A Christmas Carol is the definition of the sort of timeless Christmas classic that folks love to enjoy during the holiday season. So naturally, this means that the Charles Dickens source material is ripe for reinterpretation over the almost two centuries that the story has existed. The latest version to take a swing will be a new Bennett Miller directed / Tom Stoppard written interpretation.

The film was recently announced by The Hollywood Reporter, as Annapurna Pictures is developing A Christmas Carol as a sort of reunion with Bennett Miller, who previously directed Foxcatcher for the production shingle. As if that wasn't prestigious enough, bringing Oscar-winning writer Tom Stoppard into the mix lends an air of authenticity, as the award-winning playwright won his moment of golden glory for his screenplay to Shakespeare In Love.

So what's supposed to make this version of A Christmas Carol any better or different from the many that have come before it? Well, hypothetically, this version of the 1843 novella could be one of the most serious versions of the story. Considering the last major studio version we can think of was the vastly entertaining, yet obviously family oriented Robert Zemeckis version release by Disney in 2009, the Dickens story has mostly occupied a realm for all to enjoy. But with Bennett Miller and Tom Stoppard behind this brand new retelling of Ebenezer Scrooge's night to remember, we're kind of hoping that both collaborators see the opportunity to take the classic story onto a more serious, darker path.

While the lessons that Scrooge learns during the course of his legendary visits from the ghosts of Christmas past, present, and future are meant to ultimately leave him a changed, uplifted man, that doesn't mean that any film-maker adapting A Christmas Carol should skimp on the horrors of humanity. After all, Ebenezer Scrooge's story is of intense greed and a severe case of misanthropic behavior, so the harder the lessons, the more likely that the audience will believe that Scrooge will stay a changed man after all is said and done. Though with all of this talk about a rich misanthrope, we can't help but wonder if Foxcatcher actor Steve Carell might reunite with Bennett Miller for this new project.

Another version of A Christmas Carol may seem like the cynic's idea of overkill, but with the fresh talents of Bennett Miller and Tom Stoppard being on board with this latest version, there's a chance that this could be a groundbreaking interpretation of the source material. There's no information as to when production may start, or what sort of release date window A Christmas Carol will be looking to aim for. But as soon as we have any further information, you'll be the first to know!

Mudslinging campaigns are never appreciated when a film is working its way down the Oscar campaign trail. Any questions raised about the authenticity of a project only damages the credibility of movies that consider themselves to be Best Picture contenders. Selma faced some uncomfortable questions about its historical accuracy earlier this month, and now Bennett Miller’s Foxcatcher is taking severe heat from an unexpected source – namely, Mark Schultz, the man on which the movie is based.

Schultz has been posting messages on his Facebook and Twitter account over the past few days, and they have been escalating in hostility toward the movie, and Bennet Miller specifically. Though this Twitter feed is unverified, we believe this to be Schultz’s account, as it matches posts on his Facebook page, as well. The most aggressive Tweets landed online on Dec. 31, when Schultz Tweeted:

He continued:

And concluded (after a series of similarly angry Tweets):

And:

What could have caused such outrage? Several clues can be found on Mark Schultz’s Facebook page. In a Dec. 29 post, he said it was "pretty lousy" what Bennett Miller did to his character in Foxcatcher. And though several of his followers noted that it’s a movie, and that he should take his beef to Miller (and off Facebook), the former Olympic gold medalist continued to vent on social media.

The most revealing post appeared on Dec. 21, when Schultz explained that efforts were being made to "strip and degrade" the credit he felt he deserved for sharing his life story. In the post, Mark says:

And on Dec. 30, Schultz laid out ALL of the mistakes he finds in the movie, narrowing in on the hint of a sexual relationship between himself and John du Pont. This is a must read.

Strangely, these posts are sprinkled next to posts that praise Bennett Miller and Channing Tatum for the work they did on the movie. This was an unexpected outburst, and it will be interesting to see how (and if) Miller chooses to respond. Foxcatcher is in theaters now, and is earning raves for Miller’s direction, as well as for the acting performances of the three male leads – Tatum, Steve Carell and Mark Ruffalo. Could this controversy start to damage the film’s reputation? Or is it all a massive misunderstanding?

