I haven't seen Four Weddings and a Funeral since it came out, but I remember it being a fun, quality movie -- more so than your usual rom-com flavor. The Hugh Grant-starring film not only brought in a good chunk of coin and fans, but it also received Oscar nominations for Best Picture and Best Screenplay. However, is it the best British movie of all time? That I'm not so sure about. Yes folks, the Hugh Grant comedy was recently listed the best British Film, according to a poll conducted by Virgin Media (via AOL UK).

Having polled 1,000 adults on June 25 and 26, Virgin notes that Four Weddings took in 22% of the vote, to get the top spot. The rom-com squeaked right by the wonderful Monty Python's Life of Brian, which suffered defeat by just 1% and grabbed the #2 spot. (It's also the only film that boasts a little age.) After that comedy classic, things get rougher and tougher. Next came Trainspotting with 15% of the vote, then Casino Royale with 10%, and Lock, Stock, and Two Smoking Barrels came in #5 with 8%.

"When you can't tell your friends from your enemies, it's time to go."

The first trailer for Quantum of Solace (aka the next James Bond film) has just arrived online (watch above or over on Moviefone in glorious HD), and I'm totally hooked. First thing I noticed is there seems to be quite a bit more action this time around, including what looks to be a pretty slick speedboat scene. Like in Casino Royale, Quantum of Solace (which picks up right where Royale left off) appears to leave us with a Bond (Daniel Craig) who still can't differentiate between what's personal and what's simply business. Once again, M (Judi Dench) continues to chase after Bond, who's still somewhat of a loose cannon.

Starring Mathieu Amalric, Olga Kurylenko, Gemma Arterton and Jeffrey Wright, Quantum of Solace finds Bond on the hunt for the organization responsible for the death of his shady ex-girlfriend, Vesper Lynd. His mission eventually leads to an environmentalist (Amalric) hell bent on taking over the country's water supply. Those interested can check out the full, official synopsis after the jump.

Quantum of Solace arrives in theaters on November 7th, 2008. What do you think of the trailer?

Okay everybody, gird your loins. MGM is unveiling the theatrical trailer for Quantum of Solace -- a.k.a. James Bond 22, if this is your first time on the internet -- at 9 a.m. Pacific on Monday, June 30th. The trailer will be attached to Hancock, which comes out a mere two days later, but you'll be able to see it early over at Moviefone on this page. Of course, we'll let you know as soon as it's up.

I remember that the start of the good buzz on Casino Royale roughly coincided with the release of its terrific teaser trailer -- the one that began in black and white, with a Judi Dench voiceover -- so I trust they're putting a lot of love and effort into this one in the hopes of having another runaway hit on their hands. The project has taken a bit of a beating in the press, what with the on-set tragedies and much-ridiculed title, but I suspect once people see footage, they'll come around. The blogosphere's love affair with Daniel Craig is far from over.

Now, if only they can get this business about the song sorted out. I say they throw caution to the wind and go with Meat Loaf.

I'm just kidding. Or am I?

24 is ridiculous, repetitive, and morally suspect -- and I love it with all my heart. I'm a card-carrying liberal, but I've offered to surrender my card if it means that I can jump up and down with glee as Jack Bauer yells "There's no time!" and shoots another terrorist in the kneecap. Close friend of Rush Limbaugh or not, then, co-creator Joel Surnow is one of my favorite people in Hollywood (he left the show earlier this year). And that means I'm excited about this announcement that Surnow and 24 co-producer Michael Loceff are collaborating to write and produce a new "contemporary spy thriller" for United Artists.

Surnow and UA have enlisted Casino Royale's Martin Campbell to direct the movie after he finishes the newly announced Mel Gibson thriller Edge of Darkness. The Hollywood Reporter speculates that this project might constitute an attempt by UA to find a viable franchise for part-owner Tom Cruise, though there's no official word that Cruise is going to star in the film.

