Reports the Hollywood Reporter:

The writer has been brought on to do a draft of the baseball drama, drawing on Steve Zaillian's earlier take. The studio wants to move forward quickly with the new iteration, with Sorkin set to turn in his version as soon as next month.

Brad Pitt remains on board to star, but Steven Soderbergh no longer will write or direct and is not involved in the film.

Soderbergh, you may recall, fought with the studio over the creative direction of film, leading to production being killed by the studio just days before shooting was set to begin last June

Now, we like Sorkin's work (especially Sports Night!) so we're confident that if anyone can make an adaptation of the book work, it's him, but we still can't figure out how it would be worth a crap on the big screen. However, if it does work out, and we seriously doubt that it will, we do look forward to a scene in which Billy Beane and Jason Giambi walk down a long corridor, pause in front of the door to the locker room and turn to face each other so Beane can yell "You can't handle a curveball!" at Giambi. It'll be grand!

Aaron Sorkin Game for Moneyball [Hollywood Reporter]

First, let's briefly recap what we and others have reported so far: The film was set to begin shooting last week. Five days before the start of shooting, director Steven Soderbergh turned in a rewrite of the original script, which was written by Steven Zaillian, that Sony executives, led by co-Chairman Amy Pascal, did not like. The studio felt that Soderbergh, who was insistent that every event in the film had to have taken place in real life, was taking the film in an "artsy" direction that they weren't willing to gamble $58-million dollars on, so they killed it. That's the short version of events according to Amy Pascal anyway.

Since then a few more details about the project emerged. Movieline and Deadspin provided some new information in reports of their own, and today the New York Times has an article that sheds some light on Soderbergh's zeal for authenticity.

One reason was to win the approval of Major League Baseball, which was not happy with some factual liberties in Mr. Zaillian's version. Such approval is crucial in a baseball film that intends to use protected trademarks.

"Typically, on a film like this, we look at it for historical accuracy," said Matthew Bourne, a vice president of Major League Baseball for public relations. "We've been in touch with Soderbergh and Sony, and they've been receptive to our requests."

What baseball saw as accurate, Sony executives saw as being too much a documentary.

All of this brings us to the information provided to us by a tipster who'd been working on the project and has a decidedly different point of view than that of Amy Pascal and Sony.

First and foremost, Soderbergh had been upfront with the direction in which he intended to take the film from the very beginning of his employment. In fact, it was clear to all of us - whether in the Art Department or the Costumes Department, etc. – that Soderbergh intended to use real people to play themselves in the creation of the true story of Moneyball. Additionally, for months Soderbergh had been shooting interviews with real ball players and people from Billy Beane's past, and the studio approved these shoots. How could the studio then at the eleventh hour claim that his approach was a surprise to them? He intended to tell the true story rather than a fictitious version of the story. How innovative.

What exactly is wrong with making a movie accurate? And since when does an authentic film translate as an "art" film? I know numerous people that thought that Soderbergh's approach sounded insightful and interesting and true to the game and what really happened. If baseball lovers and non-baseball lovers alike in my large social network felt this way (not to mention the hundreds of bloggers that were fans of the concept), why couldn't this approach have universal appeal?

Regarding the notion that Sony executives were shocked to discover the direction Soderbergh planned on taking the film:

Soderbergh's script dated June 17, 2009 was not the first script that he handed in to Sony. On June 7th, Soderbergh submitted a draft to the studio with the following note on the first page:

"NOTE: Scenes involving Billy Beane's minor and major league career have been removed from this draft. They will be determined by filmed interviews with scouts, coaches, managers, players and family members who were with him at the time."

Sony executives read this draft. And Sony executives gave Soderbergh their notes. Clearly Amy Pascal did not read this draft – if she had, maybe the drama that began with the June 17th draft could have been avoided.