This year may find Channing Tatum in the in his very fist Oscar campaign. The actor's performance in Bennett Miller's upcoming sports drama Foxcatcher has been earning rave reviews, and there have been whispers that he could be a very real contender as we get deeper into awards season. Critics have praised the intensity of his turn as wrestler Mark Schultz, and while most of us haven't had the chance to actually see the movie yet, his passion and intensity getting into the role is very much apparent in this newly revealed behind the scenes story.

The Hollywood Reporter has published a long, in-depth feature about Channing Tatum in their latest issue, and contained within that feature is a scary story about just how intense the actor got on the set of Foxcatcher. As you may have seen in the film's trailers, there is a scene in the movie where Tatum's character is trying to pump himself up, and after punching himself in the face a few times he winds up putting his face through a mirror. What you don't know is that filming the scene not only drew blood, but actually did his part to damage the set. Said director Bennett Miller describing the scene,

The intensity here is no joke, and on full display in the gif below:

It's both impressive and scary that Channing Tatum could take his performance to this kind of place, and it's reminiscent of some other very passionate turns we've seen from dedicated actors over the years. In fact, this story is very similar to what happened with Leonardo DiCaprio on the set of Django Unchained. During a monologue, the actor severely cut his hand, and while he began bleeding profusely as a result, it didn't derail him in the slightest. That take, like what happened on Foxcatcher, made it into the final version of the movie:

We are eagerly awaiting the arrival of Foxcatcher in theaters, and the great news is that the wait is very nearly over. The movie will be available in limited release next Friday, November 14th.

There is a tremendous amount of buzz surrounding Steve Carell’s upcoming performance in Foxcatcher. In fact, the actor is expected to be a major force this awards season. He is, by all accounts, great in the film. Those who have followed the former Office star’s career, however, shouldn’t be too shocked, however. He’s always been able to tap into tremendous sadness and loneliness behind his eyes. He just needed the right project, and apparently, a director to threaten him with something really fucked up.

According to The Hollywood Reporter, director Bennett Miller told Steve Carell to write down the worst thing he’d ever done in his entire life, to find a moment that was so evil and/ or embarrassing that he would never tell his wife. He then made him put the piece of paper inside his pocket before shooting the movie's most pivotal scene. He wanted him to realize that at any moment in time, anyone could reach out, grab his personal shame and tell the world.

Here’s a portion of what Bennett Miller actually told him…

Every director seems to have a different approach to getting great performances out of his or her actors. There are some who spend hours and hours meticulously dissecting and talking out every single motivation behind a character’s behavior. There are some who prefer to bring the talent together weeks ahead of time in order to rehearse over and over again. There are some who shoot take after take. Some like short days. Others like long days. Apparently Bennett Miller likes this morally complicated approach. But if it works, it works.

It’ll be interesting to see where Steve Carell’s career goes from here. He’s obviously most known as a comedian, but if he makes a few good dramatic movies in a row, we may completely alter the way we look at him, at which point he’ll need to decide whether to leave the siliness behind, waffle back and forth between the two genres or return fully back to comedy, content he’s proven his talents.

To check out the brand new Foxcatcher poster, you can flip over to the net page…

Thanks to Super Bowl XLVIII, there was not a new episode of True Detective last night. Girls and Looking moved to Saturday to avoid the big game but HBO's (not true-)crime story decided it best to skip this week altogether and just air the fourth installment, "Who Goes There," next Sunday instead.

There was, however, still some good True Detective related news this week with the network signing creator Nic Pizzolatto to a two year deal. It probably goes without saying that Pizzolatto inking with HBO means a second series of the anthology is all but guaranteed. So in the critically acclaimed show's absence this week, I thought of five directors who might be up to the challenge of taking over from Cary Joji Fukunaga. That is, if the network reinvests in the one director model after he departs at season's end. I think they should, the result speaks for themselves. Not that I know what any of these artist want to do with their time but some considerations came into play when selecting Fukunaga’s replacement. That’s why there are no big names like Darren Aronofsky or Christopher Nolan on the list even though they’d kill. And maybe they would do it but I picked these filmmakers because, on top of being perfect for the job, I think HBO could possibly nab them. Here are the five...

