film, which will apparently be hitting theaters some time in the future. According to New York magazine's Vulture blog, a number of producers are interested in optioning the article, while Brad Pitt and Angelina Jolie have personally brought it to the attention of Paramount Pictures, where Pitt's Plan B Entertainment has a first-look deal. Supposedly an unnamed non-Paramount studio exec beat us all to the punch by joking that "maybe Maddox and the twins can star in it." Of course, he forgot about Pax and Zahara (and the twins aren't really international).

Actually, the first joke I thought about was the running gag on TV's The Critic about the kid from Easter Island who attends the United Nations School. Then, the second joke I thought of was about Brangelina's adopted children. Then I kept thinking of other things, such as how thanks to Prom Night people might assume this other prom-themed movie is also a horror flick. But that's not so much a joke as it is me trying to think on a studio exec's level (hey, we were synchronous with the Maddox bit) in order to contemplate what they'd call the thing. International Prom? A Prom for All Nations (ala the video's title)? Or will Hollywood appropriately go for one of those song-based titles? Been around the World, perhaps?