Another fact: Soderbergh handed in yet another draft dated June 10, 2009 with this note on the first page:

"NOTE: Billy Beane's minor and major league career will be shown via filmed interviews with scouts, coaches, managers, players and family members who were with him at the time. These interviews will comprise approximately ten percent of the film.

"Another ten percent of the film will consist of re-enactments of real events as remembered by the people playing themselves. The purpose of these scenes will be to provide set-up and perspective for subjects, situations, or relationships which currently appear in the screenplay without the requisite/normal amount of context."

Now why in the world was Amy Pascal so shocked (or, rather, "apoplectic" as it was relayed to the production team) when she read the June 17th draft? Could Soderbergh have made his intentions any more clear? Even if these executives did not read beyond PAGE 1, they would have known the direction in which he wanted to take the film – and they should have perhaps reported that to their boss. And maybe, just maybe, if there had been communication with their boss, maybe, just maybe, another avenue could have been taken rather than pulling the plug three days before the film was supposed to start shooting. For instance, maybe they could have delayed principal photography while script/concept issues were resolved.

Our tipster closed with this note:

On the day that Amy Pascal pulled the plug, there were 230 people that were working on Moneyball. Now those 230 people are all out of jobs.

When Soderbergh had to address a stage filled with crew members who were about to lose their jobs, he told us that just as Moneyball was the unorthodox version of building baseball teams, Moneyball the movie was the unorthodox way of making a film. Unfortunately, Amy Pascal does not believe in Moneyball as a concept; otherwise the film would be in its second week of shooting right now.

So there you have it—Another side of the story. All of this is obviously meaningless in the grand scheme of life, not to mention very "inside baseball" (pun intended), but it's so damn fun to talk about. We anxiously await the next bit of backbiting to emerge between the Sony and Soderbergh camps.

Why Did Sony Kill the Pitt/Soderbergh Film Adaptation of Michael Lewis' Moneyball [Previously]
MLB Approval Still Murky as Moneyball Circles the Drain [Movieline]
Money Worries Kill A-List Film at Last Minute [New York Times]
Soderbergh's Moneyball Script Too Real to Get Made [Deadspin]
pic via Vulture

Everyone loved Steven Zallian's version (he's an Oscar-winner, you know!), because it had jokes and snappy dialogue and actually made sabermetrics non-mind numbing. But Soderbergh wanted realism so much, he was determined to only film events that took place in real life. He also scrapped the conceit of having Bill James as the "Greek chorus", bookending the film with his anecdotes with and wise old man stories. The verdict:

That might make for an intriguing art film, but it clearly was no longer a film that any studio would spend $58 million to make, especially with baseball films having virtually no appeal outside of the U.S.

We got our hands on the Soderbergh draft, and it's about as bad as others have said. Gone, thankfully, is the Beane-as-dork-Messiah stuff. Soderbergh's Beane is more of a proxy for the audience this time — Bud Fox meets Crash Davis, as they say in Hollywood — and in his script, Moneyball is more of a Beane-Paul DePodesta buddy movie, which maybe makes some sense when you imagine Brad Pitt and Demetri Martin in those roles. Maybe.

The script was probably doomed from its second page, from which the above image was taken. Here's Soderbergh's disclaimer:

Billy Beane's minor and major league career will be shown via filmed interviews with scouts, coaches, managers, players, and family members who were with him at the time. These interviews will comprise approximately ten percent of the film.

Another ten percent of the film will consist of re-enactments of real events as remembered by the people playing themselves. The purpose of these scenes will be to provide set-up and perspective for subjects, situations, or relationships which currently appear in the screenplay without the requisite/normal amount of context.

All that is to say an important portion of this film will be written in the editing room. This isn't a cop-out; it's just a fact, and entirely by design.

