Hecklerspray’s working on a script for a television series based on Orko, the purple magician from the He-Man cartoon.

It’ll be a drama. In the pilot he’ll meet a pair of lavender legs, they’ll slowly fall in love, and then half way through season three he’ll realize they’re actually his legs which have been missing since shortly after birth. Initially this will pose an ethical dilemma, but then they’ll move to Vermont and get married anyway.

We’ve a guy at TBS that says he’s very interested. MTV doesn’t have room for more 80’s fanfare – they’re too busy bringing back Teen Wolf.

MTV’s decided for some reason to make an entire series out of Michael J Fox’s Teen Wolf movie. We’re not sure why they did this, but we assume it’s because anything with strong bestiality overtones is currently very popular with young people.

You gotta go to the well with water, know what we mean?

Personally we think this is a mistake that will only add to the slow erosion of societal values that we’ve all historically benefited from. A couple seasons of Doc Hollywood, on the other hand, now that we can totally get behind. Did you hear that VH1? Listen to us! We’re your targeted demographic!

Had you heard about Teen Wolf making a howling (sorry) comeback? You hadn’t? Well then read this bit from THR:

“MTV’s reinvention of the 1980s movie “Teen Wolf” is inching closer to reality with a pilot presentation order. The cable network announced the project in January as part of its development slate. After seeing the script, MTV brass picked it up to presentation. The 1985 film starred Michael J. Fox as a teenager who discovers he is a werewolf. The MTV version will be set in high school, draw from the horror genre to explore werewolf mythology and include a romantic plot line.”

We’re sure you all are thinking that MTV is just jumping on the werewolf bandwagon that’s been made so popular by Twilight. Well this isn’t true – there are differences galore! They’ll only hire actual actors to portray the various roles, for instance.

And if you didn’t like the original Teen Wolf movies, well don’t you worry about that either. As far as we can tell nobody intends to stick to a blue print. For instance this time instead of descending from a long line of were-people, the main character is created when his pregnant mother falls into a large vat of dog spoo that had been harvested by a small town for its skin replenishing capabilities.

You may think the writers made up the rejuvenating part – but they didn’t. That’s why we heard in ski-towns Walgreen’s sells dog ejaculent by the pint.

Another difference between the MTV Teen Wolf and it’s 80s parent is the teenage-lead’s transformed-dog-self has an obvious splash of poodle in him.

This will be really nice for people who like gay dogs.

Follow hecklerspray on Twitter now!

Just the other day as we sat in the back seat – we decided we most definitely did not like the way our mother was driving. Most people would be content to sit back and go whichever way she turns the steering wheel – not us. We pulled her hair until she was parked smack in-font of a McDonald’s drive-thru window.

We inssurected her the same way that Benicio del Toro inssurects things in his 4 1/2 hour long Che movie, except with slightly less girly interview walk-outs.

Ernesto “Che” Guevara was the greatest Mexican military general of all time. Not only was he solely responsible for taking back Texas, Arizona and the entire top half of South America, but he also liked to tinker in his garage on things like spaceships, escalators and highly nutritional, camel-flavoured soup mixes. That doesn’t sound good, but we’re told it really was.

We know all this because we majored in Mexican history for over two dozen semesters. We were positively riveted the entire time.

The next time we’ll probably be riveted is last weekend, actually. That’s when Benicio del Toro’s Che movie apparently came out. To sum up the basic plot for you – the guy in front of us had to get up to pee three times because the freaking movie is over four hours long. We heard it was first made as a military tool – to be used for information-extraction at Guantanamo Bay.

We didn’t actually hear that. In fact, we haven’t even seen the movie. If we had, perhaps we’d be able to make more sense of Benicio del Toro’s weird interview stromp-out. The Washington Times reports:

“A controversial new biopic about Cuban revolutionary Ernesto “Che” Guevara is awakening old passions and provoking vigorous defenses and denunciations of the iconic revolutionary and – in the case of an interview with The Washington Times – a dramatic walkout.

“”I’m getting uncomfortable,” Benicio del Toro said after fielding a question about his new movie’s portrayal of the Bolivian and Cuban revolutions. “I’m done. I’m done, I hope you write whatever you want. I don’t give a damn.” With that, the Oscar-winning actor walked away, abruptly terminating an interview conducted late last week to discuss director Steven Soderbergh’s “Che.”"

What specific question sent del Toro through the door in unknown, but perhaps it was something like “Hey, are you guys gonna make the sequel about Timothy McVeigh?”

‘Of course not,’ the answer probably would have been. ‘McVeigh looks terrible on a t-shirt.’

You! Follow hecklerspray on Twitter!

Or something. The truth is, we don’t know. But just because Wolverine is still filming weeks after the shoot was due to be completed, it doesn’t mean that the movie’s a sack of balls. Honest. Hugh Jackman wants everyone to know that it’s just unfinished.

Which, you know, is great for Hugh Jackman, but rubbish for us. We were hoping that it meant Wolverine star will.i.am would be recast with someone more convincing, like Dr Harold Shipman or some broccoli.