Michelle MacLaren

It's only a matter of time before Michelle MacLaren is off directing feature films so HBO should grab her for True Detective while they still can. The longtime television director has quite the resume, including several X-Files and the second ever episode of The Walking Dead, but is probably best known for her work as co-executive producer and eleven-time director on Breaking Bad. MacLaren was an integral part of the AMC drama, coming on board early and making an immediate impression with "4 Days Out" (S2, E9) before eventually being entrusted with Season 5's mid-season finale, "Gliding Over All," as well as the fourth last episode of the series, "To'hajiilee."

It might help her bid if Bryan Cranston and Aaron Paul signed on to be the True Detectives for the second season. The whole idea of the anthology is to allow big actors to partake in the passion project and perhaps the pair would relish the chance to work together again. I know we would. Oh, and it's probably worth noting that MacLaren already has an in at HBO since she recently finished filming her fourth episode of Game of Thrones. It's clear she can handle stepping into another hit show and I'd love to see her take on Pizzolatto's words.

David Gordon Green

The next filmmaker on the list also has an in with HBO since David Gordon Green was a consulting producer and director of twelve episodes of Jody Hill, Ben Best and Danny McBride's Eastbound and Down. Now, if you only know him from his work on the raunchy (albeit rad) series or his big Hollywood comedies like Pineapple Express and Your Highness (or aren't familiar with his name at all and just read these credits) then you're probably wondering why he'd be a great fit for True Detective. Well, all you really need to do is watch the trailer for Joe, his upcoming film starring Nicolas Cage and Tye Sheridan, to understand why I think he'd make a great director for the show's second season. In fact, those aforementioned broad comedies are probably not the best barometer of DGG's work with Joe as well as Prince Avalanche, another recent film of his (featuring Paul Rudd and Emile Hirsch), representing a return to form of sorts.

The director made a name for himself with small, compelling character or regional portraits like George Washington, All The Real Girls, Undertow and Snow Angels. Green's upcoming projects show a renewed interest in a bigger scale, working with Al Pacino on Manglehorn and Chris Pine for In The Line but perhaps he'll want to return to the small-screen after and bring a few of his stars with him? Rudd and Hirsch had wonderful chemistry. Or Cage and Pacino on their game? McBride would be an interesting choice. Maybe with Jonah Hill? As long as we all agree to pretend The Sitter never happened.

Bennett Miller

It might be hard to convince a two-time Academy Award nominee for Best Director to come to television, especially since his third film could be destined for the same fate, but Bennett Miller would undoubtedly produce an incredible season of True Detective. Miller got his Oscar nominations for helming Capote and Moneyball, two true stories that have little in common beyond being based on actual events. Well, as well as the talented filmmaker, the recently deceased Philip Seymour Hoffman and their impeccable quality. Hoffman would also have been a perfect fit for the series because, well, an actor of his caliber is a perfect fit for any project. Sadly, we won't see another collaboration between the two, not that it's important in the grand scheme.

Back to the list. Miller's next film is not only based on real events, again, but Foxcatcher, like Capote, also explores an actual crime with Steve Carell almost unrecognizable in the lead role. The director's affinity for true stories, probably born out of his documentary beginnings (The Cruise), fits the vérité feel of the present storyline of True Detective while his features also contain compositions as beautiful and haunting as any in Fukunaga's first season. Seriously, just watch the opening of Capote, the story behind "In Cold Blood," where Miller's camera explores the crime scene.

Sarah Polley

Similar to Bennett Miller, the next director on the list is not only an Academy Award nominee but has also dabbled in both feature and documentary filmmaking with great success. Sarah Polley worked with Atom Egoyan and David Cronenberg (and, uh, Zack Snyder) as an actress before going behind the camera and earning a Best Adapted Screenplay nomination for Away From Her.

Polley not only proved adept at handling serious drama but also directed the legend Julie Christie to a Best Actress nod. A snowy setting similar to Alice Munro's short story might be a prime location for the second season of True Detective. Don't worry, that's not the only or even a main reason why I think she should take over the HBO series. It's actually Polley's next two films that prompted the choice with Take This Waltz and Stories We Tell ('snubbed' by the Oscars for Best Documentary) working as interesting companion pieces that reminds me of the way the past and present are presented in True Detective. As far as I'm concerned, she could also star in the series or bring some of high profile stars like Michelle Williams to the small screen. Polley and Williams as partners would be pretty rad.