That sounds an awful lot like, "Yes, this script sucks. But trust me. I made The Limey." It was probably at this point that Amy Pascal, the Sony executive, optioned the script to the bottom of her coffee mug. Even though it was five days from shooting and Sony had already sunk $10 million dollars into the film, Pascal pulled the plug. The movie is now in limbo. The studio would presumably still make the Zaillian version if they could find a director, but would likely lose Brad Pitt if Soderbergh walks. And the current talent is free to take the project somewhere else, but no one is biting, because that brings us all back to the original argument, "Why anyone make a movie about this?" Maybe Scott Hatteberg is really big overseas?

(Additional Soderbergh script reveals, information by Tommy Craggs.)

Sony's Amy Pascal speaks out about 'Moneyball' [Los Angeles Times, via Gawker]
What happened to...Moneyball? [ScriptShadow]
Billy Beane Is A Golden God: Excerpts From The Scrapped Moneyball Script

Rumors have been swirling since Variety first reported last week that Soderbergh's vision for the film differed dramatically from the vision studio executives had for the film, but up to this point no one associated with the project has been willing to speak on the record about it.

But yesterday Sony's Amy Pascal, the studio executive in charge of the film, spoke to the LA Times' Patrick Goldstein. According to Pascal, what it all boiled down to was essentially simple—The studio loved screenwriter Steven Zaillian's original adaptation of Lewis' book, while Soderbergh felt the script lacked authenticity and rewrote it himself, making radical changes that Pascal and the studio weren't willing to gamble on, fearful that Soderbergh would turn it into an "artsy" film like Solaris or Schizopolis, especially when baseball movies traditionally don't do well at the box office outside of the United States. Soderbergh was insistent that everything in the movie had to have happened in real life.

Reports Goldstein:

Some changes to Zaillian's script were subtle, others were dramatic. At one point, Beane signs Scott Hatteberg, a journeyman catcher with a bad arm whom Bean can get for peanuts and turn into a first baseman. Beane loves Hatteberg's ability to get on base, but his staff is appalled — he just can't turn anyone into a slick-fielding first baseman overnight. In Zaillian's script, one of the coaches watches Hatteberg taking ground balls at a Little League field, his wife armed with a plastic laundry basket full of baseballs. She hits the balls to her husband off a tee, with their 4-year-old daughter backing him up down the line. One ball takes a bad hop and goes between Hatteberg's legs. When his daughter scoops it up, the coach quips: "Maybe we should sign her."

Soderbergh cut out the joke because it was the screenwriter's invention — the coach had never actually said it. He also cut out a scene where Beane gives a tongue-lashing to Jason Giambi, one of his departing free agents, again because it didn't actually happen. Zaillian's script was anchored by on-screen monologues by Bill James, the oddball guru of modern-day baseball statistics (who today works in the Boston Red Sox front office). James functioned as a Greek chorus for the film, offering wry, Yoda-like explanations about the complexity of the game.

Zaillian's deft renditions of James' maxims were funny and always to the point, allowing the audience the opportunity to see inside the game. In one monologue, James says: "If you score three runs and the other team scores four, you can be inspired as all hell but you still lost. The numbers represent the ineluctable sum of victories and defeats, and that cannot be made one iota larger or smaller than it is by PR campaigns, personal animosities or any of the greater and lesser forms of B.S." But in Soderbergh's draft, the James material had all vanished, presumably to be replaced by interviews with Beane's real-life associates.

At a "summit" held after Soderbergh turned in his draft of the script, he reportedly pleaded "trust me" to the Sony executives, who were obviously unwilling to do so. Besides Pitt, the film was also set to star comedian Demetri Martin as well as former ballplayers Darryl Strawberry, Mookie Wilson, David Justice and Lenny Dykstra, but Soderbergh's unrelenting zeal for authenticity proved to be the project's demise.

Bob Costas would be proud.

As for Michael Lewis, he seems unfazed by the developments with the film version of his book, telling MSNBC recently, "I don't understand why they bought it for a movie in the first place."

