I found myself asking one simple question during Ridley Scott's Body of Lies, a well-shot, big-name intelligence thriller that sees Leonardo DiCaprio's CIA man caught up in action in the Middle East -- namely, what is Body of Lies for? I don't mean that in the sense of asking what it supports or believes in -- although, with the film's mix of Hollywood heroics and sneering cynicism, you're certainly left with that question -- but rather in the sense of asking what it is that Body of Lies means to accomplish or communicate. Part of the film feels like an attempt at a sprawling, globe-trotting story of realpolitik and moral complexity, in the mold of Syriana or Scott's own Black Hawk Down; other parts feel like Dolby-pumped slam-bang action, in the mold of Tony Scott's Spy Game or the Bourne Films. And some of Body of Lies feels like a weird, surreal workplace satire, with DiCaprio's on-the-ground intelligence agent fighting, fussing and feuding with his D.C.-based superior Russell Crowe; if you hate having your boss hover over your shoulder second-guessing you, imagine how it feels to have your boss looking over your shoulder second-guessing you from orbit via satellite.

Adapted from David Ignatius' novel by The Departed screenwriter William Monahan, Body of Lies follows DiCaprio's Roger Ferris through a series of run-and-gun intelligence-gathering missions that start in Iraq and travel the globe in the name of penetrating, and breaking, a terror ring operating on a global level. Ferris works for Ed Hoffman (Russell Crowe, beefy and drawling), who runs his section of the CIA with a true believer's fervor. Speaking to a group of political staff and elected officials, Hoffman tries to get everyone in line by getting everyone scared: "Our world as we know it is much simpler... to put to an end than you might think." Ed knows that in an age of asymmetrical warfare, America's seemingly unsophisticated opponents have big advantages; you can't tap someone's phone if they don't have one, can't crack their e-mail if it doesn't exist.

I've been burned by Jonah Hex rumors before, so this time I'm going to tread carefully ... very carefully. Hollywood Elsewhere reports they have reliable information that Josh Brolin (W.) has signed to star in WB's feature film version of DC Comics' Jonah Hex. According to Wells' "friend", it's a done deal -- but a top secret one. So in spite of protestations to the contrary from both Warner Bros. and Brolin's reps, Elsewhere believes they have the real dirt on the comic book adaptation

Hex was created by John Albano and Tony DeZuniga, and it centers on a disfigured bounty hunter who wanders the plains in a tattered confederate uniform. Hex had a rotating cast of villains, and the series was known for its rough-and-tumble plot lines and copious amounts of gore. Mark Neveldine and Brian Taylor (Crank) have already been hired to write and direct the flick, and not much is known about the story other than the fact that Jonah's "quest in the film is tracking down a voodoo practitioner." According to Elsewhere, there will be plenty of CGI and sci-fi overtones, and even though the earlier incarnations of Hex were strictly in the setting of the Wild West, as the series carried on Hex came up against plenty of supernatural bad guys – making the fantasy element of the flick not as far out as you may think.

I guess we'll have to wait and see if Brolin is really donning the six-shooters for Hex, or whether we'll just have to settle for the actor playing a different 'cowboy with a bad reputation'. So what do you think? Is Brolin a good match for Hex on the big screen? Sound off below....

Have you ever wondered where Tom Thumb came from? If so, you'll be happy with a recent post from The Hollywood Reporter. It seems the tiny character is heading for the big screen with Warner Bros. and director Kevin Lima (Enchanted), and the project will be go the live action route, although Thumb might be CG. Robert Rodat, of Saving Private Ryan fame, wrote the script, which is said to "look at the heroism that a knight must summon after he is reduced to a pint size." Okay ... CG is cool and all, but I hope they stick to miniaturizing a real person. CG doesn't have to be used for everything, and Tom Thumb wasn't made into a cartoon character when he shrunk, after all.

Next up, THR also reports that David Cronenberg is circling the Robert Ludlum project The Matarese Circle, which we previously told you about when Denzel Washington signed on earlier this year. Before it was simply the latest political thriller to hit the screen, one that focuses on two rival agents, US and Soviet, who work together to find Matarese criminals lurking in the American government. But with Cronenberg? The man behind The Fly, Crash, Spider, and A History of Violence? This sounds so bloody good.

Finally, there's good ol' David Duchovny. In August, he went away to rehab for sex addiction. Now, according to Ace Showbiz, he's out and heading back to work. A statement issued by his lawyer says: "He is out of rehab and will be starting a movie soon." This will, most likely, be The Joneses. I'm just glad it's about a fake family and not about sex. After all this, I just can't watch Californication without getting weirded out.

There's actually a lot of noteworthy geek news today -- but alas, none of it is amazing enough to really warrant an entire post. Believe me, it makes me a sad panda not getting to devote an entire post to Wolverine. So, let's just get right down to it:

• Producer Lauren Shuler Donner talked up X-Men Origins: Wolverine over on Superhero Hype: "It's closer to the first X-Men in tone because it's a little darker, but there's a lot of action. It's his origin story. It's really good. I've been in the editing room the last couple of weeks and I think that it's good and that audiences are going to like it. But it's a little darker ... You haven't seen this side of him. It's darker and sadder and it's kick-ass. There's a ton of action. It's really kick-ass." She also suggested the film borrows from Wolverine's Victorian youth in one of my least favorite series, Wolverine: Origins.