The bad news, I guess, is that this probably means it'll be a while before we see that 24 movie that's been rumored for years now. (I still fantasize about it being called 2.) But maybe that's an opportunity for the show to get back into everyone's good graces after an unpopular sixth season and a writer's-strike-related delay of season 7. Meanwhile, as Jack Bauer would say, "tell me where the bomb is or I will kill your son." Wait, what? Never mind.

It wasn't Darby O'Gill and the Little People that brought Sean Connery to superstardom. It was his many gigs as James Bond, stretching from Dr. No in 1962 to Never Say Never Again in 1983. But that era is over. These days, Daniel Craig is 007, and he's gearing up for the 22nd Bond installment with Quantum of Solace. So, what's that have to do with Connery? Well, according to Ace Showbiz, a new press release says that the actor has considered returning to the franchise as the big baddie.

Connery is quoted as saying: "I wouldn't mind coming back as a Bond villain. But I don't think they would pay me enough. They don't pay the money for other parts, only for the Bond character, although that wasn't the case when I was doing it." Ouch! I would think they might want to add Connery in to at least save some face. Sure, things change, but what production wants to be considered penny pinchers that only care about Craig?

Ace goes on to say: "Allegedly, the 77-year-old Academy Award-winning actor has been involved in negotiations to land a villain role with the film's producers since Daniel Craig has been tapped to bring Ian Fleming's agent back to the big screen with Casino Royale."

Could this be true? Would they ever pay enough for this to really happen? We'll have to wait and see. But in the meantime, what do you think? Should Connery return to the world of James Bond?

Should Sean Connery be a James Bond villain?

Yes!!!No way. He should leave it in the past.I don't know...I don't care...Vote

I think I'm ready to give up trying to figure out what's going on with this movie -- I'll just wait till November and judge it then. But here's the latest intangible -- Bollywood actress and British tabloid staple Shilpa Shetty has just joined the cast of Quantum of Solace in an as-yet undetermined role, along with moderately well-known supporting actor David Harbour, whose role is also undetermined. Although it's being touted by MI6, the source of this information appears to be that Harbour and Shetty's names both popped up on IMDB over the weekend, so I would wait for EON confirmation next week before this becomes really, really official. IMDB does have a name for her character, though -- Devi. This late casting of Shetty is a curiosity, since she was considered a prime candidate for a Bond girl during the initial casting phase, and the Bond producers were known to be interested in working a Bollywood favorite into the film to take advantage of the synchronous orbit of Bollywood and British cinema.

Surely they don't have room for three Bond girls, do they? Shetty is very popular in Britain and recently got worldwide press attention for a mini-scandal involving Richard Gere, so I think it's more than likely that this role will amount to a cameo, like Madonna in Die Another Day or like British actress Christina Cole's role as "Ocean Club Receptionist" in Casino Royale. Remember that little scene where Bond checks into the Ocean Club and has a momentary flirtation with a stop-you-in-your-tracks-gorgeous blonde behind the front desk? I'm thinking they invited Shetty to do one of those parts and she agreed, perhaps after quietly losing out on getting one of the main Bond girl parts. But what do I know -- I thought Arterton was Moneypenny. Meanwhile, filming continues to roll on, and more confusion is sure to follow.

British jazz singer Amy Winehouse, who is known internationally more for her drug problems and wild antics -- in my five seconds of research, I see that she apparently heckled Bono while he was giving a speech, which makes me think she's good people -- has reportedly been offered the chance to sing the theme song for the new James Bond film. If British rag The Sun is to be believed, the producers of Quantum of Solace have gotten themselves involved in Winehouse's personal drama by offering the singer the theme song on the condition that she get herself clean and sober by April. "That's when the Bond people make a final decision on who sings the theme," the source said. "If Amy is clean then, it's hers." I don't know who this source is -- craft services guy, maybe -- but I also wouldn't put it past the crafty Bond producers to try to stir the media into a frenzy by putting Winehouse on the payroll in such a manner. For his part, Daniel Craig has already commented on this whole drama, saying "It's just way, way off that. Everyone's speculating about it but we've got other things to deal with -- there's no point in writing the song for a movie when we haven't got a movie." Yikes.