Sony's Amy Pascal Speaks Out About Moneyball [LA Times]
Image via Vulture

Per a Variety report that dropped today, Columbia Studio head Amy Pascal hated the script so much when she got it, she shut down production on the movie, which was supposed to start Monday in Phoenix. The script, adapted from Lewis' book by Steve Zaillian (American Gangster, Schindler's List) and Steven Soderbergh, had changed so much since Pascal had first seen it, that she's given Soderbergh and Pitt the weekend to find a new home for the movie, either with Paramount or Warner Bros.

The movie, starring Brad Pitt, Demetri Martin, and a bunch of actual baseball players (David Justice, et al) isn't exactly a traditional baseball flick, but this was also the project that ended up sidelining Steven Soderbergh's epic - and hopefully, epically flamboyant - musical take on the life of Cleopatra ("Cleo"), so, you know, you get what you pay for. Variety suggests that if they can't line someone else up to take over the bill of the movie, Columbia's either going to (A) try to replace Soderbergh on the project, (B) delay production indefinitely until Soderbergh and Pascal can agree on what's going to happen once the thing gets back into gear or (C) scrap the entire thing.

Meanwhile, Michael Lewis is still sitting on piles of money from his Vanity Fair writing contract and this, while a small bump in the road for him, certainly isn't the end of it. This project's far too beloved by Hollywood for it to go anywhere but (eventually) into production, and Brad Pitt's probably not going to stick around if Soderbergh gets taken off of it.

But most importantly, here's the list of facepalm-worthy baseball wordplay Variety used in their report:

"Columbia Pictures has dropped the ball"
"attempting to get another studio to play ball in a game that will play out"
"turnaround news on "Moneyball" is surprising, given that had reached the equivalent of third base"
"Oakland A's general manager who found success fielding competitive teams for low cost"

Sony scraps Soderbergh's 'Moneyball' [Variety]

The film, which premiered at the Tribeca Film Festival on Tuesday, will be released on May 22 in New York and Los Angeles and on demand on the TV network HDNet. It follows an escort named Chelsea who charges $2,000 an hour to act as a client's girlfriend for the night, providing more intimacy than just sex. (In the film's opening scene, Chelsea and her client are shown at a chic Manhattan restaurant discussing the film they just saw - Man on Wire - going back to his apartment and making out, and then having breakfast and reading The New York Times together the next morning.) The story takes place over five days in October 2008, and is partially improvised by the mostly unprofessional actors, who play versions of themselves, like New York magazine staff writer Mark Jacobson, who plays a journalist, and movie critic Glenn Kenny, who plays an escort reviewer. (Some readers may recall that Kenny served as writer David Foster Wallace's editor and sidekick when the duo attended the AVN Awards for a piece for Premiere magazine.) But the casting choice that has garnered the film so much attention is that the main character is played by real-life porn star Sasha Grey.

At the Tribeca Film Festival, Soderburgh explained that he chose Grey precisely because of her porn persona, The Guardian reports. "With Sasha, you can within seconds see her do anything you can imagine with her clothes off," he said. "What you can't see is what it's like to be her boyfriend, to hang out with her and be emotionally intimate with her. So my whole theory is that's the fantasy for those who've been double-clicking – that they want to spend 77 minutes being her boyfriend."

As Soderbergh put it, Sasha Grey is "not the normal adult film star." Grey is 21, but has appeared in 150 adult films and branded herself as a "new" kind of pornstar since beginning her career at the age of 18. According to the Associated Press, Grey is known for "pushing the boundaries of normal sexual acts," but, "she maintains she's always in control." Vanessa Grigoriadis, who profiled Sasha Grey for the new issue of Rolling Stone explains:

Sasha Grey is the adult industry's reigning princess of porn, a rock & roll 21-year-old with an actual mission statement - "Most of the XXX I see is boring, and does not arouse me physically or visually. I am determined and ready to be a commodity that fulfills everyone's fantasies" - and few taboos.