Hugh Jackman has got a lot riding on the new Wolverine movie. As well as starring in it and producing it, Hugh is well aware that he needs it to be a great big bloody hit. Because, sure, he’s the Oscars host and the sexiest man alive, but what with Australia tanking and Deception tanking and Flushed Away tanking and The Fountain tanking and Scoop tanking, all Hugh Jackman is running on at the moment is a winning smile and a slightly startling willingness to prance around in skintight golden trousers.

So Wolverine needs to be a hit. And we have to admit it’s certainly shaping up to be one – not least because the first Wolverine trailer was so full of eye-popping explosions that we’re pretty sure we can pin global warming solely on its shoulders.

However, just recently we started to get the hunch that Wolverine would be a big fat turd of a movie, thanks to reports that everyone was shipping up to Canada to do a load of reshoots. Why this was, nobody knew – it could have been that the implied post-Carnapian subtext of the movie was slightly drowned out by the lengthy prelude to the movie featuring nothing but Hugh Jackman reading On the Fourfold Root of the Principle of Sufficient Reason by Arthur Schopenhauer in its entirety from the top of a volcano, or it could have been because the story, direction, acting and effects were complete arsebiscuits from beginning to end. Nobody knew.

But it turns out that, in reality, nobody is reshooting Wolverine – they’re just finishing it. In reality, the Wolverine crew had always planned to reconvene in Canada now because of Hugh Jackman’s commitment to escort Nicole Kidman around the world on that weird Aborigine-offending press tour of hers. It’s true – Hugh Jackman even wrote an email to Ain’t It Cool to explain himself:

I wanted to reach out and let you know that due to scheduling conflicts with certain cast members and location/weather considerations, we had to wait until now to shoot a couple of scenes. Please rest assured that WOLVERINE will be badass and hopefully meet all of your expectations. I am stoked by the positive response to the teaser, which clearly reflects the tone and scope of the film. If you like that, we’ve got much more in store!

See? Nothing’s wrong with Wolverine at all. You have no reason to relax – it’s going to be as good as any fourth movie based around the same character that features one of the Black Eyed Peas as a principle castmember and a man whose special power involves throwing some playing cards really, really hard deserves to be. You lucky people.

You! Follow hecklerspray on Twitter!

On the down side, if you forgot to cover up while the shot-puttin’ paper boy road past you risked getting very tiny cuts in very sensitive places. Oh the memories. While we’re on the topic you should know it was in a nude-theatre that we first took in that Harry Potter film.

We should probably recommend that place to Rupert Grint, him apparently being a recently converted nudist and all.

Oh you read that right.

Outside of Harry Potter Daniel Radcliffe has only been taking roles where his genitalia gets referenced at least three times in the script. This doesn’t make sense until you realise he’s most likely getting two pay checks for it. Seriously, we heard his left nut has a five bedroom house somewhere in the Alps – complete with a neutered butler, which is just so ironic.

Rich nuts forget where they’re from, you know?

Now Rupert Grint, who’s mannana has been famous every bit as long as Radcliffe’s except under several layers of clothing, is letting the sweet sun warm every single circumcised part of his body while a nearby film director shouts things at it like ‘Hey! Hey! I said stop staring at the floor! Good, now show me frightened.’

We mean Grint is getting naked in a movie.

This is true because we don’t think the Malaysia Sun would ever lie to us:

“English actor Daniel Radcliffe, who played the role of Harry Potter in the film series …shed off his clothes on stage in Equus. Now, Grint, 20, who shot to fame with his role as Ron Weasley, has shed off his clothes in the new movie. The film is about three teenagers who embark on a debauched weekend of drink, drugs, shoplifting and stealing cars.”

When asked about his first nude roll Grint simply joked about how they were gonna need a much longer camera. Bad-um-bum.

He never said that. Nobody said that.

Although the young red headed actor refuses to say exactly how much his penis will get paid for the film, Forbes would likely assure us it’s a shoe-in for 2009’s Top 50 Richest Young Hollywood Schlongs list, right behind a few penises you’ve never heard of and something oblong and sticky that’s growing on Oprah’s foot.

You! Follow hecklerspray on Twitter!

I’ll give you a clue – it has nothing to do with ‘My Bloody Valentine’ – although we’re sure there are many horror fans who will be interested to see a virtual remake of the 1981 flick Quentin Tarantino dubbed “the greatest slasher movie of all time”.

And, no, it isn’t Betsy Rue’s lengthy full frontal scene – although it is probably worth the price of admission alone.

It’s the 3D effects. Of course, making horror movies 3D is nothing new. But judging by the two notable examples which spring to mind – Jaws 3D and Freddie’s Dead: The Final Nightmare – it’s fair to say it’s a largely been an unsuccessful marriage – so far.

My Bloody Valentine at least delivers the 3D goods. Throughout the course of the movie you will spend your time dodging pickaxes, tree branches and various body parts – all good fun.

But take away the effects and you really are not left with much.

In fact, watching My Bloody Valentine 3D is like peering into Kirsten Dunst’s mouth – a big gummy mess.