In other Bond news, there isn't any, really, but Craig did get into another tiff with journalists over his reputation for being difficult when it comes to press, which I didn't know he had. I met Craig during the junket for Casino Royale and found him to be as warm and as forthcoming as you could expect. On that so-called reputation, Craig says "I don't think it's true, it's just lazy journalism; they want to paint me as someone difficult. I think I'm quite nice, but maybe I'm delusional. There's no point in doing Bond if you're not going to sell it."

[via MI6]

Just in case you weren't paying attention yesterday, Quantum of Solace is the title of the latest James Bond movie (previously referred to as "Bond 22"), which arrives in theaters this November. Yes, it sounds a little Supermanish, but as Jessica pointed out, the title does come from 007 creator Ian Fleming himself. So, we mustn't make too much fun of it, even if 2008 is fast becoming the most ridiculous year for movie titles (Indiana Jones and the Kingdom of the Crystal Skull; Repo! The Genetic Opera). Yesterday, we also received the official plot synopsis of the sequel, a direct follow-up to Casino Royale. Now, as if the new installment was coming out this month instead of nine months from now, Empire has put up some new cast photos in order to acquaint us with the main characters of Quantum of Solace.

Of course, if you've seen Casino Royale, you're already familiar with at least four of the seven characters, and there isn't much that's new or interesting about the looks of Bond (Daniel Craig), M (Dame Judi Dench), Rene Mathis (Giancarlo Giannini) or Felix Leiter (Jeffrey Wright). But it is quite exciting to see the beautiful new Bond girls, Agent Fields (Gemma Arterton) and Camille (Olga Kurylenko), and the new villain, Dominic Greene (Mathieu Amalric), who Empire describes as being refined, as if he "could almost be Bond with madder eyes." I guess I was jokingly half-hoping Amalric's villain would have a fat lip and one of his eyes sewn up, but that would just be preposterous. These Craig-starred Bond films are certainly less hokey than that, and most of us agree that they're better that way.

It still doesn't have a title, and it still doesn't officially have a Bond girl, but according to Empire magazine, Bond 22 has found its villain. Of course, we don't know the character's name nor anything about him, except that he will be played by French actor Mathieu Amalric (Munich). The casting of Amalric was actually announced a few weeks ago by Fox News, but it couldn't be confirmed until Empire today got it out of the actor himself. He did hint at one loose detail about the movie, that it would be about childhood. Now, in the context of the quote, it actually appears that Amalric is saying that the desire to play a Bond villain stems from his childhood, but Empire understood his words differently, or at least spun them so that it seems like he said Bond 22 will focus on 007's childhood (as if James Bond Jr. and Agent Cody Banks weren't bad enough, now we may get a precocious young Bond). Empire also points out that Eva Green has dropped hints that Bond 22's villain will be her Casino Royale character's boyfriend, which would make sense now that we've heard Green will not appear in the next film, though photos of her character will.

This news would indicate that the Denver Post was wrong in claiming Robert Knepper would be playing the next Bond villain. Unless, of course, there's multiple bad guys -- a trend Hollywood has been a fan of lately. Either way, Amalric is an excellent choice to play the (or a) Bond baddie, and not just because he has that same foreign creepy look that Casino's Mads Mikkelsen has. The actor is receiving rave reviews for his starring role as a paralyzed sufferer of locked-in syndrome in Julian Schnabel's critically acclaimed new film, The Diving Bell and the Butterfly. Fans of Amalric's need not worry that because of Bond 22 he will be more sought after for big Hollywood movies (as if any Bond villain actor ever was). The actor told Empire that taking the role is simply funny to him, it's not necessarily what he wants to do with his career and he will continue doing "very small French film[s] for free with [his] friends."

