If you throw a rock out into the future pop culture zeitgest – not a Castle Rock, but just a regular rock – you're going to hit a large handful of Stephen King TV and movie adaptations that are currently in various stages of production. From projects whose releases are imminent, such as The Stand's new miniseries on the rebranded Paramount+ streaming service, to projects that are still off in the distance, King is going to be everywhere again in the coming years. However, it looks like the highly anticipated Eyes of the Dragon TV series isn't happening anymore, at least not yet.

Back in May 2019, it was announced that Hulu had won out a rights battle to adapt the '80s novel Eyes of the Dragon, which is essentially Stephen King's only major fantasy work outside of the lengthy Dark Tower series. With Fox 21 on tap as the studio, Abraham Lincoln, Vampire Hunter author and Lego Batman co-screenwriter Seth Grahame-Smith was on board to pen the pilot and serve as showrunner. Unfortunately, Grahame-Smith revealed to The Kingcast that Hulu decided not to move forward with the Eyes of the Dragon series. Here's how he explained the bad news:

First, it's interesting to note that there was a specific stipulation that Hulu couldn't just dip its toes in the water with a pilot order, and that it was all or nothing. Second, it's wild to think about a Stephen King TV show getting the kind of budget that usually gets reserved for high-profile Netflix series. But it was apparently that mega-budget that caused Hulu to balk at bringing Eyes of the Dragon to life.

Understandably, Seth Grahame-Smith was bummed to get that news back. Here's how he explained his reaction:

Seth Grahame-Smith also revealed that the goal was to get the great Sam Rockwell involved to star as the powerful wizard Flagg, although the name probably would have changed, since Sony Pictures owns the "Randall Flagg" moniker through its Dark Tower rights. Still, that casting would have been pitch-perfect. Can we get Rockwell in all the Stephen King adaptations?

While the plot isn't exactly easy to sum up, Eyes of the Dragon centers partly on Flagg, the devious magician to King Roland. (Those names are no doubt familiar to Dark Tower fans.) Once the queen becomes pregnant with a second son and brother to future king Peter, Flagg puts a plan in place to eliminate the throne's heir and manipulate the younger brother in a lengthy attempt to gain control of the kingdom. It definitely would have been wild to see it all come together, considering how lofty and effects-heavy it would have been.

Unlike just about everything else in Stephen King's massive bibliography, Eyes of the Dragon was a purposeful diversion from the horror genre. The whole point was to write something that could be read by his then-young children, such as current horror authors Owen King and Locke & Key writer Joe Hill. Though it has amassed its own sizable fandom over the years, critics and fans were initially not so pumped about the change in direction, and the backlash against it inspired King to go on to write Misery, so it was worth it for everyone.

While Eyes of the Dragon isn't happening at Hulu anymore, it's certainly possible that another streaming service or linear network could step up and bring it to life. Apple TV+ was reportedly in the bidding war against Hulu at the time, so maybe someone there is interested in footing the bill for it. Seth Grahame-Smith said it may get resurrected for a feature, or as a miniseries somewhere, but for right now, it's floating with Pennywise's victims.

Stay tuned to CinemaBlend for more information on any possible Eyes of the Dragon adaptations, and be sure to bookmark our Fall TV 2020 premiere schedule to see what new and returning shows are on the way soon.

Mark Hamill may be best known for his onscreen role as the heroic Luke Skywalker in the Star Wars franchise, but he is also a prolific voice actor who has voiced great villains over the years like Firelord Ozai in Avatar: The Last Airbender and Batman’s nemesis, the Joker, in DC’s animated movies and series. Now he is lending his voice to another iconic character, this one belonging to the horror genre, Child’s Play’s Chucky.

CinemaBlend’s own Eric Eisenberg spoke with Seth Grahame-Smith, one of the producers on the upcoming reboot/remake of Child’s Play in an exclusive interview, and he spoke about how Mark Hamill really went above and beyond to make his Chucky special. Seth said:

Wow, Mark Hamill was not messing around, he really approached Chucky with all the preparation that he would a live-action character and perhaps more so. Seth Grahame-Smith sounds as though he was both surprised and impressed at how Mark Hamill viewed the role as an acting challenge, and the level of homework that he put in to develop the voice for Chucky.