Sure, the 3D effects are a nice distraction, but not enough to brush aside the film’s eminent shortcomings.

First, we have the rather ludicrous plot, which admittedly sticks quite closely to the much-feted original. Now, this could take a while.

It basically revolves around Tom Hanniger – played by Wentworth Miller lookalike Jensen Ackles (Smallville and Supernatural) – who, as an inexperienced coal miner in his father’s mine, causes an accident which traps and kills five men and sends the only survivor, Harry Warden, into a coma.

A year later, Warden wakes up in hospital on Valentine’s Day and proceeds to hack 22 people up with his pickaxe – as you do.

He is finally tracked down and killed, but the guilt sends Hanniger over the edge, who leaves the sleepy town of Harmony and girlfriend Sarah (Jaime King – Slackers, Sin City) and best mate Axel (Kerr Smith – Final Destination) to pick up the pieces.

A decade later, he returns to find his ex-girlfriend and best mate, now the sheriff, are hitched.

But, even worse, within minutes of his return, a killer dressed in Harry Warden’s coal mining gear and gas mask (think Darth Vader’s inbred, redneck cousin) is once again wreaking havoc, killing dwarves and hacking pieces off the good townspeople of Harmony. Bugger!

Then there is the acting and the script. Now, we realise that director Patrick Lussier has tongue firmly pressed against cheek throughout most of the movie, but by the end of it we were not even sure which bits were supposed to be funny.

It didn’t help that a lot of the actors spent most of their time spitting out their lines while wearing the expression of someone who had been forced to smell their mate’s fart.

Old pros Kevin (Lost) Tighe and the great Tom (Creepshow) Atkins do their best, but the only thing that really adds any depth is the effects. Even the rats cannot act.

But where My Bloody Valentine 3D really falls down is as a horror movie. Strip away the gimmicks, it’s a very sub-standard slasher movie.

The death scenes are unoriginal and fail to exploit the effects in great, er, depth. Plus, there is very little suspense. A crime for someone like Lussier, who has served as horror auteur Wes Craven’s editor for many years.

In fact, the scariest thing about the film is the randy dwarf who owns the local motel.

My Bloody Valentine? More like My Bloody Waste of Time.

You! Follow hecklerspray on Twitter!

Because what would we have to be disappointed about then? The weather? Our jobs? The way we can’t grow a proper beard? No, Fox didn’t want to just block Watchmen – it wanted to block our right to be chronically disappointed by Watchmen, and that wasn’t on.

Luckily, though, the crisis has been averted. Fox and Warner Bros have resolved their legal squabble, and Watchmen is coming out as planned. That means our plan to slag it off before we’ve seen it remains intact! Yay!

Watchmen is undoubtedly one of the must-see movies of the year, provided that you’re a) a virgin, b) a pleb and c) so afraid of going outside that your skin has become the same colour as your bedroom walls.

And, to be fair, you’ve got every reason to be excited about Watchmen’s release – not jut because it’s a Zac Snyder movie so it’s bound to be brimming with so much latent homoeroticism that it’ll make WWE wrestling seem like an episode of The View, but because it almost wasn’t going to be released in the first place.

As we’ve mentioned before, we’ve had to put up with endless squabbling between Fox and Warner Bros over Watchmen – first Warner Bros made Watchmen, and then Fox said that it actually owned Watchmen and that Warner Bros shouldn’t have made it, and then Warner Bros was all like ’screw you’ and Fox was all like ‘no, screw YOU!’ and then Warner Bros said something about Fox’s mum giving blowjobs to sailors and Fox took Warner Bros to court to block Watchman’s release.

It all got very messy, especially when a judge ruled that Fox had an interest in Watchmen on Christmas Eve. Since then, Fox and Warner Bros have been in a series of protracted negotiations about who owns which part of Watchmen and, more importantly, how many frightened southeast Asian prostitutes they’ll be able to buy with their cut from the movie. Possibly.

But since this is Hollywood we’re talking about, it’s time for the happy ending. People, Fox and Warner Brothers have smoothed things over and Watchmen’s March release date stands firm. Reuters reports:

Terms of the agreement will not be disclosed, but it is said to involve a sizable cash payment to Fox and a percentage of the film’s box office, which Warners plans to release March 6. Fox will not be a co-distributor on the film, nor will it own a piece of the “Watchmen” property going forward. The studios are set to release a joint statement announcing the agreement Friday.

Well, this is good news all round, isn’t it. Warner Bros gets to release a movie that comicbook fans have salivated over for two entire decades, Fox gets a large injection of cash and, best of all, what with Watchmen AND Terminator Salvation coming out in coming months, there’ll be two movies this year that take a painful, slobbery dump in the eye of things we used to like. Hooray for everything!

You! Follow hecklerspray on Twitter!

No, instead the movie’s called Notorious, and it’s either about the Duran Duran song, the Alfred Hitchcock film, dead rapper Notorious BIG or the notorious Anglo-American wife murderer Dr Crippen. At a guess, we’d say it was about the dead rapper. We should research more, sorry.