Coming Soon has a new interview with Daniel Craig, and he's talking Bond 22. The script is done, and filming is expected to start very soon to avoid conflict with a possible Screen Actors Guild strike (different from the WGA strike -- ay caramba!). Craig confirms that Bond 22 immediately follows the events of Casino Royale, and praises director Marc Forster, saying, "If you look at Forster's current body of work, that in itself makes me very excited. If you look at Monster's Ball, Finding Neverland, and then Kite Runner, which is just stunning, it's such a diverse look at the world, I'd want us to have that. Marc is very solid."

You Ian Fleming fans might be disappointed with one tidbit from the interview -- Craig says the new script isn't based on Fleming's work at all: "There's nothing left, as far as I know." As for Craig's controversial mention of adding Roger Moore-style "humor" to the new Bond, Craig insists he was "lying," and adds "I'm not going to shy away from the fact that occasionally there should be humor. I just don't like gags. I don't like written gags. That's not the way I've ever liked working and I don't think that's funny myself." And Craig fans can rest easy, he says he's totally game for another Bond, as well as a sequel to the soon-to-be-released and surprisingly controversial The Golden Compass. There is no Compass sequel script yet, but there is an outline Craig says is "pretty good." Just pretty good? Show us a little enthusiasm there, DC! The Golden Compass releases December 7th, Bond 22 on November 7th, 2008.

I have to be honest with you, as much as I enjoyed Casino Royale, when it comes to the villains I draw a blank. There was no one too memorable -- certainly no villain to match up to say a Dr. No, or even Grace Jones' thigh strangling technique. IGN reports that Danish actor Jesper Christensen (aka Mr. White) will be returning for Bond 22; his involvement has also been confirmed by MI6.co.uk and CommanderBond .net. Both sites reported on an interview the actor sat down for with the Danish media outlet vip.tv2.dk. And it was during said interview that Christensen confirmed Mr. White's return for another go-round with our favorite conflicted super spy. Now if they could just figure out who gets to be the next Bond girl, they might have something here.

Last May, Oscar winner Paul Haggis was hired to do a little script polishing for Bond 22 (he did the same for Casino Royale). In an interview with IGN, Haggis confirmed that Bond 22 is "not based on any book or short story or anything that Ian Fleming had done. Although it is based on Ian Fleming ideas. And it starts right after the last one, two minutes after Casino Royale this movie starts." The ending, in case you don't remember, had Bond (spoiler warning) ... tracking our friend Mr. White to an exotic locale before popping him once in the leg and delivering his first official: "The name's Bond, James Bond". Last month, Patrick reported on the first glimpse of Daniel Craig back in action. Location shooting had been taking place in Palio di Siena during their famed horse race in the Tuscan town of Siena. Previous reports had also put director Marc Foster and Barbara Broccoli in Austria last July, so this time it looks like Bond is definitely going to be earning some frequent flier miles.

James Bond -- when played by Sean Connery, Pierce Brosnan and now Daniel Craig (and a bit less so when played by Roger Moore, Timothy Dalton and George Lazenby) -- has long been the gold stanard by which all other cinematic spies have been judged. He's smooth, aloof, quick-witted and charming. Guys want to be like him and women with names like Pussy Galore want to sleep with him. But these days, 007 has some serious competition from a more reserved, grittier and -- dare we say -- more likeable amnesiac spy named Jason Bourne (Matt Damon).

When The Bourne Identity came along in 2002, it pretty much reinvented the action-spy genre, placing its hero, Jason Bourne, squarely in the real world (where things like Bond's invisible car do not exist) and dealing with the unheard of (in the Bond world, at least) issues of moral accountability, character metamorphosis and even vulnerability. Clearly influenced by his neophyte rival, a new Bond was born in 2006's Casino Royale, with Daniel Craig stepping into the tux of a more down-to-earth, relatable and gadget-free 007. Even so, the gap between these two men remains enormous.

From the cars they drive to the villains they battle to the way they fight to the women they bed, Moviefone compares the two most badass spies ever to grace a movie screen in a Jason Bourne vs. James Bond gallery. Check it out and then tell us: Who do you think is the more super spy?