Ben Wheatley

Ben Wheatley, the last entry on the list, might be the least known director of the bunch but Martin Scorsese called his latest film, A Field in England, "audacious and wildly brilliant... a most original and stunning cinematic experience." The director has been gaining notoriety over the last few years thanks to almost universal praise for his bleak yet funny feature films, however, he's also no stranger to the small-screen having worked on a few weird and dark British comedies like The Wrong Door and Ideal (with a feature film adaptation of the latter next on Wheatley's schedule) before his latest hot streak.

Wheatley's Kill List is one of the most intense and scary movies I've seen in years while Sightseers is about as dark as a comedy can get and still be a comedy. Like I said, the director is quickly making a name for himself and it's only a matter of time before he makes his first A-List American project. HBO would be a great place to start if he can fit it into his busy schedule with on his adaptation of J.G. Ballard's High-Rise starring Tom HIddleston on tap. Not to mention a couple episodes of the new Doctor Who he's shooting. As for his potential stars, well, Hiddleston and Hemsworth would be amusing but I'm sure there are also several other actors and actresses in Hollywood itching to work with Wheatley. Especially if it's on something like the second season of True Detective.

True Detective returns with Episode 4, “Who Goes There,” on Sunday, February 9 at 9:00 p.m. ET on HBO. Created (as well as written) by Nic Pizzolatto and directed by Cary Joji Fukunaga, the series stars Matthew McConaughey, Woody Harrelson, Michelle Monaghan, Michael Potts, Tory Kittles, Alexandra Daddario, Elizabeth Reaser and Kevin Dunn.

One of the most anticipated late-year releases, Bennett Miller’s true crime story Foxcatcher was almost certainly going to show up in the Oscar race, as the Academy was very kind (in nominations) to both of Miller’s previous features, 2005’s Capote and 2011’s Moneyball. But it doesn’t look like that’s the case anymore, Sony Pictures has announced that they are pushing the planned December release of Foxcatcher off until 2014. This is the point in which I jump up and down, beating my chest, yelling, “Are you kidding me?”

In Foxcatcher Steve Carell stars as John du Pont in the most atypical role of his career. Du Pont, he of an extremely wealthy family, was a Pennsylvania ornithologist and sports fan who sponsored USA Wrestling and eventually built an amateur wrestling compound in Newtown Square, Delaware. He allowed his friend and world champion wrestler David Schulz, played by Mark Ruffalo in the film, to live on the grounds with his family. David and his brother Mark Schultz, played by Channing Tatum, were the only two brothers to with both Olympic and World Championships. But while training for another Olympic run with “Team Foxcatcher,” tragedy struck.

A tragedy at the time, it didn’t seem ripe material for a feature, but a trailer-- which has sadly already been removed from the Internet-- proved that it could be completely chilling. Films based on true stories like this are always harder to watch, since the ending is already set in stone. But du Pont was apparently suffering from a slowly forming mental breakdown, and it’s going to be really fun to watch Carell chew those scenes up. Affecting whatever accent he’s got going on, it’s eerie hearing him say lines like, “I am a patriot,” and “A coach has great power on an athlete’s life.” I mean, just look at him! He’s as far away from Michael Scott and Maxwell Smart as he could be.

I can’t say as much for Ruffalo or Tatum, since they’re given limited dialogue in that quick trailer. But they both look right at home, especially Tatum, who looks to be giving it 110% meathead power.

So it probably won’t be premiering at the AFI Fest in November, and it’s a shame that there isn’t even a planned date in 2014 for us to look forward to. The filmmakers apparently wanted more time to get the film just right, but one has to wonder what this film’s post-production entails. The only thing sitting in the December 20 spot right now is Achorman: The Legend Continues, so Foxcatcher had a good chance of pulling in some bank before Christmas.

