MTV News got the scoop from director Ridley Scott that his upcoming Robin Hood pic starring Russell Crowe, "Nottingham," would now be called... "Robin Hood." Writes Larry Carroll,

“Nottingham” has now officially been renamed to reflect its lead character. “Oh yes, I think we are just going to call it ‘Robin Hood’,” Scott revealed. “We start in almost 2 months.”

A Universal spokesperson, however, is somewhat less definitive. "I can tell you the title of 'Nottingham' is changing," she said, "but right now it's 'Untitled Robin Hood Adventure.' "

The reluctance is understandable. "Robin Hood" already has been the title for nearly two dozen films, dating back to 1912. Best known today is the 1991 Kevin Costner starrer "Robin Hood: Prince of Thieves." That was followed by Mel Brooks' 1993 spoof, "Robin Hood: Men In Tights," which apparently killed the titular concept for more than a decade.  

Bonus round: Here's the trailer from RHPOT, a classic of its kind ("A time of war... A time of homecoming... A time for tyrants") and noteworthy for rendering all of its characters mute -- the better to delay the mind-bending concept of a Medieval Robin Hood who somehow possesses all the flat intonations of a Malibu surfer. (Thanks, Erin)

So by now everyone's heard how inexhaustible producer's rep Jeff "The Dude" Dowd annoyed Variety critic John Anderson so thoroughly that Anderson had no choice but to get up from his breakfast and punch him. Or something like that. (Not that hitting is OK!)

Because it's so hard to imagine, because Dowd will milk the second-best publicity opportunity in his life until it is dry and because "Black Dynamite" star Michael Jai White is a helluva guy, here's the re-enactment. [MCN]

We're a mere nine days way from that celebration of celluloid, that snowy schmoozefest, the 2009 Sundance Film Festival. What's the buzz? I have no idea! I'm not going this year _(yay) and am currently Sundance-gossip free, a condition I'll maintain as long as possible.

While I remain in that blissful state, I'd like to provide a PSA for those less fortunate:

The buzz, she is sexy. But do not trust the buzz, for she is bullshit.

I was reminded of this by an Erik Davis post providing an "exclusive premiere" of the one-sheet for  the March 13 release of the buzz film from Sundance 2008, "Sunshine Cleaning," a film that had everything going for it -- namely, that it could (oh please oh please) be a snappy retread of the hit film from Sundance 2006, "Little Miss Sunshine." It had some of the same producers! It had a kooky premise! It won Alan Arkin an Oscar! It had the word "sunshine" in the title! Emily Blunt was in "The Devil Wears Prada"! Amy Adams is magic!

And then "Sunshine" screened to a full house... of crickets. Not that people hated it, but no one said they loved it. And it was kind of gory and it was too expensive and the whole "Sunshine" thing was kind of confusing. We'd anticipated a bidding war; instead, a few days after its premiere, it was as if "Sunshine Cleaning" never happened at all. A month after the festival, Overture Films bought the movie and said it was considering a title change.

By contrast: At Sundance 2005, Warner Independent Pictures was really excited about winning the bidding war for "Strangers With Candy" for $3 million. It also, with National Geographic Films, bought "a French doc about penguins." (Or, as a rival distrib asked me in disbelief, "They got the boring penguin movie?") One post-purchase narration from Morgan Freeman later, "March of the Penguins" earned $77 million and the Oscar for best documentary; WIP never released "Strangers With Candy," which made about $2 million for ThinkFilm instead. [Cinematical]

For this one, I have to let this be a cut-and-paste; Page Six has a certain je nai sais quoi that makes ever Getty Images pic look like a mug shot:

I wish this photo was available in larger resolution, but SnagFilms founders Ted Leonsis and Rick Allen's portrayal of the documentary film market is worth a squint:

The submission, acceptance and purchase numbers are for Sundance (of course), but it's especially interesting for the pyramid that lies beneath it. Those are some tiny-ass figures that are somehow responsible for 1 billion people's internet delivery.

At the recent International Film Festival Summit in Las Vegas, Allen told the audience that festivals "are now more important than ever," which is something you'd figure he'd have to say ("In a time when most of us feel heightened senses of both fear and hope, storytelling is critical to inform, engage, challenge and touch" -- glurgh). However, he also pointed out that as the entertainment industry becomes both consolidated and fragile, metrics rule and gatekeepers become more risk averse. And for festivals, he suggests that means preserving their ability to make artistic choices:

I suggested to the festivals represented at IFFS that they focus on the basics, and move aggressively in one new direction. Blocking and tackling in this environment means making whatever cuts are necessary to ensure survival; analyzing where they have defensible uniqueness; and considering joint activities with other festivals (such as to back-of-the-house functions) or even combinations. But the biggest opportunity comes from extending their business model with a smart web strategy that amplifies a festival's impact beyond a few days and the limitations of bricks-&-mortar to a wider audience and a persistent presence year-round.

In other words, it's the same story everywhere: Cut back and get what's left online. [IndieWire]

The 2009 Sundance lineup will be announced in about 30 minutes, which should give you enough time to read Eugene Hernandez's helpful primer for all 3,600 of the feature filmmakers who submitted their work for the festival's approval.