Anyway, despite being a major character in the movie, Lil’ Kim is refusing to see Notorious. We think it’s probably because she’s played by Verne Troyer in blackface.

There’s a law stating that if you’re a) in the music industry and b) dead, then someone has to make a movie about you. It’s why Ray Charles got a movie, Johnny Cash got a movie and Etta James got a movie, and the reason why up to 15 different competing producers are actively willing Cliff Richard to fall down a concrete staircase.

But, more relevantly, it’s also why there’s a Notorious BIG biopic rattling our way. Notorious is basically the heartwarming story of Biggie Smalls, the lovable rapper whose life was a non-stop rollercoaster of drug-dealing, fan-beating and being shot four times in the chest until he died. It’s Eight Mile, in essence, but you don’t get to see Kim Basinger’s bottom and the ending’s a bit bleaker.

That’s not why people will go to see Notorious, though – they’ll see it because, as well as being the story of Notorious BIG, it’s also the story of all his old chums. Puff Daddy’s there, Faith Evans is there, Tupac Shakur is there – and there’s even a slot for dear old Suge Knight, after an actor was found who could convincingly drive a car while repeatedly punching a woman in the head. Allegedly.

And, of course, one of the major characters in Notorious is Lil’ Kim, the tiny rapper who had a love affair with Notorious BIG, then allegedly had his baby aborted and then went on to ultimately not release as many albums as a handful of presumably deaf people wanted.

Lil’ Kim’s probably aware that Notorious exists, but it looks as though she doesn’t want anything to do with it – she’s refusing to see it and, as the New York Daily News reports, she didn’t even help the actress playing her with the part:

Naturi Naughton, who plays Kim in “Notorious,” didn’t even meet her subject before delving into the role… “I don’t know. I tried to reach out to her. I think there was some conflict. I’m not sure.” Faith Evans, who was married to Biggie, told us, “I don’t know what [Kim] wanted. But we all signed the same agreement to be portrayed in the movie.”

Perhaps Lil’ Kim is just being grouchy because she’s holding out for a movie of her own instead of just being a supporting character in films about her boyfriend. If that’s the case, she’s probably in for a long wait – if any movie producers wanted to make a biopic about a diminutive female rapper, they’d surely want to make a Foxy Brown movie instead. And we’d go and see that, by the way – but only so long as all the brutal violence contained in the movie was sped up and accompanied by Yakkety Sax. That would be a dealbreaker.

You! Follow hecklerspray on Twitter!

Making Keanu play a cold, emotionless, stagnant alien iin The Day The Earth Stood Still is almost typecasting but the role perfectly suits eanu’s unique brand of timbre.

However, unfortunately, the film around him is a mess.

Reeves plays Klaatu – an alien who has a zero tolerance attitude to global warming, so he comes to our planet to give us all a good ol’ slap on the wrists. What he didn’t count on, however (as the advertising tells us) is that this time we’re going to fight back.

It’s only human nature, of course. The first sign of life from another planet comes to visit us and reaches his hands out in a welcoming gesture, what else can we do?

We stomp that fool out and pop a cap in his ass. The reaction to the alien and the whole opening 20 minutes is alarmingly underwritten, with the army first picking up scientist/alien humanitarian Helen (Jennifer Connelly) who, for around five of the opening 10 minutes, doesn’t looked particularly shocked that the whole US Army have come to pick her up at her front door without an explanation.

Helen is immediately drawn to the ET and establishes an understanding that nobody else shares. The whole film then mixes between Helen driving Klaatu around on his guided tour of Earth, making various stops to help usher in the global apocalypse, while the government is all like “let’s blow this fucker up”, and when that doesn’t work they literally turn around confused and ask anybody else if they have any better ideas.

In the form of drama we have Helen dealing with the Fresh Prince of Bel-Air Jnr, the step-son she’s left with after her husband passes away. Little Smith wisetalks and generally whines his way through the movie, showing that he has zero tolerance for anything remotely approaching decent characterisation and instead just copies his dad Will in Independence Day by just punching aliens in between smart-arse responses.

The film rolls around on clichés with as much dignity as it treats the original film. We are treated to broken families and gun-toting Americans led by Kathy Bates – looking like a cross between Amy Winehouse after a night out and Kermit the Frog – whose destructive attitude does the world no favours. The only real shining star, though, is John Cleese in an all-too-brief role as an intellectual type (because he listens to classical music and has a chalk board) who has a terrific scene with Klaatu.

Of course, though, this is the time of year when the supposedly more thought-provoking blockbusters are released and, like last year’s I Am Legend, the script finds it hard to balance action with drama.

But with ropey CG effects, like the well-designed new style GORT, the film feels sloppy and unfinished in places. Of course, as humans, the climatic scene of destruction was pleasing to our eyes as much as it would be to the drooling Neanderthals lurking within the average cinema audience.

Overall, a disappointed remake that alienates the viewer by a) not being faithful to the original and defying logic and originality for some people and b) not being action-orientated enough for everyone else.