Grey, who is co-managed by former Jane's Addiction guitarist Dave Navarro (and appeared in the porn film he directed), has modeled for American Apparel, and sung with the reggae musician Lee "Scratch" Perry. She says she is striving to make porn more artistic; Grigoriadis asserts she is changing the relationship between feminism and porn:

"Porn has been one of feminism's most divisive issues because it hits on such a raw level to so many woman. Here are the fantasies of men, and it's of course better to live out those fantasies through pornography than to try to do them in the real world, but the fact is the real world is impacted by it. Grey says, ‘If you look at me and you think "Here's a woman who's intelligent, cognizant and making her own choices, and you still tell me that what I'm doing is wrong, screw you, because that should end the debate.' "

Grey's appearance in The Girlfriend Experience has been interpreted as the first step in her attempt to go mainstream like former adult actresses Traci Lords and Jenna Jameson, but according to our sister site, Fleshbot, (link NSFW):

If anything, we suspect that Sasha is attempting to remake the notion of what a mainstream star is, and does-much the way she's remade any notions of what an 18-year-old pornstar looks and sounds like .... it's also possible that Sasha could rise to fame in the mainstream cinema while continuing to work as an adult star-perhaps completely remaking our notions of what it means to have crossover appeal.

Though Grey doesn'tactually have sex on screen in The Girlfriend Experience, Soderbergh says that he felt comfortable casting her because "Porn is beyond everywhere now." He told Time Out New York that he thinks prostitution should be legal and does not consider the prostitute in his film a victim. When asked what he would say to someone who has been roped into a life of prostitution, he replied:

Well, there are people for whom that is true. That's not the case with Chelsea any more than it is with Sasha in the adult-film industry. But, yeah, I think whatever agreement two people want to come to about whatever is really none of my business. I don't know what the difference is between that and what I'm doing for Sony Pictures right now [directing Moneyball].

According to the Village Voice review:

Like Godard, Soderbergh views prostitution as the ultimate paradigm for capitalism. But where Godard saw the hooker as a tragic or exploited victim, Soderbergh suggests there are no victims, only failed traders, in the post-Reagan era of DIY capitalism.

And, says Variety's review, the film de-emphasizes the sex involved in Chelsea's work and portrays her as a woman in control of her own get-rich-quick scheme, much like her clients who strive to make a fortune in the world of finance.

From reviews and interviews, it appears Soderbergh was striving for some sort of meta commentary on how capitalism makes prostitutes and porn stars of us all. The johns in the movie delude themselves into thinking they're experiencing a higher level of intimacy with "the girlfriend experience" than they would by just having sex with a prostitute. Similarly, Soderbergh suggests that audience members, who have presumably seen Grey's porn films, will delude themselves into thinking they are experiencing her on a more intimate level by watching her act in a mainstream film rather than a porn film. But by focusing on a high priced escort who chose to get into prostitution, and having her portrayed by an actress described as an atypical pornstar who feels in control of her career, he conveniently ignores the fact that many women in both industries are exploited. Soderbergh is certainly allowed to use the old fantasy of a sex worker who simply loves her work. However, by ignoring the uglier side of the sex trade, he undermines his argument that his film reflects any underlying truths about sex, pornography, or society.

Trailer for The Girlfriend Experience:



Steven Soderbergh On The Girlfriend Experience: 'I Hired Real People And Turned Them Loose' [The Guardian]
Porn Star Sasha Grey Stars In New Soderbergh Film [The Associated Press]
Sasha Grey, The Dirtiest Girl In The World: The Story Behind The Story [Rolling Stone]
Sasha Grey, Crossover Star (NSFW) [Fleshbot]
Steven Soderbergh Interview [Time Out New York]
Soderbergh's Girlfriend Experience Porn-Star Is A True Character [The Village Voice]
The Girlfriend Experience Review [Variety]

Earlier: Dave Navarro Makes Porno Debut
American Apparel Now Sponsoring Bloggers & Porn Stars (NSFW)
Oprah Learns About The Ins-N-Outs Of Legal Prostitution

You can read live updates in the Twitter Room or follow them all on this Twitter feed.