Even before he had recorded a single line of dialogue, Mark Hamill had already watched all of the films in the Child’s Play/Chucky franchise and was working on multiple voices for his iteration of the character. All of this for a killer doll; that’s what you get with a true pro voice actor like Mark Hamill.

I guess it should be unsurprising he puts this much thought into his characters given how vocal he has been about the direction of Luke Skywalker in the Star Wars Sequel Trilogy. He isn't just reading a script, he has an idea in his head of who his characters are and what their story should be. All that hard work paid off too, as Seth Grahame-Smith continued:

It sounds like Mark Hamill knew that he had the unenviable task of taking on an iconic character that already has a signature voice. Mark Hamill obviously wasn’t going to try and imitate Brad Dourif who has voiced Chucky in all the previous films and is the voice of Chucky to this point.

With that in mind, Mark Hamill really wanted to put his own spin on Chucky and work hard to make sure that this new Chucky was memorable and unique and that he sounded the way he does for a reason that is informed by his character.

This makes sense too considering that the Chucky in the new Child’s Play isn’t a doll with the spirit of a serial killer in him. This new Chucky is more a Black Mirror-esque killer A.I. that turns smart home products into tools to kill. So he should have his own unique voice and Mark Hamill took that responsibility very seriously.

We haven’t heard (or seen) much from Mark Hamill’s Chucky in the trailers so far, and they seem to be really building him up. If Seth Grahame-Smith’s comments are anything to go by, the famous actor disappeared and really became Chucky for Child's Play. And given Mark Hamill’s track record, we have no reason to doubt that he will be a worthy torchbearer for this horror icon.

Child’s Play slashes its way into theaters on June 21. Check out our 2019 Release Schedule to see all the movies headed your way as we enter the summer movie season.

Sure, Game of Thrones coined the phrase, “What is dead may never die.” But that concept can also apply to just about every major horror franchise, as classic killers from Freddy to Jason appear to die, but always figure out how to return to create chaos. This is fine. Audiences WANT to spend more time with these terrifying threats. But it means that storytellers have to find fresh ways to bring the beloved horror threats back, and Child’s Play thinks it figured something out.

We are getting a new Child’s Play movie on June 21, from producers Seth Grahame-Smith and David Katzenberg. The new movie will serve as both a remake and a reboot of the classic Child’s Play franchise, which followed a doll named Chucky who was possessed by the spirit of deranged serial killer Charles Lee Ray. In the new movie, the team found a new way to revive Chucky, and detoured away from the serial-killer spirit inside of the doll.

It’s a major switch to the doll’s origin, and at a recent press event for the film, producer Grahame-Smith told CinemaBlend:

As the conversation continued – and also, as is made evident in the recent Child’s Play trailer that we are including below – the new Chucky is driven more by demonic Artificial Intelligence, and not by the spirit of a serial killer. This appears to give Chucky the ability to control more technology, as the new trailer appears to show him taking over drones, controlling power tools, and more.

Child’s Play producer Seth Grahame-Smith elaborated to CinemaBlend on the origin angle of Chucky in the new movie, explaining:

As the conversation played out, CinemaBlend learned that Child’s Play isn’t just changing Chucky, at his core. It’s also making changes to the boy who befriends Chucky, thereby changing their relationship. Andy in this new movie is older than he was in the 1988 Child’s Play, which kind of means that he’s past the point of playing with dolls. Seth Grahame-Smith assures fans that the movie will address that immediately, and goes on to say:

All in all, it’s sounding like the team behind the new Child’s Play went above and beyond to make their story stand apart from previous versions of the Chucky story, hoping to make improvements while also luring a fresh audience into this world. Remakes and reboots aren’t always guaranteed successes, but it sure is looking like the new Child’s Play has updated the look and feel of Chucky, as evidenced by this most recent trailer.

Child’s Play will hack and slash its way into a competitive summer blockbuster frame, arriving on June 21 where it will go toe-to-AI-toe with Toy Story 4 (a totally different story about toys with emotions), and the pending Annabelle Comes Home. The competition for the horror dollar will be intense, but because of the major changes introduced into this new Child’s Play take, we think it looks interesting enough to lure both fans of the original franchise, and newcomers looking for creative, never before seen thrills.

