Gerard Butler may have once sported the greatest eight-pack in the history of mankind, but his punishment for it (besides all the puking and crying I assume happened in the shaping of it) will be to answer questions about a 300 spin-off until the end of his career.

While at the Toronto Film Festival, where many of my lucky colleagues are, Butler was asked again about the franchise potential of 299 dead Spartans by Superhero Hype. "I've heard some backroom chatter, but nothing more, so I don't know if it would be a sequel or a prequel. I don't want say anymore than that, because I really don't know. I haven't read anything. I can't see it myself -- sequel for me absolutely not, but I just mean the idea generally, I'm really not sure which way they would go with that."

He was asked this same question at RocknRolla's ComicCon junket, and his answer then suggested he'd actually been approached with a more solid idea. "No. They mentioned it, and we'll leave it at that. It's a very interesting idea, I have to say."

By "interesting" idea, I keep imagining that the story involves King Leonidas being resurrected by a necromancer to fight an unspeakable evil. (That's actually going to be written into a spec, I just know it.) But honestly, it really must suck to be Butler sometimes. He's got his own production shingle, he's going to be directed by Frank Darabont any day now, and everyone just wants to know when Leonidas is going to be resurrected by a necromancer.

Why doesn't anyone direct the question to Frank Miller? He's supposed to be the one writing it.

(Thanks to MoviesOnline for their transcript of the RocknRolla junket -- I still curse my tape recorder.)

A double Academy Award winner is going back to the future. Denzel Washington will star in the post-apocalyptic drama Book of Eli, to be directed by Albert and Allen Hughes, according to Variety. He will play "a lone hero in a not-too-distant apocalyptic future who must fight across America to bring society the knowledge that could be the key to its redemption." Sounds like the best of all possible worlds, doesn't it? Denzel as an intellectual action hero of the future.

Denzel has been resolutely dealing with modern-day problems for the last decade, so maybe he felt like a change of pace. As far as I can tell, the only time that Denzel's tipped his toe into future waters was back in 1995 with Brett Leonard's Virtuosity. In that movie, set just four years into the future, he faced off against a virtual reality Russell Crowe. How far into the future will Book of Eli be set? Who gets the blame for the apocalypse? Will this be a tale of weary, wary survivors or vengeful warriors? And what's in that book, anyway?

Amazingly, this will be the first feature from The Hughes Brothers since 2001's graphic novel adapatation From Hell. They'll be working from a script originally written by Gary Whitta (the two new Akira films) and re-written by Anthony Peckham (Clint Eastwood's upcoming The Human Factor and Sherlock Holmes for Warner Bros). Joel Silver is on board as one of the producers. Filming begins in January.

Dark Knight Spoiler Warning ...

No more speculation, no more talk of ret-con and false funerals -- Harvey Dent is officially 100% dead. It comes straight from the mouth of Aaron Eckhart, who revealed his character's fate in no uncertain terms to ComingSoon.net "He is dead as a door nail. He ain't coming back baby!"

And lest you doubt that he knows the mind of Christopher Nolan, well, Eckhart asked him whether Two-Face would ever be coming back. "I asked Chris [Nolan] that question and he goes, "You're dead" before I could even get the question out of my mouth. 'Hey Chris, am I?' 'You're dead!' 'Alright, cool.'" There's no chance it will be rewritten or retconned, as he was never even contracted for a third film. "No, I'm not coming back. I think unfortunately, Heath [Ledger] was supposed to go on and that didn't work out. I'm nobody. I'm a cog. I have no say over this sort of stuff. I'm sure that there's so many other characters that they could whip together. I heard Angelina Jolie was going to be Catwoman or something like that. I thought that was a great idea. I'd like to be in that one."

Dent's death has now been confirmed via the novelization, the script, the actor, and the director. Though I would say that's as definitive as it gets, fanboys and girls across this great Internet refuse to accept it -- they just believe in Harvey Dent too much. But since we do live in a world where no comic character stays dead, where 299 Spartans can rise again, and Chev Chelios survives a fall from a helicopter, I guess you can hardly blame them.

