Right. Here’s the future. In the year 200andGoogleitbecausewedidnot, once all the disinfectant from Leona Lewis’ Olympic Opening Ceremony Performance has sterilized Britain, there is to be some exciting news. Naomi Watts is going to do exactly what Meryl Streep has just done here in 2012.

But she’s going to do it slightly more creepier – and be all PRINCESS DIANA and everything.

Okay. Quick reminder on who Princess Diana is, just before everyone jumps on the bandwagon and starts holding aloft an ironic piece of bunting with a smashed arm of a princess on it or something.

So, Princess Diana was a woman, who married a man whom she did not love (That’s Prince Charles, that guy who once stood 20 miles from a working class civilian and didn’t complain about it at all) Alas, it didn’t work out – both parties allegedly got off with other people, and it was all a bit of a car crash to be honest.

It doesn’t really matter who Princess Diana was. Suffice to say her buttocks was not as pert as Pippa Middleton, she just contributed to various charities instead. Charities are like Children in Need, but they give the money to impoverished minorities, rather than a hedge fund for Terry Wogan’s minibar, per se. Like we say, it doesn’t really matter what charity is or indeed represents.

Here’s the lowdown on this Princess Diana biopic. Obviously, you all know how to type in ‘IMDB’ into Google, but you’re here now – and god, we may as well, right? The wonderlist for Completely Undocumented Life of Princess Diana is as follows:

NAOMI WATTS – PRINCESS DIANA
WHOEVER THE HELL WROTE ‘THE LIBERTINE?’ – SCREENWRITER

The power troupe of Hollywood there, in full force as per usual. The Breakfast Club of our hearts. The Emilio Estevez of our chronic loneliness. (Or ‘Paula Abdul’ if you want the clinical terminology)

Upon the casting, Naomi Watts said quite a large quantity of things about trophy polish and ‘must get a new diaphragm for Elton’s after-party’, but once we breezed past all that, the gist appears to be:

“It is such an honour to be able to play this iconic role – Princess Diana was loved across the world and I look forward to rising to the challenge of playing her on screen.”

Congratulations Naomi Watts! THIS IS ALL SO INCREDIBLY NECESSARY.

One mild concern – who’s going to play Cat Deeley in the crucial Paul Burrell performing terrifying the Chicago soundtrack with the vigour of a repressed 70s Gimp Candyman on Stars in Their Eyes scene?

Bit worried.

This is just a hunch, but we’re expecting Will Ferrell to be named as People‘s sexiest man alive next year.

Because, seriously, that man is loaded. He gets paid so much money. Too much money, in fact. And he doesn’t deserve a bloody penny of it. That’s according to Forbes, at least – Will Ferrell has come out on top of a list 0f Hollywood’s most overpaid stars. The list claims that Will Ferrell only earns his investors a return of $3.29 for every dollar he’s paid.

Why such a poor figure? Well, it’s partly because Land Of The Lost flopped, partly because comedy is notoriously difficult to sell around the world and partly because Will Ferrell has cold dead eyes and a rapist’s haircut. Possibly.

What makes a good actor? Commitment? Research? An ability to emotionally connect with an audience? No, you idiot. What makes a good actor is the comparative financial return that they make for investors based on their salary. That’s why Matt Damon is a great actor and Will Ferrell is the worst, stupidest, actor to have ever walked the Earth.

According to a new Forbes list, Will Ferrell is the most overpaid star in Hollywood because he only makes $3.29 back for each dollar he’s paid. Compare this to Naomi Watts, who earns investors $44 for every dollar she’s paid, and you can see what an underwhelming amount that is.

That’s not necessarily a helpful comparison – Naomi Watts’ figure is so much higher because she’s generally paid less than Will Ferrell, her films cost less to make and she rarely carries movies by herself, plus the fact that her name is a guarantee that you’re either going to see her boobs or the outline of at least one of her nipples through a skimpy top at some point – but it must still be a worry for Will. ABC reports:

Ferrell took first place largely due to the flop of his summer 2009 movie “Land of the Lost”, which Forbes said cost an estimated $100 million to make but earned just $65 million at box offices worldwide for movie studio Universal Pictures. The movie followed a disappointing $43 million box office for Ferrell’s 2008 outing “Semi-Pro”, and $128 million for “Step Brothers”.

We should probably point out that Will Ferrell was part of a list of overpaid actors, but we’re trying not to mention that because it’ll only depress Ferrell further. For instance, Ewan McGregor came second in the list. And when was the last time you ever got excited about a Ewan McGregor film? This year? Last year? This decade? Ewan McGregor is awful, and he’s still better value for money than Will Ferrell.

Other actors on the list include Tom Cruise – a man who only makes films so that people can tell him how rubbish he is in them – and Billy Bob Thornton. Billy Bob Thornton, for crying out loud. He can’t even do an interview properly, let alone a bloody film. Seriously, Will Ferrell must be feeling terrible.