What do you think of the changes made to the new Child’s Play? Does it make you excited to see it? Weigh in down below in the comments section. Maybe you’ll make a new best friend while you are down there.

It's certainly news whenever it happens on a high-profile project, but a movie losing its director isn't exactly a rare occurrence in Hollywood. Clashes between creativity and business cause conflict, and sometimes it's all too much for a filmmaker to work through. When this happens early enough in the production process, it's not too big a deal, as a new person and with their own vision can be brought on-board to right the ship and keep things sailing smoothly.

Unfortunately, these aren't the kind of conflicts we've been watching occur behind the scenes of the DC Extended Universe. With both 2017's Wonder Woman and 2018's The Flash, Warner Bros. has found itself in a situation where they have been forced to look for a new director following months of pre-production work. For now there are only two examples, but it's most definitely not a great start for a franchise that producer Deborah Snyder has previously described as being "filmmaker-driven."

Rick Famuyiwa's departure from The Flash is the more recent example, and the original trade report about the split highlights the biggest problem with the situation (on beyond losing Famuyiwa, whose previous film, Dope, demonstrated incredible potential). While the project was still in fine shape after it lost Seth Grahame-Smith from the director's chair earlier this year, Variety's piece on the situation draws comparisons to Patty Jenkins' entry into Wonder Woman and notes that "With pre-production so far along, change[sic] course now will be a tough hurdle to overcome, while still meeting deadlines." Basically, whoever winds up taking Famuyiwa's place likely won't have a blank slate and the opportunity to tell the exact Flash story he or she wants to tell; but instead will probably be molding blueprints created by the guy who had the job before them. A degree of this admittedly comes with the territory when it comes to franchise filmmaking, but it's the key difference between James Gunn being given the keys to Guardians of the Galaxy from Day One, and Peyton Reed taking over Ant-Man from Edgar Wright (both are good movies, but the former is inarguably the much better put-together film).

While it may be Warner Bros. ultimate goal to have the DC Extended Universe be a more filmmaker-driven franchise, the evidence we've seen so far suggests that at this stage there is an overwhelming amount of studio interference. This is demonstrated not only in the creative differences that drove Michelle MacLaren and Rick Famuyiwa away from Wonder Woman and Flash, respectively, but even in the fact that extended cuts exist of both Batman v Superman: Dawn of Justice and Suicide Squad - suggesting there was some tussling in the editing room on both productions. When you toss in the rumors that James Wan hasn't been super happy with the way things are running behind-the-scenes of Aquaman, and the fact that Zack Snyder's Justice League got a last minute tonal change in response to franchise criticisms, there is a picture painted of the next two years of DCEU movies potentially lacking in specific vision and direction -- and that doesn't exactly get us super pumped up.

Given the way things are going in the DC Extended Universe -- with Man of Steel not exactly proving to be Iron Man, and the poor critical reaction to Batman v Superman: Dawn of Justice and Suicide Squad hurting the brand -- it's understandable why the studio would want to start taking a more hands-on approach with the films and help guide the wheel, particularly with so many major release dates already carved out. The problem is that this is clearly interfering with both the ideas and expectations of the filmmakers that they're hiring, and these issues have a tendency and clear history of affecting what ends up being the finished product. It is, of course, entirely possible that everything will find its way to work out, and we're definitely hoping that the next few years are packed with great new comic book movies -- but the recent news definitely stokes our concerns about the franchise.

Now that Batman V Superman: Dawn of Justice has hit theaters, we have our sights set upon the upcoming solo adventures and introductions for new members of the Justice League into the DCEU. One such character is Ezra Miller's take on The Flash. However, Barry Allen’s silver screen solo adventure seems to have stumbled at the starting block with the recent departure of director Seth Grahame-Smith from the project. While this would often be cause for concern, this newfound development has me breathing a serious sigh of relief for the future of The Flash solo movie.