Starring 20-year-old porn princess Sasha Grey amid a strong cast of non-actors (including former Premiere movie critic Glenn Kenny in a hilarious, disturbing cameo as a talky sex-trade connoisseur), Experience follows elite New York escort Chelsea through the routines and rigors of ambition, love and lifestyle. While she and her gym-trainer boyfriend Chris (Chris Santos) strive for a more sizable slice of the American Dream — even as the economy contracts violently around them — their relationship erodes to a stalemate. The presidential election, the recession and each lover's unwavering career-mindedness coalesce into a nonlinear cocktail of modern dread, made all the more potent by Soderbergh's still, chilly camerawork and Grey's compounding vulnerability.

Soderbergh said during the post-screening Q&A that his lead was the only one of his actors who had ever appeared in front of a camera before. And yes, 150+ adult movies count, though Experience lacks not only explicit sex but rather any sexiness whatsoever. Having several years ago read Grey's more philosophical industry perspectives in a Los Angeles Magazine profile, the filmmaker said he hand-picked the actress to more realistically explore the transactional nature of Chelsea's sexuality.

"When the idea for this movie came about, I contacted her, and we sat down and talked," he said. "And I sort of described the way we work on these things. I said, you know, 'Would this be interesting for you?' Because even though the film's not very explicit, there's a comfort level that she obviously has from making all of those films that I think is difficult to fake. There's kind of an attitude. And she said, 'I want to try it. Let's see what happens.' ... It's really fun as a director to watch; I really like the idea of people speaking in their own words, really speaking for themselves. Everybody in there — that's them."

The final cut and mix are yet to come, but may be ready as a late addition to the Berlin Film Festival or, more likely, a premiere in competition at Cannes. Magnolia Pictures has yet to set a release date. But as Soderbergh films go, it's in the austere league of Bubble and Che, likely to confound the average moviegoer and irritate the eager pornhound Grey-ophile — which is kind of how we like him. At least until Cleo.

Despite conspicuous no-shows James Spader ("I think he was embarrassed by the hair," Soderbergh said) and Harvey Weinstein ("This is like a tribute to Dr. Frankenstein and the monster doesn't come"), the director had a good-enough time with Andie MacDowell, Laura San Giacomo and Peter Gallagher, hanging out on the lip of the stage and reminiscing about those heady days of microbudgets, 120-degree Louisiana locations and agents who discouraged the actors from involving themselves with Soderbergh's ostensibly smutty tale of voyeurs, true confessions and infidelity.

"The idea obviously came from watching porn," Soderbergh half-joked during the 30-minute discussion that followed. "I'm happy to say I've never done that in my life. I viewed Graham [Spader's camera-wielding sex inquisitor] as kind of an intimacy junkie, and this was his sort of way of getting intimate information without actually having a relationship. But there's a long history of this kind of behavior, as anyone who's followed porn closely knows. It’s a more sophisticated version of the gonzo stuff that you see going on all the time. His new wrinkle was sort of shrouded in this patina of understanding. He's really nefarious."

It was the first time most on hand had seen the film since the filmmaker hand-carried it into Park City in 1989. Gallagher said it reminded him precisely why he wound up as one of Hollywood's go-to smarmy types for the better part of the '90s. "At the time this movie was released, I was at dinner and Sean Penn was sitting at the table next to us," he recalled. "He leaned over and said, 'Hey, man, nice job. I just wanted to meet the only other guy in Hollywood hated more than me."

But that was apparently the worst of it. The rehearsal and shoot were the fastest and most efficient any of the principals had experienced. MacDowell churned at the prospect of working opposite Spader. "One of my biggest memories from rehearsal was James Spader, because he intimidated me," she said. "I mean, James is kind of weird anyway. He's a great actor, but he's one of those actors who likes to really get into character. So I didn't know who I was meeting when I met him. I think he was kind of already there, sort of. He was weird and kind of sexy at the same time. He was scary as hell, actually."