There’s only one thing for it. To turn this around, Will Ferrell will have to start taking on Naomi Watts-style roles before it’s too late. He should sign up for impossibly minor roles in bad Clive Owen films, harrowing remakes of brutally amoral German horror films and London-set films where members of the Lord Of The Rings cast beat a large number Russian gangsters to death with their bare penises. That will definitely revive Will Ferrell’s fortunes as a Hollywood commodity.

We expect a consultancy fee for this advice.

Follow hecklerspray on Twitter

Grab your magic wands and swords – let’s hear it for the hottest fantasy film babes.

In our latest excuse to trawl the internet looking for pictures of sexy women, we have decided to focus our attentions on the strange world of fantasy.

Now, admittedly, this could be misinterpreted as an excuse to scour the net for porn.  Type in the words ‘fantasy film’ or ‘fantasy babes’ into your search engine of choice and you certainly get some interesting responses. But you’ll be delighted to know we stayed professional throughout, kept our greedy eyes off the one ring and stuck rigidly to our magical quest.

After all, this was more ‘dwarf’ than ‘dwarf porn’. However, it did raise an important issue: what exactly is a fantasy movie? Well, it’s actually a very difficult question to answer. We all kind of know what a fantasy film is, but we all add different movies into the equation.

For example: our superhero movies considered fantasy? Would you add horror movies? What about Star Wars? Anyway, to try and help us with our task we looked up several definitions. The best we could come up with was this:

‘Fantasy films are films with fantastic themes, usually involving magic, supernatural events, make-believe creatures, or exotic fantasy worlds. The genre is considered to be distinct from science fiction film and horror film, although the genres do overlap.’

But even this seemed a bit vague. So we decided to come up with our own rules, which basically meant we ditched horror and superhero movies, and let you argue among yourselves over the results.

For example, we decided Star Trek was science fiction, while Star Wars was more fantasy – for no reason whatsoever.

Oh, and no anime or cartoons. These are our rules, OK?

Anyway, enjoy!

25. Cherie Lunghi (Guenevere)
Movie: Excalibur

A must-see film – and not just because Cherie Lunghi and Helen Mirren get undressed.

24. Ann Darrow (Naomi Watts)
Movie: King Kong

Beauty killed the beast, but she at least kept us awake through the first hour and half of the movie.

23. Kira (Olivia Newton-John)
Movie: Xanadu

OK, the boss asked us to put this in. He has a thing for Olivia.

22. Jessica (Jenny Agutter)
Movie: Logan’s Run

You have to love Jenny Agutter. She loses her clothes more times than Lindsay Lohan and Paris Hilton combined.

21. Princess Lyssa (Lysette Anthony)
Movie: Krull

Krull was a terrible film, but Lysette gave a stand out performance.

20. Winona Ryder (Kim)
Movie: Edward Scissorhands
Everyone’s favourite cleptomaniac.

19. Andromeda (Judi Bowker)
Movie: Clash of the Titans

Did she do anything else?

18. Sorsha (Joanne Whalley)
Movie: Willow

Brit actress was one of the hottest actresses in Hollywood at one point – then she married Val Kilmer. What a Whalley.

17. Carmen Ibanez (Denise Richards)
Movie: Starship Troopers

16. River (Summer Glau)
Movie: Serenity

Whether it’s playing some kind of killing machine in Serenity or as a, err, killing machine in the Terminator series, Summer is a ray of sunshine.

15. Morena Baccarin
Movie: Serenity

One of the most attractive space whores ever.

14. Leeloo (Milla Jovovich)
Movie: The Fifth Element

It’s Milla time!

13. Maj. Eden Sinclair (Rhona Mitra)
Movie: Doomsday

The sexy British actress was the original Lara Croft model – need we say more?

12. Trinity (Carrie Ann-Moss)
Movie: Matrix trilogy

11. Princess Farah (Jane Seymour)
Movie: Sinbad and the Eye Of The Tiger

Jane Seymour about to get ravaged by a one-eyed monster.

10. Arwen (Liv Tyler)
Movies: Lord of the Rings Trilogy

Pointy ears or not – Liv is stunning.

9. Loana (Raquel Welch)
Movie: One Million Years BC

Welch’s blonde cavewoman certainly gave us the bone.

8. Gail (Rosario Dawson)
Movie: Sin City

Sin in the city with Rosario Dawson? Hell yeah!

6. Padme (Natalie Portman)
Movies: Star Wars prequels

OK, the films were pants, but at least we had something to look at apart from that abortion Jar Jar.

5. Queen Gorgo (Lena Headey)
Movie: 300

She really does rule.

4. Mikaela Banes (Megan Fox)
Movie: Transformers

What a fox.