The moral message in the end works well enough but underwhelms and gets oddly confused with a pro-war subtext.

Nevertheless, a good acting choice for Keanu – any film that makes him stand out as an actor can really only be a good thing for him.

[story by David Scarborough]

But because of all the pre-release hype surrounding Terminator Salvation, it’s almost certainly not going to be the last Terminator film. In fact, according to producers, Terminator 5 is now going to be rushed into cinemas by summer 2011.

Apparently to be set in the Middle East, Terminator 5 will revolve around the time when John Connor got a nasty scratch from some robot shrapnel and looked for treatment. It’ll be called Terminator Savlon. Sorry.

Terminator Salvation isn’t being released until the middle of next year, but already the hype onslaught has started. There are rumours that Arnold Schwarzenegger will be a Terminator in it, and that Christian Bale will become a Terminator at the end of it and that if anyone so much as mentions Terminator 3 or that bit from The Sarah Connor Chronicles with the toilet that turned into a Terminator who looked just like the singer from Garbage in it, they’ll be crushed.

Trouble is, though, at the moment Terminator Salvation looks rubbish.

Judging from the Terminator Salvation trailer – which is supposedly a collection of all the best bits from the movie – Christian Bale’s still doing his ridiculous indecipherable Batman growl and there’s a metal Cloverfield monster running about the place going apeshit at everyone. Worse still, we get the feeling that there won’t even be a naked Austrian cyborg from the future demanding that a truck driver lends him his trousers. And, after all, isn’t that what the Terminator movies are about?

But anyway, even if Terminator Salvation turns out to be an embarrassing mess it doesn’t matter – because according to Halcyon Co bigwigs Derek Anderson and Victor Kubicek, Terminator 5 is already in the works. Variety reports:

The duo had originally planned to wait until the release of “Terminator Salvation” next summer before deciding on whether to proceed with the next chapter, but the positive studio, fan and media reaction to footage from the current pic has encouraged them to move forward ahead of schedule. “We feel the time is now to start shaping the next part of this,” Kubicek said.

That makes such good business sense – strike while the iron is hot. Hot and unfinished. Hot and unfinished and possibly a bit crap. There’s literally nothing that could go wrong with this plan whatsoever.

Apart from the fact that, you know, by announcing that there’s going to be a Terminator 5 before Terminator 4 has even been released it’s perfectly clear to everyone that John Connor won’t beat the Terminators for another film or two so it’s not really worth paying to go and see this one. But apart from that, it’s a genius plan.

In fact, it seems a bit pointless calling the new film Terminator Salvation at all, now that we know nothing will be salvaged until at least Terminator 5. Perhaps Halcyon will take this onboard – after all, it’s not too late to switch the word ‘Salvation’ for an equally pointless noun in the title. We were thinking maybe Terminator Pianola or Terminator Bum.

Unless, of course, the hidden twist of Terminator Salvation is that all the invincible killing machines are destroyed by the Salvation Army, who march through the post-apocalyptic wasteland blowing up the robots by playing God Rest Ye Merry Gentlemen on the tuba. If that’s the case we take it back. We take it all back.

You! Follow hecklerspray on Twitter!

But none of this can disguise the fact that Hugh Jackman is Wolverine, nothing but Wolverine and will remain Wolverine until the day he dies. That’s why he’s made a new film that’s only about that one character, and that’s why we’ve got the new Wolverine trailer for you here.

But if you can’t wait for X-Men Origins: Wolverine to be released, or you can’t be bothered to go and see it when it’s released, we’ve knocked out a brief synopsis of the movie based on the trailers. There may be spoilers. But, somehow, we think there probably won’t…

Wolverine starts life as an actor in a touring civil war reenactment troupe who is driven to despair by his inability to do anything other than stare off into the middle distance with a vaguely anguished look on his face. To cheer himself up, Wolverine goes to an unlicensed beauty spa and almost drowns. Rather than write to Watchdog to complain about this infringement on his consumer rights, Wolverine kills everyone, then blows something up, then rides a motorbike through an explosion, then blows something else up, then smashes through a wall, then a window and then he blows up a jeep, flies through the air and lands on a helicopter for some reason.

Why does Wolverine look so furious throughout his entire trailer? We’re not sure, but we think it has something to do with the fact that his best friend is Will.I.Am from the Black Eyed Peas. We’d be constantly putting our life at risk if he was our friend, too.

It’s hard to tell if the Wolverine trailer makes the film look like an epic John Woo-style action ballet or an overblown load of tosh. But one thing’s for sure – we want X-Men Origins: Wolverine to be a success.

That’s because the sequel’s bound to be X-Men Origins: That Bloody Halle Berry Woman, and there just aren’t enough opportunities to fall asleep in a cinema these days, are there?

You! Follow hecklerspray on Twitter!

It’s obvious! Jennifer Aniston is promoting a film that’s primarily aimed at children, so it’s obvious she’d end up naked on the front of GQ magazine. Really, this is just like when Jodie Foster got her bum out to promote Nim’s Island or when the entire cast of that Narnia film guest-edited that issue of Fat Filthy Knockers magazine.