But she wasn't even supposed to have the role, according to Soderbergh; the producers disliked her, but she returned for another reading with the director. "Remember?" he asked her. "You were in the room alone with me. You did exactly what you did in the film. I came out and said, 'Andie really is great, and I think that's who we should go with. And everyone went, 'Uh-oh. What happened in there?' And I said, 'No, it's not like that. She's really good.' "

San Giacomo arrived in Park City shortly after the 1989 premiere. "By the second screening, that's when it started to sort of catapult. And by the third screening, people were trying to sneak on line with ticket stubs trying to get in. It just blossomed from there; it was exciting. It was very much a darker place then! People were not in sporty clothes all the time! They were New York-looking! And very serious!" Pity! Just imagine all they missed.

She was met at the gate by a couple fanboys with merch to sign, which she did, with a smile. I've attached photographic evidence. [Hollywood PrivacyWatch is written by and for Defamer readers; send your sightings to tips@defamer.com.]

· This year marks the 20th anniversary of an unknown Steven Soderbergh shuffling into town with a print of sex, lies, and videotape and leaving on Harvey Weinstein's hulking shoulders — kind of a for-better-or-for-worse Sundance benchmark touchingly remembered today in the LAT: "'We had very low expectations,' Soderbergh recalled. 'I was hoping the film would be a résumé piece; it would get shown and I could meet some people and maybe get another job.'" So! Lesson to all budding Sundance filmmakers: Low expectations.

· Lesson No. 2: It's just fine to have your Oscar-winning male lead phone his performance in. You might even get that prestigious opening-night slot like Mary & Max director Adam Elliot, who couldn't afford to fly Philip Seymour Hoffman to Australia for looping. Try it sometime!

· This is about as close as we're going to take you to the neighboring Slamdance Film Festival. Sorry.

· While we have our eye on the distributors lobbing cash at this year's likely bidding-war darlings, a distinguished second tier of indies including Zeitgeist, Kino, and the Adam Yauch-owned Oscilloscope Laboratories will do the respectable thing and attempt to acquire actual art. We tip our fur-lined cap. OK, that's enough, it's fucking freezing.

· That said, expect to find the rest of festival society joining David Carr for deep, precious lungfuls of fresh mountain hype. At least he's honest.

"Unexpectedly" is debatable, we suppose; IFC took a wait-and-see approach after acquiring Steven Soderbergh's 262-minute biopic last fall, dropping it in New York and Los Angeles a month ahead of its Jan.21 roll-out to VOD. Its success means good news to those bros in Boston, Chicago, Dallas, Houston, Minneapolis, Philadelphia, San Francisco, Seattle and Washington D.C. hoping to throw Benicio Del Toro's accent back in his face: Che gets at least one week in your towns starting tomorrow. Sorry, Cleveland — we passed along the request, we swear.

• 'Che' Roadshow Soldiers On [Movie City Indie]

It's a shame that Robert Downey Jr. is locked into franchise properties until roughly the year 2015, as the now-bankable actor possesses both the singing ability and proven "what the hell" track record for Cleo. And since Soderbergh will need a trim, youthful Marc Anthony to balance out Ray Winstone's Julius Caesar, we imagine that stipulation may clash with the "no diets" rider of 30 Odd Foot of Grunts frontman Russell Crowe.

Thus, Soderbergh may want to consider making a more unconventional choice (an unlikely route for a filmmaker making a 3-D, Guided by Voices-penned musical, we're aware). Why not choose between singing rivals Jamie Foxx and Terrence Howard—one self-enamored, the other "as soft as doctor's cotton"? Can we interest you in either Conchord? Or does the role of Marc Anthony call for the boyish looks and "not entirely present" personality of a David Archuleta?