For the 120 or so who made the cut, Hernandez tempers the back-slapping with hard-nosed realities: "Merely being a part of the lineup doesn't guarantee that you or your film are going to get any attention, particularly from buyers and press." True that. As is his observation that Sundance 2009 "will be like no other in that it probably won't be as robust for big on-site acquisitions." So for all the money you've spent so far, prepare to spend some more and don't expect too much in the way of short-term returns. For those who were turned away, he provides a quick primer on the rest of the circuit, with the reiminder that "for many filmmakers your film festival tour is your de facto theatrical release." Caveat emptor. [iW]

This is how bad it's gotten: the Sundance Film Festival, an event that (fairly or not) has become synonymous with sponsorship, is looking to the state of Utah for financial aid because corporate purses are drawn tight. According to NPR, "Organizers recently met with state officials and said the film festival is good for the state's economy. An official with the Governor's Office of Economic Development responded that everyone is having a tough time right now." And the timing for this potential handout is, shall we say, awful. There's already talk of a Sundance boycott in the face of the passage of Prop. 8, the logic being that Mormon hotbed Utah is a "hate state." Among the strong arguments against such a protest is that Park City, while in Utah, is not of Utah. If the festival were to receive state funding, would that logic still hold?

How did indie film become inextricably linked with Prop. 8? First, there was the question of whether an earlier release date for Focus Features' "Milk" might have helped defeat the ban on gay marriage. Now there's talk of a 2009 Sundance Film Festival boycott -- the connection being that Sundance, like the Mormon Church, is based in Utah. However, Mormons devoted tens of millions in both dollars and man-hours to support the California constiutional amendment that defines marriage as a heterosexual act; Sundance, of course, did not.

The idea of a Sundance boycott was initiated by John Aravosis, a gay-rights activist who writes americablog.com and has also organized boycotts of Dr. Laura Schlesinger's TV show, Microsoft and Ford over gay rights issues. Avarosis told Brock Vergaris, "Large donors are involved who are very interested in organizing a campaign, because I do not believe in frivolous boycotts. The main focus is going to be going after the Utah brand. At this point, honestly, we're going to destroy the Utah brand. It is a hate state."

Vergaris points out that a boycott "would likely do the most harm in Salt Lake City and Park City — two of the state's most liberal cities and those with some of the smallest percentages of Mormons in the state." And the Sundance Film Festival responded Monday with this statement: "Sundance Institute was founded on the idea of championing diversity and freedom of expression. It would be a grave disappointment to us if our Festival were to be singled out for a boycott, especially as we celebrate 25 years of showcasing independent voices."

Sundance, which is about a week away from locking down its 2009 lineup, already has its defenders, Eugene Hernandez reports. Allison Anders ("Gas Food Lodging") wrote on Facebook, "Sundance was for decades one of the tiny few hands that fed gay filmmakers, women filmmakers, browns, blacks, reds and everyone underrepresented on the screen... If people continue to misplace their rage over Prop 8 passing, they will change not one thing." Ross Katz ("Lost in Translation") also chimed in on FB: "The idea of boycotting Sundance is totally misguided... They offer a voice - a loud, uncompromising voice - for filmmakers of all ethnicities, sexual orientations, political bents. Those voices are shouted from the mountain tops of Park City. If anything, take the amazing platform that Sundance is, and run with it." [AP, indieWIRE]

RELATED:

• Send a donation to overturn Prop.8 in the name of the Mormon Church!
• Did "Milk" miss the opportunity to change history?

The recession is hitting the formerly boundless festival circuit, with the Jackson Hole Film Festival and Institute announcing that they have closed. Johanna Love reports that while the five-year-old festival's estimated 2009 budget was $1.2 million-$1.5 million, only $300,000 was in place and the current financial climate made hope of covering the shortfall seem dim. This year's June event saw its largest-ever audience, around 10,000, and the launch of the Global Insight Summit, with United Nations secretary-general Ban Ki-Moon as its keynote speaker; festival managing director Todd Rankin says he hopes the summit might continue. [Jackson Hole Daily, via The Circuit]

The 13th Pusan International Film Festival kicked off today under less than celebratory circumstances: One of South Korea's most beloved actresses, Choi Jin-sil, was found dead the day before, an apparent suicide, and the once-robust local film industry has seen better days. "South Korean films are in a major slump," writes an AP correspondent. "In Seoul, seven out of the 10 biggest box office hits in the first half of the year were imports... In May, Korean films accounted for a measly 7.7 percent of the total box office." The concurrent film market plans to showcase five local productions for investors. [International Herald Tribune]

Scott Kirsner has a modest proposal for film festivals and indie filmmakers who love them: "During the festival, or on the day it ends, (filmmakers) should make their movie available through their own Web site, perhaps using DVD-on-demand services like NeoFlix, Film Baby, or CreateSpace/Amazon. Same thing for making downloads available: get that movie onto Amazon Unbox, B-Side, or iArthouse." Festivals can help out by making deals with iTunes, cable channels or pay-per-view. Writes Kirsner: "If I read a glowing review of something playing at Toronto this weekend, I’m going to want to download it or buy the DVD right then –- and I may not feel the same way a week later, after the festival ends (I may not remember the movie at all by that point.)" Toronto’s rules say that films can’t be available on the Internet prior to the last day of the festival. [CinemaTech]