A few days ago, the news broke that Seth Grahame-Smith had left The Flash due to unspecified "creative differences" with Warner Bros. It’s unclear exactly why he left the project, but I personally am of the mindset that this could ultimately be a stroke of good fortune for The Flash. One look at Grahame-Smith’s resume will make one thing abundantly clear: he may have bitten off more than he could chew with The Flash. His only work as a director came in the form of two episodes of MTV's The Hard Times of RJ Berger, and his most notable writing credits are Pride, and Prejudice, and Zombies, Abraham Lincoln: Vampire Hunter, and Dark Shadows. I'm not here to knock his overall talents (really), but his hit-or-miss history as a writer, coupled with his utter inexperience as a director, made him a questionable choice to direct The Flash from the very beginning.

Rather than a setback, this development should feel more like an opportunity for DC to correct course with a reliable filmmaker. At this point, Warner Bros. and DC need to carefully choose which directors helm their most important projects. With Man of Steel and Batman V Superman: Dawn of Justice, they seem to have learned the lesson that the wrong director for the wrong project can completely derail a film. Sure, the studio's keeping Zack Snyder in the DCEU, but he’s already showing signs of a loosened grip on the overall vision for the universe. Ben Affleck, James Wan (who is apparently not leaving Aquaman), and even Patty Jenkins are the sort of prestigious names needed at this stage of the game.

Bringing in filmmakers with relatively little experience on big-budget blockbusters has often yielded amazing results for studios. Just look at the work done by the Russos on the last two Captain America movies, or Colin Trevorrow’s work on Jurassic World. However, for every dynamic Russo duo, there’s a Josh Trank and his abhorrent work on Fantastic Four. Considering the shaky ground that the DCEU currently finds itself on, Warner Bros. needs to tread lightly and not swing for the fences with directors. Perhaps more importantly, we need to remember that WB still has time to fill Seth Grahame-Smith's spot before The Flash enters production; a director leaving a project is never great news, but we should count ourselves thankful that it happened sooner rather than later.

Am I saying that Seth Grahame-Smith was an inherently bad choice for The Flash from the get-go? Of course not. There exists a very real possibility that he could’ve knocked the film out of the park. That being said, the DCEU needs to place its bets on reliable directors until it finds solid footing. Then, and only then, can it start to take risks with the directors it employs. We will keep you up to date regarding this situation as more news becomes available to us, The Flash is currently slated to sprint its way to theaters on March 16, 2018.

Warner Bros. has been making strides with finding directors for upcoming DC solo films over the past year. After Michelle MacLaren exited Wonder Woman due to creative differences, Patty Jenkins was hired to replace her. Then Furious 7’s James Wan was tapped to direct Aquaman. Now the word is that the studio is looking at Pride and Prejudice and Zombies writer Seth Grahame-Smith to tackle The Flash.

According to THR, Grahame-Smith is currently in negotiations to helm the Scarlet Speedster’s first solo movie. If hired, this will be his second foray into the world of DC, after penning The Lego Batman Movie. Besides Pride and Prejudice and Zombies, Grahame-Smith’s other notable work includes writing Abraham Lincoln: Vampire Hunter (and its film adaptation) and the screenplay for Dark Shadows, but his only directing credits are two episodes of the MTV comedy The Hard Times of RJ Beger. Grahame-Smith is also lined up to write Beetlejuice 2 and produce the Gremlins remake.

This is the latest step to getting The Flash moving forward. Last year during the DC film slate unveiling, The Stanford Prison Experiment’s Ezra Miller was hired to play the Fastest Man Alive. Then, six months ago, Warner Bros. hired The LEGO Movie duo of Phil Lord and Chris Miller to write a treatment for The Flash. Some wondered if this meant they might direct the feature as well, but considering that they’re helming the Han Solo Star Wars movie, no doubt there wasn’t enough time for them to direct The Flash as well (not to mention they’re also writing the animated Spider-Man movie). As for Grahame-Smith, he’s obviously well-versed in the world of fantasy, so it wouldn’t be much of a stretch to jump onto a movie about a young man who can run at incredible speeds. Still, choosing someone who's a first-timer at directing movies is a curious move.