Oh, who are we kidding. Johnny Depp and Ewan McGregor, call your agents—it's time to go down swinging and singing!

• Hugh Jackman off 'Cleo' wishlist [Variety]

In conjunction with the release of his audience-participatory biopic Che, the Independent quizzed Soderbergh about other famous historical figures portrayed in film. When they brought up the Elizabeth Taylor version of Cleopatra, though, Soderbergh spilled on exactly what he's got in store for his stars:

All I can think of when I watch Elizabeth Taylor in Cleopatra is, 'Well, it's brave!' She's got both feet in. When you look at what she has to say and what she has to wear and the sets she has to walk around in, again the fact that she kept a straight face during all that, that's a testament to her fortitude. God, I hope we can recreate some of those crazy-ass costumes. Our version [of the Cleopatra story] will be like an Elvis musical in 3-D. It's a total rock'n'roll, 1966 aesthetic – like Viva Las Vegas meets Tommy. I've wanted my whole career to make a musical. And the 3-D makes it more challenging but makes it more fun. Based on the way I want to shoot it, I think it's going to really pay off. But our treatment of her is pretty modern, let's say."

We admire Soderbergh's daring; the moviegoing populace has recently rejected both Jackman and Jackman-toplined musicals, so it takes a special brand of visionary to note, "But those weren't in 3-D!" If the director is looking for some more A-list talent with experience in glossy Hollywood sing-alongs, might we suggest Fergie's labia? We hear the mysterious new ingenue brought out some of Daniel Day Lewis's best work, and is currently looking to go solo.

• Che way: Steven Soderbergh on how to play a famous historical character [The Independent via Movie City News]

Quickly becoming the TMZ of the independent-film beat, indieWIRE had cameras on the scene for an altercation that we were surprised hadn't happened before Friday: In the middle of defending his aggressively objective 4.5-hour portrait of Che Guevara, Soderbergh first repelled a shouty viewer bellowing, "He was a murderer!" before a torrent of outraged barks and heckles flooded the orchestra pit around him at the Ziegfeld Theater. The video cuts off before the rumored advance of pitchforks, torches and refund requests to the front row, with Soderbergh negotiating his escape only after promising not to make Ocean's 14. Che would be proud.

• Soderbergh Q & A: Is Che a Murderer? A Revolutionary? [YouTube]

Anthem mentioned Che Guevara’s established reputation as a lady’s man. “Yeah,” Soderbergh agreed. “But [Che] doesn’t strike me as a big masturbator, I have to say. That was an impression that I felt early on. All of my research confirms it. Not a big masturbator.”

So the new movie should be great!

[Anthem; pic via]

· The busy, busy Steven Soderbergh, when not making Dogma fleshcore [NSFW] or Liberace biopics, and 3-D Cleopatra extravaganzas, is also planning Making Jack Falcone, an undercover mob story for Paramount. [THR]
· Ron Livingston will star in Defying Gravity, an international co-production about "eight astronauts from five countries who take on a mysterious six-year mission through the solar system." If the distance between Earth and the nearest star system is 2.7 million light years, how long would it take Astronaut Livingston to get there and back, assuming he's traveling in a vacuum during a non-Leap Year year. Use the space below for scrap. [THR]

Variety reports that Soderbergh will follow his current film The Girlfriend Experience with Cleo, a $30 million project with music provided by Guided By Voices and a script by GBV's bassist James Greer. No one seems to know how or even if this news squares with the Liberace biopic Soderbergh is plotting with Michael Douglas and Matt Damon, but we admit we're a little less intrigued by Cleo knowing that Jackman would not, in fact, play the Egyptian queen. And surely, in a sleek, dark loft somewhere in Australia, a sleepless Baz Luhrmann is wondering why he didn't think of this first.

• Soderbergh to make 3-D 'Cleopatra' [Variety]