3. Princess Leia (Carrie Fisher)
Movies: Star Wars trilogy

Gold bikini. Don’t think we need to add anything more.

2. Barbarella (Jane Fonda)
Movie: Barbarella

How good is that pic?

1. Jessica Alba
Movie: Sin City

A clear winner.

Retweet this article or follow hecklerspray on Twitter here

For a man who seemed disinterested in playing the suave spy James Bond, Clive Owen has seemingly decided to fill his CV with knock-off government agents ever since.

Which brings us to The International, a film that manages to pit Owen against a group of evil bankers (Watch out! They’ve got pens on chains!).

Owen plays hardened Interpol agent Louis Salinger, on the trail of a top bank with Naomi Watts‘ Assistant DA. both uncovering their dodgy dealings which are funding global terrorism. The film’s timing is somewhat unfortunate given the current climate (might as well kick the banks while they’re down) but fails to get its nails dirty anyway.

While splendid architecture and a more than suitable group of actors do their best to spice up this thriller, it plods along at such a slow pace that it fails to get any adrenaline pumping whatsoever. Owen is a one-note lead while Watts flutters in and out reflecting the dry, routine performance of Owen making a truly stale situation.

The film is so sluggish that when the action does kick in (in the form of a shoot-out in the Guggenheim Museum) that it feels out of place with the rest of the proceedings – not to mention quite implausible. When a gang of thugs run in with Uzi’s tearing up the place, the film takes an all of a sudden turn to the peculiar.

The International has a string of good ideas – it’s an intelligent thriller in fantastic locations mixed with a decent cast. Unfortunately it seems to get sucked into a black hole along with any pace, wit or excitement. It tries to create a web of intrigue but becomes a meandering mess, which means that anything interesting that does happen gets bogged down with the rest of the bland proceedings.

It’ll come as a disappointment to anyone who’s been clambering for an intelligent thriller given the wave of brain-free blockbusters this year has already thrown up. The International packs neither the intellect nor the brawn. Owen and Watts can do better and the only real positives one can say of The International is that it’s slightly more enjoyable than an evening spent filling out your tax returns.

Extras:

A scene-specific commentary and a host of features on architecture give some fascinating insight into the motivation behind the film, but won’t have you clambering to revisit the movie. Also included is an extended scene with Owen and Watts further displaying their lacklustre chemistry.

You! Follow hecklerspray on Twitter!

As good as The Birds was, we thought that it lacked two main things – old-school charm and an oblique criticism of the government.

So thank heavens that George Clooney is apparently close to starring in a remake of The Birds. If reports are to be believed then George Clooney is all set to take on the role of Mitch Bremner – the man who doesn’t die and gets away safely at the end of the movie – in next year’s The Birds remake, to probably be directed by Martin Campbell.

Of course, 45 years have passed since the original, so George Clooney’s version will need some updating. For instance, since climate change is such a worry, The Birds remake will be given a more ecological bent. And instead of having birds in it, it’ll be about plants that kill people for no reason. And Mark Wahlberg‘s going to star in it. It’ll be excellent, really.

George Clooney has gained such a position of importance in Hollywood lately that he can more or less pick and choose the movies that he wants to be in. That’s why the only films you’ll ever see George Clooney star in are either a) clever pieces of slightly non-commercial social commentary or b) stupid films that reinforce his self-proclaimed Mr Smooth image.

And for the life of us, we can’t work out which one of these categories a remake of The Birds would fall into. According to reports, George Clooney is close to signing on to star in the forthcoming remake of The Birds alongside Naomi Watts.

Naomi Watts we can understand – between King Kong and The Ring and Funny Games, that girl loves pointless remakes so much that she’d probably play everyone in a remake of High School Musical 3 tomorrow if you asked her nicely enough – but George Clooney? Apparently so. Metro reports:

Hollywood legend George Clooney has been tipped to take the lead role in a remake of the classic horror film The Birds. And Rod Taylor, who starred in Alfred Hitchcock’s original 1983 movie, is delighted at the prospect of George taking on the role. Rod told the Daily Express: “I often cringe when I hear mention of remakes but I’ll hold judgement, especially since I’ve been told Clooney’s the favourite.”

We can only pray that George Clooney’s remake of The Birds will be half as good as the 1998 remake of Psycho, but it probably won’t be because Vince Vaughn isn’t going to play all of the birds. Unless he is, in which case we’re in.

Oh, and the bit above where we mentioned the birds going on the attack as revenge for humans messing up the environment? That’s apparently true, keeping within the confines of the law which states that all vaguely nature-based movie remakes must feature humans as the real monsters.

Speaking of which, isn’t it time that someone did a remake of The Perfect Storm where George Clooney enrages the sea by accidentally catching a dolphin in a tuna net? We’d definitely watch that, but only on the proviso that it ended with Clooney getting completely Steve Irwined by an army of swordfish.