The Flash will feature Miller as Barry Allen, a forensic scientist who is imbued with super speed after being struck by lightning in his lab. Flash will be one of the leading heroes in Justice League: Part One, and it’s been rumored that he’ll also cameo next year in Batman v Superman: Dawn of Justice. Currently The CW has a Flash TV series starring Grant Gustin as Barry, and if the show is still on when the movie arrives, it will be in the middle of its fourth season. That means audiences will be seeing two live-action versions of a major DC superhero in 2018, similar to how Smallville and Superman Returns overlapped in 2006.

Said to be one of the more unique entries in the DC Extended Universe, The Flash hits theaters on March 3, 2018.

Though we've been hearing about Tim Burton's Beetlejuice 2 for years now, the truth is that we really don't know much about the film's plot. Of course, we will see the return of Michael Keaton's titular ghost with the most, and reports have even confirmed the return of Winona Ryder's Lydia Deetz, but any details beyond that are a mystery. As a result, any new info is kind of newsworthy, including the time period setting for the film.

The Hollywood Reporter recently had the chance to sit down with Beetlejuice 2 screenwriter Seth Grahame-Smith, and while he couldn't say much about what we can expect from the sequel or the plot, he did confirm that the film will be set in present day. The trade doesn't have any direct quotes from the filmmaker, but he also apparently confirmed that the film will be taking a Michael Keaton-suggested "less is more" approach with the eponymous character (noting that the original didn't have the obnoxious, disgusting freelance bio-exorcist appear until the middle of the story).

So what exactly does Beetlejuice 2 being set in present day actually mean? It's somewhat hard to say. Part of the charm in the aesthetic of the original is that it has a strong timeless quality, with Tim Burton's bizarre style suggesting that the story could very well be taking place on a whole other planet. So does this mean that the sequel will be a bit more modernized? It will be interesting to see if the setting has any really significant effect on the story outside of explaining why all of the characters are older.

Word of Seth Grahame-Smith's involvement with Beetlejuice 2 first popped up all the way back in 2011 when he was hired by Warner Bros. to work on the screenplay. The time since then, however, has been a bit rough for the screenwriter. His first collaboration with Tim Burton, 2012's Dark Shadows, was torn apart by critics and wound up flopping hard (partially thanks to it being released one week after Joss Whedon's The Avengers). A few months later, cinemas saw the release of Timur Bekmambetov's Abraham Lincoln: Vampire Hunter - a film adapted by Grahme-Smith based on a novel he wrote - and that too experienced the same fate of its box office predecessor. The performances of these two projects haven't seemed to phase either Tim Burton or the folks at Warner Bros., as both still seem to have confidence in his vision for Beetlejuice 2.

Those starting to really look forward to the Beetlejuice sequel may not want to start holding their breath just yet. As of one month ago, Michael Keaton was still telling people that the script is still being worked on, and Tim Burton currently has Miss Peregrine's Home for Peculiar Children lined up as his next project. So when will we actually get to see the present-day set Beetlejuice 2? I would put my bets on sometime in 2017.

Following the smashing success that was the spirited black comedy Beetlejuice, talk of a sequel predictably began. Thankfully, the proposed Beetlejuice Goes Hawaiian never came to fruition. (I love me some Beetlejuice, but that sounded insanely terrible.) But we have seen the last of Tim Burton's ghost with the most!

Back in 2011, Pride and Prejudice and Zombies author Seth Grahame-Smith resurrected talk of a Beetlejuice sequel. In early 2012, Tim Burton bolstered the project's prospects among fans by confirming that Grahame-Smith's sequel had his blessing, and that Michael Keaton was slated to return as the moldering menace in the cartoonish striped suit. And we might have our first look at Keaton (or someone) in costume thanks to Grahame-Smith's Instagram feed!

Admittedly, this image is not a lot to go on. I tried to get all Sherlock Holmes on it, but as devoted a Keaton fan as I am, I can't comfortably confirm that this is him. Actually, I have a sneaking suspicion because of the strange texture of the striped suit that Grahame-Smith is holding up a Beetlejuice action figure and using some tricky forced perspective. If that's the case, what does this tweet mean? Is there any relevance to the computer screen? Is Beetlejuice's arm blocking the crucial details of the sequel's title page? Or is Grahame-Smith just toying with us? (Pun intended.)