I debated whether or not to even publish this -- rarely have two men had less to say about a subject. But nevertheless, Paul Haggis and Marc Forster did take a few questions at LAFF about their upcoming collaboration on the still-untitled Bond 22. Asked to speak in general about his commitment to the project and why he turned down an offer to direct, Haggis said: "I just didn't want to dedicate that much time. It's going to take me six months to get the script into shape as it is." Ouch -- that's a little harsh, no? Is he saying the script turned in by Purvis and Wade was subpar? That would be hard to believe -- those guys are getting hired all over the place. Haggis also took a swipe at the notion of this new film being a direct sequel to Casino Royale: "I wouldn't describe it as such," he said. "I think it's going to stand on its own although it does follow right on the heels of Casino Royale."

As for Forster, he brushed off the notion that he's already steeped in preparations for his Bond effort. "To be honest, I haven't put any thought because really, my mind is in The Kite Runner and scoring and finishing that up," he said. "I haven't spent any time with that stuff. I wish I could tell you. Maybe in a later period." Someone followed up that statement with the completely redundant question about whether or not he's found a Bond girl yet. "I think finding Bond girls will always be an interesting task but again, not something I have dealt with at this point," he said. Looks like we're getting ahead of ourselves a bit -- Forster isn't quite ready to put on the Bond hat yet. But soon.

Just last week we got news that Martin Campbell was possibly going to direct a movie called Unstoppable for 20th Century Fox. Now there's another report that says Campbell is already attached to helm 36, the remake of Olivier Marchal's 36 Quai des Orfèvres, which we told you about back in January. The original, which stars French superstars Daniel Auteuil and Gérard Depardieu, is about two detectives investigating a series of armored car robberies. The remake was set to cast George Clooney and Robert DeNiro (who is still producing through Tribeca Films) in place of Auteuil and Depardieu, but a new rewrite from Richard Price (Clockers) has the detectives' ages lowered, so younger actors will now be required.

According to Variety, Campbell is currently prepping for Unstoppable, so his attachment to 36 won't be conflicting with that film. But unfortunately for many James Bond films, these two projects seem to indicate further that Campbell will not be directing the next 007 feature, despite his acclaim for and success with Casino Royale. One thing I find interesting is that previously 36 was being reported with Marc Forster set to direct. Forster was also rumored to have been offered "Bond 22" last month. If he was to take it, there would have to be a petition from Campbell's fans to call for another switcheroo. Meanwhile, I'll be circulating a petition calling for somebody in America to put out a Region 1 DVD of the original 36.

You might think landing a gig as director of the next James Bond film and being part of one of the greatest and most successful franchises of all time would be a dream job most directors would kill, or at the very least maim for. Well, if you do think that, you would be wrong because there's at least one director out there who isn't concerned about those kinds of things. In fact, he actually had the job then decided it wasn't for him and dropped out. Who is this seemingly crazy director? His name is Roger Michell and no, he's not crazy -- he's an artist.

According to an article at The Times Online, Michell, whose previous films include Notting Hill and several others, including two with Bond star Daniel Craig, was the producers' first choice to direct the sequel to the super-successful Casino Royale. He was in active pre-production on the film until late last year when, according to Michell, he realized that the job wasn't really for him after all. "It was because in the end I didn't feel comfortable with the Bond process, and I was very nervous that there was a start date but really no script at all. And I like to be very well prepared as a director," said Michell.

Michell was also concerned that he was doing the film for all the wrong reasons. "I'd be doing it for my friendship with Daniel Craig. I'd be doing it for the money. And not really because I yearned to do it, " said the director. Wow, someone who actually values the filmmaking process is concerned about quality and isn't just in it for the money? I don't really know what to say about that. Too often it's so obviously the opposite -- people doing films explicitly for the money and seemingly not giving any thought to quality at all. I sure hope Michell's decision starts a trend in Hollywood. If so, maybe there's still a chance to save the movie business from itself.