I've had my eye on Bennett Miller's Foxcatcher for ages, and for a lot of the obvious Oscar-baity reasons. It's the follow-up film from the director of Moneyball and Capote, and tells another true story with a tinge of murder, about how the heir to a massive fortune came to sponsor a wrestling team and eventually murder one of the players. And, as you might expect from the guy who made Moneyball, Foxcatcher has a fantastic cast in place to draw you in, including Channing Tatum and Mark Ruffalo as wrestling brothers Mark and David Schultz, and Steve Carell as the man who killed one of them.

Now, in this first official photo from Foxcatcher that premiered at Entertainment Weekly, we see Steve Carell in full-on future killer mode, and if he looks a little unfamiliar, that's the point. "We just had our first test [screening], and not everybody recognized Steve," Miller told EW. "He is aged [for the film], and his face is changed, and his physicality changed." And though Carell has tried his hands in dramatic roles in the past, in Hope Springs and Little Miss Sunshine, his turn as a schizophrenic murderer will deliberately go against his comedic persona: "John DuPont was a character who nobody thought was capable of doing something as horrible as he did. And I did not want to cast somebody who would feel dangerous in that way.”

Foxcatcher-- which was the name of the wrestling facility that du Pont ran-- tells the bizarre story of what happened as du Pont's mental health declined while he was allowing as many as 150 athletes to train at his Foxcatcher Center. David Schultz was a former Olympian who considered du Pont a friend, even living on the property with his wife, and he attempted to help du Pont as his mental health declined-- only to be shot in du Pont's driveway, with several witnesses on hand to see it. Foxcatcher assembled its impressive cast last fall, and was picked up by Sony, who clearly were happy to stay in the Bennett Miller business following the success of Moneyball. Foxcatcher is strangely missing from many of the fall festivals, but it recently announced a December 20 release date-- which keeps it right in the thick of the awards season, where we expected it.

Revisit what happens when an actor transforms himself for a Bennett Miller film in this look back at Capote, and look for Foxcatcher in the middle of the holiday season rush on December 20.

Given that Columbia Pictures-- a.k.a. Sony-- was behind the successful and Oscar-lauded Moneyball, it makes sense that they would want to continue being in business with director Bennett Miller. So it's not especially surprising to learn that Sony has picked up the distribution rights to Miller's next film, Foxcatcher, which is currently in production with a major-league cast on board.

Steve Carell, Channing Tatum-- who has been making bank for Sony this year thanks to 21 Jump Street-- Mark Ruffalo, Sienna Miller, Vanessa Redgrave and Anthony Michael Hall make up the cast of the film, which a script from Dan Fogelman based on some pretty incredible true events. Carell will play John DuPont, heir to the DuPont family fortune who invested heavily in American amateur athletics, including sponsoring the USA Wrestling team as "Team Foxcatcher." He also allowed wrestler Dave Schultz to stay in his home, an arrangement that turned deadly when DuPont shot Schultz dead in his driveway, witnessed by two people. Tatum, as you might imagine from his Magic Mike build, is playing Schultz.

It's not always easy to turn fascinating true stories into fascinating movies, but Miller managed to do just that with both Capote-- which took the actions of the book In Cold Blood but wove a narrative around them-- and Moneyball, based on a book about the math side of baseball. He's quickly proving himself as one of the most promising directing talents working, and Foxcatcher ought to offer him plenty more challenges-- and hopefully the rest of us the chance to see this fascinating, bizarre true story unfold in a movie as strong as what Miller has previously done.

Things are currently looking really good for Mark Ruffalo. In addition to getting extremely positive early reviews for his performance as Bruce Banner/The Hulk in Joss Whedon’s The Avengers, he’s just landed a role in the next film from Academy Award-nominated director Bennett Miller.

The actor is currently in talks for Foxcatcher, Miller’s follow up to last year’s Moneyball, according to Variety. As previously reported, the film is already set to star Steve Carell and Channing Tatum. The movie is based on the true story of John du Pont, heir to the du Pont fortune, who built his own wrestling training facility called Team Foxcatcher. Du Pont also happened to be a paranoid schizophrenic who murdered Olympic gold medal-winning wrestler David Schultz. Carell will be playing du Pont and Tatum will portray Mark Schultz, David’s younger brother. Should he sign on Ruffalo will play the tragic David Schultz. Miller has been developing this project and will be working from a script by E. Max Frye and Dan Futterman (Capote).

