HUMAN TARGET Writers to Adapt Y: THE LAST MAN; Scott F. Butler to Script HOLD TIGHT

An adaptation of Y: The Last Man has been in development pretty much since it’s release in 2002, and has proven unadaptable for just as long.  Last we checked in on the project, Louis Leterrier expressed his dream to turn the 60-issue comic into a TV series.  But Heat Vision reports that New Line has hired Matthew Federman and Stephen Scaia (Human Target) to start from scratch on a Y: The Last Man feature.  The Brian K. Vaughan comic centers on Yorick, an escape artist who is the sole male survivor of an unknown plague that wiped out every man on Earth.  It’s a sprawling tale in which Yorick wanders across the country, where a new adventure awaits at every location.  The report says nothing about the possibility of multiple films, so presumably Federman and Scaia are faced with the daunting task of streamlining the entire adventure into a two-hour arc.  Vaughan actually drafted a Y: The Last Man screenplay himself that leaked to a positive reception.  So it can be done.  I do wish Federman and Scaia the best of luck, since I’d like to see Y on the big screen.  But if they fail like so many others, let’s try it on TV.  C’mon, HBO.

Hit the jump for details on Inferno Entertainment’s option on Hold Tight.

Variety reports that Inferno has hired Scott F. Butler to adapt Harlan Coben‘s novel Hold Tight.  Here’s the synopsis:

Mike and Tia Baye decide to spy on their son Adam, who has become moody and withdrawn since his friend’s suicide. The software they install on his computer exposes every website visited, every e-mail and instant message sent or received. But each keystroke draws them deeper into a maze of mayhem and violence that could destroy them all.

Another Coben novel, Tell No One, served as the basis for a multiple César winner led by Francois Cluzet and Kristin Scott Thomas.  Ben Affleck is attached to direct the Hollywood remake.

View the original article here

Coming Soon An An Extraordinary Day In Human History

Charles Darwin and Abraham Lincoln will be celebrated on February 12, the occasion of the 200th anniversary of their births - which occurred on the SAME DAY in 1809. That is truly amazing. More amazing is the gap that exists in America between reverence for the one and either ignorance or opposition to the ideas of the other. In the rest of the western world, both are celebrated, as seems appropriate. Why the difference? One reason - the mind-numbing ignorance that some religions foster among their adherents. Nothing else could possibly explain anything less than awe of and admiration for Darwin's contributions to human understanding. Because of Darwin, we better sense how we developed, where we fit, in brief, our origins as a species.Fifty years after his birth, Darwin published his great work, On the Origin of Species. This unprecedented breakthrough in human understanding described evolution by natural selection, a theory recognized almost universally as the most important principle in biology. Jerry A. Coyne termed it the most revolutionary scientific idea in history. (Seeing And Believing, The New Republic, February 04, 2009.)Science was the beneficiary of Darwin's life work, and science, unlike religion, continually tests its assumptions, discarding those that prove false. Why the opposition to science in America? As noted above, because of religious teachings. Consider the findings of science relative to Darwin's work and the knowledge gained since. Then try to reconcile all this science with the religious beliefs Americans overwhelming embrace.* No less than 74 percent of Americans believe in angels.* Only 25 percent accept that we evolved from apelike ancestors. (Some of these bozos are members of the US Congress; three Republican candidates for president of the United States raised their hands during the last campaign when asked if anyone on stage did not believe in evolution.* One in eight of us think that evolution should be taught in the biology classroom without including a creationist alternative.* Among thirty-four Western countries surveyed for the acceptance of evolution, the United States ranked a dismal thirty-third, just above Turkey.* Throughout our country, school boards are trying to water down the teaching of evolution or sneak creationism in beside it.* Most people in America have a neighbor who thinks the Earth is ten thousand years old. (Source: Karl Giberson in Saving Darwin.)Mark Slouka, in an article in Harper's that appeared in the St. Petersburg Times on February 8, 2009 entitled It Could Be That We Are The Problem, made the same point, as follows: What we need to talk about, what someone needs to talk about, particularly now, is our ever-deepening ignorance (of politics, of foreign languages, of history, of science, of current affairs, of pretty much everything) and not just our ignorance but our complacency in the face of it, our growing fondness for it. A generation ago the proof of our foolishness, held up to our faces, might still have elicited some redeeming twinge of shame - no longer. Today, across vast swaths of the republic, it amuses and comforts us. We're deeply loyal to it. Ignorance gives us a sense of community; it confers citizenship; our representatives either share it or bow down to it or risk our wrath.I hope you will find occasion to indulge in one of the many DarwinFests taking place around the world, even here in Darwin-denying America. Perhaps we should find ways, in our modest circle of influence (e.g., family, friends, co-workers) to express support for President Obama's goal of restoring science to its rightful place. Maybe putting in a few (lots would be better) words for Charles Darwin would be a good start, thereby joining with the likes of Paul Kurtz, Richard Dawkins, Daniel C. Dennett, Sam Harris, Christopher Hitchens, P.Z. Myers and so many other Darwin popularizers to fight against religious superstitions, supernaturalism and just plain cold stone ignorance.This might be a nice alternative to singing Happy Birthday, Dear Charlie. Darwin would like that, and I can't help thinking Abraham Lincoln would, too.