The date has been set for Warner Bros and Fox to go head to head -- and it should soothe the fearful. According to The Hollywood Reporter, the studios will be going before the judge on January 6th. There's plenty of time, even at a snail's pace, for the issue to be resolved before the March 6th opening. (It's like the court is going along with the movie marketing -- we'll get a video journal the same day. There really is no such thing as bad publicity in Tinseltown!)

Furthermore, U.S. District Court Judge Gary Allan Feess says that Fox shouldn't attempt to file a preliminary injunction against Warners to stop the release of the film because the issues surrounding the case were too complex to be solved in an interim basis. Instead, both studios are being ordered to put their cases together, and start expedited discovery and depositions. This thing could get quite big -- as the New York Times pointed out, Paramount, Legendary Pictures, and even Universal could get hauled into it, alongside Lawrence Gordon, who's really the man in question in all this.

And remember, this is if it actually makes it to court. This could easily be settled before Christmas, with Warners handing over a nice chunk of The Dark Knight change just to be done with it. (How appropriate that Bruce Wayne help out other costumed vigilantes.) It depends how fierce the studio is feeling, and how certain they are of their case -- but all signs point to you keeping your March 6th moviegoing plans.

You really have to feel bad for the cast and crew on this one, though. All that happy buzz of ComicCon panels and promo posters squashed under a heap of legalese. Oh well, at least Fox can't take away what we've already been given. Check out our Watchmen gallery below.

There's an interesting trend going on in film right now -- everyone is grabbing up classic characters of pulp and adventure literature right and left. We've got Conan, Sherlock Holmes, John Carter, and now Tarzan. There's a sociological study in here for an aspiring student.

Tarzan has seen many a reboot, and there's always whispers of someone wanting to make a new version. This current project has been floating around since 2003 (the same year Warner Bros tried to bring Tarzan to television and the modern city), and once boasted Guillermo del Toro's name. Now, according to Variety, it has landed in the hands of Stephen Sommers, who is cowriting a script with Stuart Beattie. Beattie boasts some impressive credits, like Pirates of the Caribbean and Collateral, so the Lord of the Apes might be in quite capable hands.

But Sommers' movies tend to fall a bit short of expectation, to put it kindly. And I mean it kindly, from someone who does actually own Van Helsing -- I could write a long defense as to why, but it really just comes down to liking Hugh Jackman and David Wenham a lot. But, in my defense, I reportedly audibly booed the ending when I saw it at the theater, though I can't remember if it was because they so visibly CGI'd pants on a naked post-werewolf Jackman, or the floating head of Kate Beckinsale. I think it was the floating head, but knowing me, it may have been the pants.

So, while I want to think about how cool a new Tarzan movie could be, what hot dude they'll put in a loincloth, how feisty Jane will be, I can't. Because I'm picturing the whole thing saddled with the same CGI Sommers has used since The Mummy, a jungle peppered with apes that can stretch their jaws for miles. Am I wrong, readers?

At last, the focus of at least one obsessive Batman 3 rumor has adressed. Johnny Depp was recently on a Florida radio show promoting the reunion show of his band, The Kids. (I know how the girls love Johnny, you can listen to the entire interview in two parts here.) A persistent fan called into the station to remind them to ask Depp about playing the Riddler for Christopher Nolan.

Depp's answer was essentially a denial and as enigmatic as well, the Riddler. "Oh yeah I heard about that. Not that I know of. It seems like it'd be a fun gig for a while, yeah."

A denial isn't surprising since we know Nolan isn't even signed, let alone writing or casting. But given that the rumor machine is going regardless of that fact, here's more fuel for the fire. There's no doubt Depp would do a fine job. He could probably play me to perfection. And he's open to taking just about any role that interests him. So, those of you keeping score can mark Depp as "interested" and various news agencies that don't read these things carefully can report it as "confirmed." For my part, I'm going to go ahead and tell my sister that Depp is "totally doing Batman 3" because that's one way to interest her in the franchise. Except then she'll start working on a Riddler costume for a certain lookalike. Never mind, then.