Depending on where the story begins this could either be a very big or very small role for Ruffalo. Following the murder, du Pont had a two-day stand-off with the police. If the story focuses on that end of the crime than Ruffalo won’t be hanging around for long, but if it goes back a few years and looks at du Pont’s relationship with Schultz then it could be much bigger. We’ll have to wait to hear more details.

Every weekday from now until the Oscar ceremony we'll be running a For Your Consideration piece on behalf of every Best Picture nominee, arguing why it deserves its nomination or even a win, arguing why it's important, or even pointing out why it doesn't belong at the Oscars at all. Here is Eric with a personal argument on behalf of Moneyball.

In 2008, Barack Obama defeated John McCain and was elected the 44th president of the United States. He was able to accomplish this monumental feat with the power of one word: change. After years of war, economic collapse and endless bad faith from politicians, the American people stood up, said that they were sick of the failing status quo and used democracy to demand something new. But change never comes easily – just ask Billy Beane.

I don’t think that Moneyball is a political film. I don’t think that director Bennett Miller saw Beane as a proxy for Obama and I don’t think the movie sways to either side of the political scale. How could it? Michael Lewis wrote “Moneyball: The Art of Winning an Unfair Game” in 2003 and the movie chronicles the Oakland Athletics’ 2002 season. But no movie released in 2011 better represents the era in which we are living and the magnitude of that fact is why Moneyball should take home the Best Picture prize at this year’s Academy Awards.

This year’s list of Best Picture nominees contains an unprecedented number of films that look backwards and reflect on the past. The Artist and Hugo both transport audiences back to the golden age of cinema. The Help and The Tree of Life both take us back to the 1960s. Midnight in Paris has Owen Wilson transported back in time to the early 20th century. War Horse takes place entirely during World War I. Of the nine films up for the big prize at the Academy Awards this year, only three – Moneyball, The Descendants and Extremely Loud and Incredibly Close – are set after 2000. But while our culture has become obsessed with nostalgia and the way things were, it’s the opposite of where we should be looking. We need to stop glorifying the past and learn how to change for the future, and no film from last year – nominated for Best Picture or not – does that better than Miller’s baseball drama.

We should aspire to be a renegade like Beane, and what’s most impressive about Moneyball is that the film makes that seem achievable. As scripted by Steve Zaillian and Aaron Sorkin and brilliantly portrayed by Brad Pitt, Beane is not a god or a saint, but rather a normal, flawed human being who has been driven to rebellion against a broken system. His obsession with work takes away time with his daughter, he has rage issues that often lead him to throw office supplies against the wall, and his past is riddled with mistakes and failures. But rather than let his humanity defeat him, the A’s general manager uses it to fuel his drive and make the changes that he knows are right.

At the end of Moneyball, Billy Beane takes a meeting with John W. Henry, the owner of the Boston Red Sox, who offers the A’s manager a $12.5 million salary to run Boston’s organization. During their conversation, Henry, played by Arliss Howard, dispenses this bit of wisdom:

We, as a nation, are covered in blood. In the last three years we have seen health care reform that could eventually help us reach the standards set by other first-world nations, troop withdrawal from Iraq, and economic reform that has seen the unemployment rate finally start to drop. And every change has been met with debate, dispute, denunciations, and disparagement. But then you have the 2004 Red Sox. Embracing the methodology propagated by Beane, the organization won its first championship in 86 years. Change turned into triumph, and that social message is displayed perfectly in Bennett Miller’s film. And that not only deserves to be celebrated, but needs to be rewarded.

For more arguments for and against this year's Oscar nominees, go right HERE.

Bennett Miller earned a Best Director Oscar nomination in 2005 for his debut feature, Capote (and also coached Philip Seymour Hoffman to his first Oscar win). But he then waited six years to release his follow-up, which ended up being the critically acclaimed inside-baseball drama Moneyball with Brad Pitt and Jonah Hill.

Thankfully, we won’t have to wait another six years for Miller to release his next film, as plans for the announced Foxcatcher appear to be coming together. Steve Carell joined the drama weeks ago, ready to tell the story of paranoid schizophrenic John du Pont, a multimillionaire and member of the esteemed du Pont family who shot and killed Olympic wrestler David Schultz at his home. Following the murder, du Pont barricaded himself in Schultz’s mansion and negotiated with police for two days.