• The troubled Punisher: War Zone has launched its official site, and it's got all kinds of things to click on. The multiplayer game jammed up my computer so I don't know what that's all about. And IGN has the new poster, which will arrive in your local theaters framed in "real" guns. I must say, that is a pretty impressive piece of marketing.

• David S. Goyer, scribe of The Dark Knight, tried his best to end all these Batman 3 rumors. "It's all B.S.," he told MTV News. "ALL of it. Chris and I haven't even talked about it. He quite understandably is taking a long, long vacation and wants to purge himself." This will dampen the "Guess who's playing Catwoman" rumors for approximately 3.5 days.

• Superhero Hype has 5 videos of Kick-Ass filming in Toronto. Mostly people standing around, and cars being driven on platform trucks. And /film has photos up of Dave "Kick Ass" Lizewski's costume, filled out nicely by his stunt double.

Sometimes I oooh over talk of re-energizing an old franchise; sometimes I cringe and sometimes, like today, my brow is so damned furrowed that I probably have about 20 new wrinkles. The Hollywood Reporter posts that Warner Bros. is going back to Yogi Bear and YellowJellystone Park.

Oh yes, the Hanna-Barbera classic is getting developed into a big-screen feature by the pens of Joshua Sternin and Jeffrey Ventimilia, with Ash Brannon attached to direct. That means a mixture of That 70's Show exec producers and the co-writer and director of Surf's Up. It will be live-action with a CG Yogi and Boo Boo.

Now sure, the chipmunks made a comeback, but at least they have an uber popular Christmas song that keeps them in the memory banks. Something like Speed Racer had the effects going for it. Will kids go wild for a character from the '50s that gets into good-natured fun at a park? And who would voice them? Better yet, simply: WHY? Maybe I'm in the minority, but this doesn't seem like the best idea.

What do you think? Weigh in below ...

I know, I know -- "sequelized" isn't a word, but it's the most fitting label I can come up with. Ever since 300 hit theaters in March 2007, there has been talk of creating some kind of spin off. Would it be a prequel? Would it be a sequel? Would it be some demented fever dream invented by one Cinematical blogger on a late Colorado night?

Well, someone finally asked a 300 alumni other than poor Gerard Butler. IESB.net caught up with director Zack Snyder, who revealed that 300 would receive the sequel treatment. Snyder did the impossible, and actually spoke to Frank Miller about it, and learned he's writing a graphic novel that takes place between Thermopylae and the Battle of Plataea which is seen at the end of the film. There's a mere year in between waiting to be populated with new Spartan heroes (though David Wenham's lone survivor, Dilios, could return) by way of Miller's pen. Snyder promises to direct the adaptation when Miller finishes the book.

There's certainly historical material to draw from -- the time between Thermopylae and Plataea was marked by several battles -- the naval Battle of Artemisium, which occurred alongside Thermopylae, and the Battle of Salamis. Both were victories for the Greek states (although Artemisium could be argued to be a draw), but not without cost. Several Greek cities, including Athens, suffered severe Persian attacks.

But while the Greco-Persian Wars are ripe for many stories and movies, I don't see any of them fitting the hyper-stylized mold of the original graphic novel or the film. The insanity of it all worked because it had a legendary story and king to anchor it down, and shine through the blood-splatters and giant rhinos. Why water that down? As fond as I am of Snyder, Miller and violent boys in leather pants, I wish they would just let the Spartans lie.

If you read my posts regularly, you might be under the impression that the only movies that make me truly weak in the knees are Marvel adaptations. But my heart belongs more to rogue cops than it does superheroes, and if I could have my film wish, it would be for a renaissance of the action/thriller. And you know, I think it might be on its way ...

First comes a story from The Hollywood Reporter that Paramount has hired Josh Olson to adapt Lee Child's novel One Shot. It's the ninth in Child's Jack Reacher series -- why they aren't adapting the first, I have no idea. Now, I haven't read the series, but from all accounts Reacher is the kind of man we haven't seen onscreen since Harry Callahan or Wendell "Bud" White. And that's why Olson (who was also behind the adaptation of A History of Violence) took the job: "I had just finished watching the first two Dirty Harry movies on Blu-ray. And I thought, 'No one's making movies like that anymore.' It coincided perfectly. It's just the kind of movie that I haven't seen in a while. It's a tough, smart, action-oriented thriller." (In a really funny twist, I was watching Dirty Harry last weekend and thinking the same thing -- and also how much I want to date Clint Eastwood circa 1971.)

Obviously, One Shot isn't enough to revive the genre, but Entertainment Weekly reports that rumors continue to gather around Lethal Weapon 5, particularly with Shane Black's Cold Warrior catching everyone's interest. Seems he's down for writing and directing the fifth installment, though all waits on the approval of Mel Gibson. I'm intrigued by the new story details, as it introduces a pair of young New York cops. Now, if Lethal Weapon 5 was more of a reboot/origin story for two new characters who could carry some films of their own, well, that would be pretty darn cool.