But, of course, Jennifer Aniston isn’t just naked in GQ for her film – it’s also to show everyone that she’s happy. Happy! She’s happy, OK? HAPPY!

You know what’s old hat these days? Gratuitous celebrity nudity. These days, if a famous woman decides to get naked, it has to be for an important cause. That’s why Khloe Kardashian got naked yesterday, in an effort to raise awareness of the barbaric fur trade. And it’s also why Jennifer Aniston is naked on the cover of GQ magazine this month – because, um…

OK, look, we don’t know exactly why Jennifer Aniston is naked on the cover of GQ magazine this month, but she is, and we think it’s down to one of the following:

1 - To promote her new funny animal movie Marley And Me.

2 - To show the world that she’s completely comfortable with herself, especially after hours of expensive post-shoot digital manipulation.

3 - To show that bitch Angelina Jolie who’s the sexy one. Yeah, you see that, Angelina? You see these sexy naked tits? Yeah, this is why Brad Pitt married me and then, um, ran off with… oh. Nevermind.

4 – Because Jennifer Aniston clearly doesn’t think that the 18 hours of each day that she monopolises by jumping around screaming “Woo! Look at me! I’m Jennifer Aniston! I have a complex love life I’m just dying to tell you about!” in every single publication on the planet is enough.

So, yes, the sight of Jennifer Aniston naked on the cover of GQ might reek of desperation, but at least it stops her prattling on about Brad Pitt and Angelina Jolie like some sort of demented bellend. Doesn’t it?

“The funny thing is that people don’t realize we all go away to the Hamptons on the weekends.” Really? “No. But can you imagine? That’d be hysterical. I’ve got Zahara on my hip, and Knox …”

Oh. It doesn’t.

But, still, it’s worked – the naked GQ cover has got Jennifer Aniston more publicity than she knows what to do with, and we’re sure this will be reflected in Marley And Me’s opening weekend box office, where it will no doubt break records in reaching the ‘lonely single man who enjoy masturbating to pictures of naked women doing weird squirrelly things with their arms’ demographic.

But don’t forget that there’s still a fortnight before Marley And Me is released, so this probably isn’t the last we’ll see of Jennifer Aniston. But what tricks could she possibly have left in her arsenal? After all, we’ve had the fake pregnancy trick, and the slagging off Angelina Jolie trick, and the desperate plea for babies trick, and now we’re already at the naked in a magazine trick. What could possibly be next?

Well, logic dictates that that if the pattern holds there’ll be a Jennifer Aniston sex tape out in the next few days. But just you cool your heels, Aniston fans – a Jennifer Aniston sex tape wouldn’t be nearly as good as you expect, because chances are it’d also star John Mayer and, you know, people only have a finite amount of vomit they can puke up before they start retching blood.

You! Follow hecklerspray on Twitter!

Yes, now she’s all grown up, Emma Watson is proud woman in possession of a full set of boobs and, if we hear correctly, a properly-functioning bottom. And she’d like nothing more than to show you.

Observing Daniel Radcliffe’s critical acclaim after appearing nude in Equus, Emma Watson has decided that she’d quite like to get naked, too. But only if it’s artistic and integral to the plot. Or slapdash and gratuitous. She’s not really bothered.

The Harry Potter actors are quickly approaching a crossroads in their life – after the movie series ends in the next couple of years they can either accept that they were lucky to be part of the Harry Potter phenomenon to begin with, live off the millions they earnt from it and top up their holiday funds by appearing on The Weakest Link: Rubbish Old Bloody Hasbeens We Can Barely Even Remember Edition once every few years. Or they can become serious actors.

Daniel Radcliffe has taken the second option, embarking on a wildly successful transatlantic run as the little naked horse-stab boy in Equus. And it’s paid dividends – by doing so, Radcliffe has dismissed any notion that he’s the next Mark Hamill. At the absolute least he’s a new version of Mark Hamill who gets his cock out night after night at the behest of a terrifying half-man half-horse god figure. So take that, haters.

And now Emma Watson has decided that she wants a slice of the artistic credibility pie as well. Although she shot to fame as prim little bookworm Hermione Granger in the Harry Potter movies, Emma Watson has been experimenting with adulthood a little lately, by showing off her knickers and possibly getting off with pig-faced rockers who look like they smell of paint thinner.

The final step of this transformation is, of course, the utterly gratuitous movie nude scene.  So Emma Watson has decided that he wants to do that as well now, please. The New York Daily News reports:

The baby-faced teenager, who has garnered legions of fans for her role as innocent Hermione Granger, admitted this weekend she would go naked for her art. “Yes. For Bernardo Bertolucci. It … depends,” said the actress, referring to the Italian director. But she quickly rationalized, “I’m not getting my kit off any time soon, but it is part of my job.”

That’s right Emma, it is part of your job to get naked. After all, if young actresses didn’t blunder into onscreen nudity at an embarrassingly young age, then the internet would shrivel up and die within weeks. Emma Watson, we salute you.