Details about Miller’s production are starting to reach us. The L.A. Times reports that G.I. Joe star Channing Tatum has signed on to play Schultz, who was close friends with du Pont and was trying to help the man get his life in order when he was murdered for his efforts. Schultz was a seven-time world and Olympic wrestling champion. He left behind a wife and two children when he was murdered. As for du Pont, he was jailed for his crime and died in prison in 2010.

It’s unclear if Miller’s story will follow du Pont’s story from an early stage, giving Tatum and Carell plenty of scenes together prior to the murder, or if he’ll focus more on du Pont’s trial and incarceration. Either way, Miller has shown an incredible knack for casting in his first two films, and if he sees something in Tatum that works for Foxcatcher, I’m willing to see what the handsome (but so far one-dimensional) performer can bring to the production.

When Sony pulled the plug on Steven Soderbergh's planned adaptation of Moneyball just days before production was to start, then handed the project over to Capote director Bennett Miller, it seemed fair to worry that the studio had brought in a less-established director who they could boss around and force to make a very traditional, very dull sports movie. But there's a reason that Miller spent a long five years before picking his Capote follow-up-- he's a very picky, very thoughtful director who knew that a traditional sports narrative was the last thing Moneyball needed. In fact, he was so wary about falling into the usual traps that he avoided even showing the action on the baseball field until the film's third act.

I talked to Miller during what must have been an exhausting jaunt through the Toronto Film Festival, just a few weeks before Moneyball was set to open in theaters (it's out starting tomorrow). He opened up about how he and Brad Pitt decided a common goal for telling the story of Billy Beane and the Oakland A's, how Beane's personal story is what defines the film, and why he did eventually relent and show off the bright stadium lights and green grass iconography and baseball that we all know and love. Take a look below, check out my review of the film if you're so inclined, and catch Moneyball in theaters this weekend.

The way that you came on board this was not just unusual but very public. At what point after the Soderbergh version fell apart did you come into this?

To be totally honest I don't know the timing. I don't remember when it was that the previous thing ended. After it had, there was a renewed effort that must have gone for some months before I ever came on. I don't remember where it was at that point.

And when you started becoming interested in it, what got you on board?

It was not a love at first sight kind of thing. There was a lot to look at and a lot to read and absorb. Brad was the one who was passionate about it and driving the effort to keep this alive and get it done. I sat with him and flew out to LA, we had a long talk, and discovered that there was a common interest.

Was there a primary thing that you both realized you wanted to get out of this story, and that was where your thought process kind of merged?

One thing is that we both recognized that there's really two films going on, there's two stories. The story of a guy who thinks he's trying to win baseball games and thinks that's what he really wants, and we were both focused and concerned on the undercurrents, and what's happening beneath the surface.

For Billy Beane personally?

Yeah. And as it happens, also like Brad, and honestly probably for most people, you have a public self, a public face. Then you've got a private reality that's somewhat masked by the public image. I think that the superficial story of a guy trying to put together a baseball team that's going to win on a low budget, it's a nice structure and it's the stuff that you can make a movie about. But it was the quieter thing that's never really explicitly stated in the movie, but it's what it's all about, that this is a guy who's trying to remedy something from his past, that he has his own personal, private reasons that are driving him and make him desperate to accomplish something. There's a line in Michael Lewis's book about Billy wondering if there was another life that he was supposed to be living. When he was a kid, like 17 years old, he had to make a decision--

Going to Stanford vs. joining the pro leagues?

Yeah. I think when his life did not turn out the way he expected it to turn out, he looked back and began to question the decision he made and the truth about himself and this world, baseball, that he had spent his life in. I thought that was more the hook for me.

His internal struggle, and his personal story, it makes Brad Pitt's performance really interesting. The leading man role can turn out really bland, but he's really interesting-- how did you guys work together to bring that out?