We just don't know! But we do know that Grahame-Smith, who recently scripted Abraham Lincoln: Vampire Hunter and Burton's Dark Shadows adaptation, will be picking up the plot 26 years after the first film's musical finale. Whether this plot will include the Deetz and/or Maitland families is (frustratingly) unknown.

Maybe if we all chant "Betelgeuse Betelgeuse Betelgeuse, " in unison this project will finally kick into gear. Ready? On three…

Writer Seth Grahame-Smith has not had the greatest run in Hollywood thus far in his brief career. The adaptation of his book Pride & Prejudice and Zombies continues to be stuck deep in the bowels of development hell, and both Dark Shadows (which was based on a script he wrote) and Abraham Lincoln: Vampire (which was based on another one of his novels) were both disappointments to critics and at the box office. And yet now he's been hired to polish one of the biggest projects currently in development.

The Hollywood Reporter has learned that 20th Century Fox has hired Grahame-Smith to do some work on the upcoming Fantastic Four reboot that is currently getting prepared for a 2015 release date. The news about the film, which is reportedly one of the highest priority projects at the studio, comes right on the heels of reports from late last week that said X-Men: First Class director Matthew Vaughn has boarded as one of the producers. The author-turned-screenwriter will be touching up the script by first time writer Jeremy Slater. Josh Trank, who hit it big with Chronicle last year, is directing the film.

The trade notes that the new cinematic version of the superhero team with be "taking a grounded superhero and sci-fi approach" and that there are plans to incorporate many more elements from the comics and deep mythology, which includes Doctor Doom, Galactus, and the alien races known as the Kree and the Skrull.

Fantastic Four will be in theaters March 6, 2015.

Before Tim Burton made Johnny Depp his go-to leading man, his recurring star was '80s everyman Michael Keaton. Together the pair made two darkly fun Batman movies, and the delightfully demented poltergeist comedy Beetlejuice in which Keaton famously played the eponymous "ghost with the most." Keaton's game goofiness and aloof appeal easily made him a fan favorite. So when word got out that Pride and Prejudice and Zombies author Seth Grahame-Smith was developing a sequel to the 1988 adventure, there was a less-than-shocking outcry. Cinema Blend's own Eric Eisenberg surmised the feelings of Beetlejuice devotees succinctly, saying, "if they do move forward with the sequel, let's hope that they can bring back Michael Keaton, Winona Ryder and Tim Burton. It simply can't be done without them."

Thankfully, this sentiment was largely echoed by Grahame-Smith and his producing partner David Katzenberg, who assured anxious fans no sequel would be made unless the script met with the approval of Burton, and unless it starred—not featured with a lame cameo appearance, but starred—Michael Keaton. Grahame-Smith has insisted Keaton's involvement would be key as the premise he's dabbling with is, "a true continuation 26 years later." As to what this bad boy of the afterlife is up to 26 years A.D. (After Deetzes), that remains to be seen. However, MTV has revealed that Grahame-Smith, who scripted Burton's soon-to-hit Dark Shadows adaptation, has discussed a Beetlejuice sequel with Burton, who expressed enthusiasm about the project, saying:

As Burton has been revisiting his past works lately, adapting his 1984 short "Frankenweenie" into a full-length feature, it seems a good possibility that he'd be willing to return to the world of gargantuan sand worms and prison-striped formal wear. When pressed for details on a possible plotline, Burton replied he hasn't seen a script, but he feels confident Keaton would nail his reprisal, "Michael was so great in it. I'm sure he'd strangely tap right back into it."

As someone who has long lamented Keaton's absence from the spotlight, I have to say I'd love to see a Beetlejuice sequel if only to watch Keaton in a leading role once again. As far as Grahame-Smith is concerned, it's too soon to say how his interpretation of the could-be franchise would turn out. After the surprise success of his cheeky take on Jane Austen—which is actually pretty clever in its execution despite an annoyingly low reading level—he got his first chance to script a screenplay, adapting his historical-fantasy novel Abraham Lincoln: Vampire Hunter, which Burton's producing. This star-studded romp and Burton's Dark Shadows are both slated to open later this year, and their successes or failures could determine whether or not Beetlejuice will score a second life.