But, as shocking as it sounds to her that Emma Watson from Harry Potter wants to get naked in a film, remember that it’s not as scandalous as it sounds – Emma is 18 years old now and she’s firmly stated that it won’t be happening immediately.

After all, Emma Watson has a wise head and she knows that it’ll take several years to decide if she wants to thwonk her boobies out in a tawdry straight-to-DVD erotic thriller, or if she wants to preserve her womanhood for something really special like Showgirls 2: Return Of The Minge.

So, sincere congratulations to Emma Watson for her nudity vow. We’re sure that however she decides to display her bazzers on celluloid, a small army of quite creepy middle-aged men will firmly support her all the way.

Oh, but Emma? If you being naked in a film inspires that Ron Weasley kid to do the same thing, we’re going to hunt you down and tear you apart like dogs. Dogs, you hear? OK, thanks.

You! Follow hecklerspray on Twitter!

And that theory works beautifully with the Alien series. Alien had an alien in it, Aliens had more than one alien in it, Alien 3 was the third film in the franchise and Alien: Resurrection was a film about some aliens that featured a resurrection as a key plot point.

Which brings us to Alien 5. Which might be happening. Without any aliens in it. Whoops.
Although Sigourney Weaver is possibly most famous for her role as Ripley in the Alien franchise, she doesn’t need it to make a living. She’s been in plenty of other films, from that crappy movie about the village to the crappy movie about the vantage point to, um…

OK, look, perhaps Sigourney Weaver does need the Alien franchise a bit. But that’s just tough luck because, between the two Alien Vs Predator movies that have been released in recent years, the aliens in question now couldn’t be less scary if they came in big clown shoes and spinny bow-ties and constantly did goofy renditions the Soulja Boy dance at 90-second intervals.

So what’s Sigourney Weaver to do? On the one hand her old action movie contemporaries like Sylvester Stallone and Harrison Ford are revisiting old glories in return for piles of cash, but on the other she knows that making another Alien movie would essentially make her Michelle Dessler from 24’s sloppy seconds. If only there was a third way – a way that made little to no sense on any level but would somehow ensure that Sigourney Weaver had enough money for that nice new speedboat she’s had her eye on.

Wait a minute, there is! Apparently Sigourney has been talking to Ridley Scott about the possibility of making Alien 5. And, here’s the kicker, it doesn’t look as if it’ll have any aliens in it. Filmstalker quotes:

“Both of us feel a kind of commitment to that woman. He’s as much responsible for who she is as I am. We’d have to go back to the drawing board on [the alien]. Ridley said that right away when we first talked about [a fifth film]. What we’re interested in is taking the character of Ripley and seeing what other science fiction story we can tell about someone who has lived several lives.”

You see? Ripley’s life doesn’t revolve completely around her incident with the aliens, so it stands to reason that you could make Alien 5 about other adventures that she’s been on. Like when she returned to Earth and took up tapestry, for example, or the time she thought she saw a fox going through her bins but actually it was just next door’s cat. Any of these scenarios would make a perfectly good film.

Of course, there is one perfectly good option for Alien 5 here that nobody seems to have noticed. Remember in Alien: Resurrection where we saw the seven hideous variously-deformed Ripley mutant clones? Let’s make Alien 5 about them! It would be excellent – not only would it give Sigourney Weaver the chance to play seven characters at once, giving her the chance to show off her acting ability, but it’d probably be the only chance we’d get to see a film about seven deformed mutant ladies and their hilarious plan to start a Salvation Army brass band much to the horror of the local parish council. It’d be a hoot. A hoot!

Now, look, we share your concern here – an Alien 5 that hasn’t got any aliens in it does sound almost unstoppably awful. But don’t forget – Ridley Scott sounds as if he’s heavily involved in the development process of the movie, so Alien 5 could be the movie that takes the series back to its roots.

Or, given that the next two films that Ridley Scott wants to make are a version of Robin Hood where Russell Crowe plays everyone and an actual movie adaptation of the bloody Monopoly boardgame, the whole thing is going to stink so badly that everyone who goes to see it will need to get their brain fumigated. But let’s not think about that option too much. It’ll just make us want to cry.

You! Follow hecklerspray on Twitter!

Of course, times have moved on since then – but nobody tell Steve Guttenberg. Guttenberg has decided that he’s ready to make Police Academy 8, even though that would obviously be the worst idea that any human has ever had.

Oh, and also Steve Guttenberg says he’s making another Three Men And A Baby movie, too. And Steve Guttenberg has forgotten to take his medicine. And he needs a lie down.

Alright everyone, it’s time to stop this belated sequel madness. Sylvester Stallone returning to make Rocky Balboa was actually a fairly decent idea. Harrison Ford returning to make Indiana Jones 4 was a stupid idea. Arnold Schwarzenegger thinking about Predator 3 is beyond a stupid idea. Steven Seagal wanting to make Under Siege 3 is – well, actually Steven Seagal wanting to make Under Siege 3 is a brilliant idea, but only if it can be set in space like he wants.