Coming Soon An An Extraordinary Day In Human History

Charles Darwin and Abraham Lincoln will be celebrated on February 12, the occasion of the 200th anniversary of their births - which occurred on the SAME DAY in 1809. That is truly amazing. More amazing is the gap that exists in America between reverence for the one and either ignorance or opposition to the ideas of the other. In the rest of the western world, both are celebrated, as seems appropriate. Why the difference? One reason - the mind-numbing ignorance that some religions foster among their adherents. Nothing else could possibly explain anything less than awe of and admiration for Darwin's contributions to human understanding. Because of Darwin, we better sense how we developed, where we fit, in brief, our origins as a species.Fifty years after his birth, Darwin published his great work, On the Origin of Species. This unprecedented breakthrough in human understanding described evolution by natural selection, a theory recognized almost universally as the most important principle in biology. Jerry A. Coyne termed it the most revolutionary scientific idea in history. (Seeing And Believing, The New Republic, February 04, 2009.)Science was the beneficiary of Darwin's life work, and science, unlike religion, continually tests its assumptions, discarding those that prove false. Why the opposition to science in America? As noted above, because of religious teachings. Consider the findings of science relative to Darwin's work and the knowledge gained since. Then try to reconcile all this science with the religious beliefs Americans overwhelming embrace.* No less than 74 percent of Americans believe in angels.* Only 25 percent accept that we evolved from apelike ancestors. (Some of these bozos are members of the US Congress; three Republican candidates for president of the United States raised their hands during the last campaign when asked if anyone on stage did not believe in evolution.* One in eight of us think that evolution should be taught in the biology classroom without including a creationist alternative.* Among thirty-four Western countries surveyed for the acceptance of evolution, the United States ranked a dismal thirty-third, just above Turkey.* Throughout our country, school boards are trying to water down the teaching of evolution or sneak creationism in beside it.* Most people in America have a neighbor who thinks the Earth is ten thousand years old. (Source: Karl Giberson in Saving Darwin.)Mark Slouka, in an article in Harper's that appeared in the St. Petersburg Times on February 8, 2009 entitled It Could Be That We Are The Problem, made the same point, as follows: What we need to talk about, what someone needs to talk about, particularly now, is our ever-deepening ignorance (of politics, of foreign languages, of history, of science, of current affairs, of pretty much everything) and not just our ignorance but our complacency in the face of it, our growing fondness for it. A generation ago the proof of our foolishness, held up to our faces, might still have elicited some redeeming twinge of shame - no longer. Today, across vast swaths of the republic, it amuses and comforts us. We're deeply loyal to it. Ignorance gives us a sense of community; it confers citizenship; our representatives either share it or bow down to it or risk our wrath.I hope you will find occasion to indulge in one of the many DarwinFests taking place around the world, even here in Darwin-denying America. Perhaps we should find ways, in our modest circle of influence (e.g., family, friends, co-workers) to express support for President Obama's goal of restoring science to its rightful place. Maybe putting in a few (lots would be better) words for Charles Darwin would be a good start, thereby joining with the likes of Paul Kurtz, Richard Dawkins, Daniel C. Dennett, Sam Harris, Christopher Hitchens, P.Z. Myers and so many other Darwin popularizers to fight against religious superstitions, supernaturalism and just plain cold stone ignorance.This might be a nice alternative to singing Happy Birthday, Dear Charlie. Darwin would like that, and I can't help thinking Abraham Lincoln would, too.