[Thanks to The Comic Book Cynic for sending this to us.]

It's so heartwarming to see rival studios playing nice with each other, even if it's only for purely financial reasons. It's especially good when the result of their cooperation is that a film by Danny Boyle (pictured) will get the theatrical release it deserves.

Slumdog Millionaire, about a Mumbai street kid who strikes it rich on an Indian game show before having his knowledge called into question, will premiere at the Toronto International Film Festival next week. And now it'll hit multiplexes, too, on Nov. 28, thanks to a deal hammered out this week between Fox Searchlight and Warner Bros.

The film was originally part of Warner Independent Pictures' slate. But that division got shut down earlier this year, and Warner Bros. was left to deal with its leftover movies. It's like Warner Independent was a slightly irresponsible young adult, and Slumdog Millionaire was one of its children. Then Warner Independent died penniless in the gutter, and the child's grandmother, Warner Bros., being the only living relative, got custody. And Nana Warner Bros. loves the kid, thinks it's a great movie that people will enjoy, but ol' WB is on a fixed income and can't really support it. WB has kids of its own still living at home, for crying out loud.

So WB sidled up to Fox Searchlight, the dashing playboy son of billionaire Twentieth Century Fox, and struck up a relationship that involves Fox Searchlight paying for the film's marketing and distribution. Nobody has any illusions about this arrangement -- there's certainly no romance involved -- and they all live happily ever after. I just hope Fox Searchlight's dad doesn't find out, considering mean old Twentieth Century Fox is busy suing Warner Bros. over Watchmen. It's a pretty thorny situation, but hey, you gotta do what's best for the kids. It takes a village, right?

There's a lot of cinematic power behind Warner Bros. upcoming political thriller Body of Lies: It's directed by Oscar-winner Ridley Scott (Gladiator), it's written by Oscar-winner William Monahan (The Departed), and it stars reliable talents / big-time movie stars like Leonardo DiCaprio and Russell Crowe. Based on the novel by David Ignatius, Body of Lies tells the story of a journalist who is enlisted by the CIA to help track down a suspected terrorist. That's only the sketchiest of plot synopses, but since I haven't read the book, I'd like to enjoy Body of Lies without knowing the whole story.

And we're very pleased to bring you the very first look at the official one-sheet for Body of Lies. (It's behind the jump!) The film hits theaters on October 10 -- and since it's a Ridley Scott film, you just know I'll be there opening night. If it's half as good as Mr. Scott's last "action" film (the stellar Black Hawk Down), then I'll be a happy guy. (Click here for the poster!)

It seems the entire comic book and film world "misread" Warner Bros' announcement that they were angling to make Superman's reboot a gloomier one. No one seems to have read the original article slowly enough -- not even MTV, Kevin Smith, Christopher Golden, Jeph Loeb, Steven T. Seagle, or Mark Waid.

The wonderful geeks over on MTV's Splash Page chased down all the above, and asked them what they thought about the studio's latest plans for the Man of Steel. The funniest and most extreme reaction isn't Smith's, it's Golden's! "How stupid is that? That announcement made my head spin . . . Making a dark and gritty Superman movie because Dark Knight made a ton of money is incredibly stupid." Oddly, Smith is actually more tempered in his comments, and that he was all for a reboot. "You always have to always keep Superman very distinct from Batman ... Superman is about the hope in people, the good in people, whereas Batman is about the more driven, hungry for justice angry side of us. [So] I don't know if doing a dark Superman is the approach."

The lone dissenting voice is Seagle, not surprising from the man who penned It's a Bird ... and feels that Superman has always been a dark character. "Heroic struggles are basically all dark in tone. The idea of 'villains' implies something bad happening to good people most of the time, and that's dark. Heroes look brighter emerging from dire consequence successfully." Ultimately, I think Waid's the man who speaks for the majority of us in arguing that you can make Superman's world darker, but not the character, who's "a creature of hope." If Warner Bros goes in that direction, I can get behind it. A bright and shining Superman against a depraved and unjust world might be just what the reboot ordered.