But Steve Guttenberg wanting to make Police Academy 8? Why? What possible reason could there ever be on the face of the earth for that to happen? What, did Police Academy 7: Mission To Moscow leave any questions unanswered, other than the obvious ‘Why do I feel the compulsive urge to run home and scrub myself clean the second I’ve finished watching this?’

And yet Police Academy 8 is happening. Or at least it’s happening in Steve Guttenberg’s mind, which is slightly different to real life because in his mind Steve Guttenberg is still famous, people still care about anything Steve Guttenberg has to say and the national anthem of the entire planet is the full four-minute theme-tune to the Commodore 64 videogame adaptation of Short Circuit.

But, yes, Steve Guttenberg is really getting a script together for Police Academy 8. And it’ll reunite all the old gang, too – Steve Guttenberg, the man who makes the funny noises with his mouth, the short lady, the dead one with the guns, the unusually tall man, the sexy one with the big boobs who’ll be a pensioner by the time Police Academy 8 ever gets made – even the two actresses for which the Police Academy movies were an unfortunate blip on the path to bigger and better things, as Empire reports:

“We are doing a new movie and it is going to be great fun. A script is being written and so far it is really great, everyone from the original movies who is still around will return. I know Kim [Cattrall, who starred in the original] and Sharon [Stone, the love interest of Police Academy 4: Citizens On Patrol] have been asked but they haven’t said yes yet. It would be really great to have them on board.”

They haven’t said yes yet? Is that because they were too busy shouting “Hey Guttenberg, I’m not going to tell you again! If you don’t get off my lawn immediately I’ll have you arrested! And put some clothes on, for crying out loud!”? Maybe we’ll never know.

As well as Police Academy 8, Steve Guttenberg seems convinced that he’s going to re-team with Ted Danson and Tom Selleck to make a third Three Men And A Baby movie too. But why stop there, Steve? Why not make a new Short Circuit movie where Johnny 5 starts a bloody turf war with a family of Honda Asimos? Or another Cocoon starring Jessica Tandy’s corpse and the ghost of your film career? Huh? Huh, Steve? Huh?

You! Follow hecklerspray on Twitter!

Do you often get irritated because, even though you could literally drown in all the different versions of Planet Of The Apes that have been made over the years, nobody’s ever bothered to tell you what happened on the planet almost 2,000 years before the events of the original movie?

If you do, we have two pieces of advice for you – 1) hold onto your hat, because Fox is apparently very close to starting production on that exact Planet Of The Apes prequel, entitled Genesis: Apes, set 1,969 years before the original movie, and 2) stop wasting your life, you friendless nincompoop.

Aside from inexplicably continuing to give Vin Diesel work, Hollywood loves nothing more than overloading a hot trend until its wheels fall off. And the hottest trend of the moment would appear to be the utterly needless prequel.

Looking at the production schedules, we can see that there’s a Wolverine prequel coming out soon, plus a Star Trek prequel, the prequel to Lord Of The Rings and a Terminator movie that’s a sort of prequel but not really. But that’s nothing, because there’s a Planet Of The Apes prequel coming out, and if you judge a prequel’s quality on the space of time between the setting of the prequel and the original, then it’s going to be the best prequel ever made.

The original Planet Of The Apes was set in the year 3978, but if you want to trace back to the exact moment which set off the chain of events that ended up with Charlton Heston wailing around on his knees like a sandy bellend, you need to go back 1,969 years to – oh, this is a coincidence – 2009.

That’s apparently the plot of new Planet Of The Apes prequel Genesis: Apes. And to prove we’re not making any of this up, here’s a quote about it from Fox’s Tom Rothman, as found on CHUD:

We are very close at Fox on a new Apes script- this one a kind of prequel story before the first story, with a return to the social thematics that mark the first one, but with an entirely contemporary setting – Earth 2009.

So, just to make this clear, the new Planet Of The Apes sequel won’t be set on the ape planet as we know it, nor will it feature very many clever monkeys. Maybe there’ll be a chimpanzee with a metal colander on its head who can talk through a machine, but apart from that there’ll be a bunch of grumpy humans listening to Katy Perry and not much else.

Who knows why Planet Of The Apes is getting this prequel. Maybe it’s because strong sales of Planet Of The Apes DVDs proves that demand for the new movie is there. Or maybe someone at Fox is friends with Tim Burton and deliberately wants to make a Planet Of The Apes movie that’ll make Tim’s 2001 remake look less crap in comparison. Or maybe people just think they’ll get rich if they cynically knock out a massively unnecessary Planet Of The Apes prequel without putting much thought in.

Let’s hope the last one isn’t the case, because if Genesis: Apes is successful then we’re going to be overloaded with prequels set thousands of years before the original. And a trend that logically concludes with a Four Christmases prequel where Vince Vaughn’s great great great great great great great great great great great great great great grandfather hits Reese Witherpoon’s great great great great great great great great great great great great great great grandmother over the head with a club and then insincerely marvels at the invention of fire is not a good trend at all.

You! Follow hecklerspray on Twitter!