I think you begin just in the abstract, what is essentially going on, what's happening in the scene? I want to get this player, or I'm studying to see information about this player or that player. That's the action, that's what's happening. But if you understand that at this point you are, as things after a long stretch of going badly, if things begin to turn around, how does this guy react to it. The truth is that instead of relaxing into it and being OK, he really becomes hungrier and more desperate and more of a bull. With success does not come relief, but comes an amplification of his need.

And is that the way to deal with the end of this story not really being the classic story arc? You end with your main character still searching.

The fact that he does not have that big, traditional sports movie end is a great thing. I don't think that there would be a movie--

I don't think he would be the same Billy Beane if that happened.

And how would you relate to that guy who has the big win? Because that's not life, and that's not something you can really relate to. There isn't a finish line to these things, there isn't a conclusion, isn't an event at which point you kiss a frog and it becomes a prince and you're happy. And how many times have you seen that before? There is a triumph in the movie, but it doesn't burn as bright and fast as something like that. It's not this ephemeral thing. It's a quieter, more private, deeper, personal, long-lasting, altering the course of his life by a little bit.

When you get to the big game, you have a few moments to use those iconic baseball images, like the flag unfurling or the view from behind home plate. Were you being careful not to overuse it?

You can very easily be desensitized to the other things that are going on if you just surrender to the tropes and the genre of baseball. If you really indulge in all of that and go for that sentiment and push those buttons, it's hard to undo that. Once you tip over into that place, I think it happens at the expense of the other frequencies that the movie is hopefully communicating on.

But you use it a little bit, when you could have kept our perspective on the game entirely with Billy in the weight room?

But those things are part of the game. That color guard ceremony, that's real. And it's fascinating. It is part of it all. It's not like we went overboard with it at all. To me it feels like an honest brush stroke and a reminder of where they're at.

When the first trailer for Moneyball dropped last month one thought was going through my head constantly: a movie about baseball statistics shouldn't look this amazing. When you have Aaron Sorkin and Steven Zaillian working on the script and Brad Pitt starring, however, it's a whole new ballgame (if you'll pardon the pun). Throw in the fact that director Bennett Miller's angles, focus-shifts and alternating speeds make the games look incredibly beautiful and Moneyball may end up being one of the best films of the fall. Now we get our second look at the film.

Based on the book by Michael Lewis, the film centers on Billy Beane (Brad Pitt), a former-player-turned-general-manager who, despite all of his efforts, can't seem to make a winning team out of the Oakland Athletics. Strangled by a microscopic budget and his job always on the line, Beane's fortunes turn around when he meets Peter Brand (Jonah Hill), a young man who has a whole new approach to scouting. Signing players with high on-base percentages instead of homerun power, Beane and Brand work together to change the game, but with an institution as storied as Major League Baseball change doesn't come easy.

Check out the film's new TV spot below.

By now Demetri Martin was supposed to be a big star. He was the lead character in Ang Lee's summer 60s tribute Taking Woodstock, despite having only worked as a standup comedian previously, and he'd been cast in Steven Soderbergh's Moneyball project even before Lee's film opened. Then a lot of things that had nothing to do with Martin went wrong. First Soderbergh was kicked off Moneyball just days before production was to start, then Woodstock was a box office disappointment and quickly forgotten. Bennett Miller signed on to direct Moneyball last December, and while we hadn't heard anything one way or another, it was safe to assume Martin would still be playing Paul de Podesta, the Harvard graduate who applied economics knowledge to help the struggling Oakland A's baseball team.

But now there's been yet another shakeup on the Moneyball squad-- The Playlist is reporting that Jonah Hill has been brought in to replace Martin, apparently with the goal of giving the movie a broader comedic appeal. While Martin was always a big question mark as the lead of a major studio movie, the Hill casting seems truly bizarre. Plus, he's already involved in half a dozen upcoming projects-- when is he going to have time for this one?

Brad Pitt is apparently still on board to play A's general manager Billy Beane, despite the fact that Soderbergh has bailed. While it's hard to imagine Hill playing a Harvard graduate economics whiz, it's nearly incomprehensible to think of him and Pitt sharing the screen. With all the changes and stops and starts, is Moneyball turning into some kind of hydra monster? Or is there some method behind what seems like madness here? Until production on this thing actually gets started-- there's no specific plan just yet-- there's no way of knowing.