When I reported last month that David Katzenberg and Seth Grahame-Smith had signed a two year deal with Warner Bros. and were possibly going to work on a sequel to Tim Burton's 1988 classic Beetlejuice, I closed out my article by saying, "let's hope that they can bring back Michael Keaton, Winona Ryder and Tim Burton. It simply can't be done without them." That appears to be a sentiment shared by Katzenberg and Grahame-Smith, for at least two of the names, anyway.

EW recently had the chance to go behind the scenes of Katz­Smith Productions and pick up a few details about the possible Beetlejuice 2, and one of the things that stressed was that a) they desire Burton's approval to move forward with the project and that b) it won't be made unless Keaton is available to play the title role. Starting with Katzenberg saying that they would not be remaking the movie (thank god), Grahame-Smith talked about how the project would operate, as the original was released more than two decades ago. "The movie has to be Michael Keaton as Beetlejuice, and it’s a true continuation 26 years later. Not just throwing him in as a cameo going, 'Hey, it’s me. I endorse this movie.' We’re not there yet [with Keaton] because we don’t have a film to present to him."

I'm still against the idea of another Beetlejuice movie (just let great movies be) but I will admit that Michael Keaton signing on would likely make me change my opinion almost instantaneously. It's truly unfair that Keaton doesn't get the same amount of work that he used to get and, outside of Batman, Beetlejuice was his most iconic role. If they can actually get him interested, they would get my interest as well.

I think it's officially time to give up on Pride and Prejudice and Zombies. It was fine when Natalie Portman decided she didn't want to star. It was fine when David O. Russell decided he didn't want to direct. It was fine when Russell's replacement, Mike White, decided he didn't want to direct either. But now it looks like the project has lost it's third director and I think it's time to just give it up.

According to Deadline, Craig Gillespie, who has been attached to direct the Seth Grahame-Smith adaptation since April, has left his poster as helmer of the project. In August there was a rumor that the director had left the project, but it was quickly debunked by Lionsgate, the studio behind the film. According to the new report Gillespie left peacefully, but his departure came as a result of multiple issues, including who to cast in the movie.

But it hasn't just been directors who have been turning down the project. In addition to Natalie Portman, other actresses who turned down offers to play heroine Elizabeth Bennett include Mia Wasikowska, Scarlett Johansson, Emma Stone and Blake Lively. While the story doesn't explicitly say what the next step will be, it's suggested that Lionsgate may turn to an agency and pick up a director and cast as part of a package deal.

In the meantime, Abraham Lincoln: Vampire Hunter, a film based on another book by Grahame-Smith, has wrapped production and is on schedule to be released on June 22nd of next year. Pride and Prejudice and Zombies may have been the book that launched the author's popularity, but it might be time to just let the dream die.

I know there's a lot of good to be found in quirky literary revisits like Pride, Prejudice & Zombies or author Seth Grahame-Smith's newest, Abraham Lincoln: Vampire Hunter. But when the trick is to take an author's familiar prose or a person's life story and throw in supernatural creatures, is it really going to translate that well to the screen? Twice?

Tim Burton is apparently counting on it. Not long after Natalie Portman optioned Pride, Prejudice & Zombies, Burton and Russian director Timur Bekmambetov have plans to produce Abraham Lincoln: Vampire Hunter, which was published yesterday (you can see a "trailer" for the book here). Apparently Lincoln's mother was killed by supernatural creatures when he was young, so his willingness to beat the South during the Civil War wasn't motivated by slavery or states' rights, but a desire to crush the vampires who lived there.

The Deadline Hollywood article also includes the detail that David O. Russell is looking to direct Pride, Prejudice & Zombies, which is news to me-- and surprising, given that his recent film Nailed still hasn't managed to see the light of day. With the Zombies movie, at least we have a classic TV movie version and feature version of the book to keep us satisfied. But there's still never been a truly great biopic of Abraham Lincoln, and as Steven Spielberg's pet Lincoln project gets continually delayed/put off, it's a little heartbreaking that the vampire version will get to the screen first.