Ben Miller is set to star as a villain in a Doctor Who episode penned by Mark Gatiss. It will be the actor’s first role on the British juggernaut, which returns later this year.

“As a committed Whovian, I cannot believe my luck in joining the Twelfth Doctor for one of his inaugural adventures,” Miller said. “My only worry is that they’ll make me leave the set when I’m not filming.”

Rumors are swirling that Miller may be playing the Sheriff of Nottingham, or some Whovian iteration of the famous baddie. Last week, Tom Riley was cast in an upcoming Doctor Who episode and many are assuming he will be playing Robin Hood. The same rumors are naming other another recently announced guest star, Ian Hallard, as playing merry man, Alan-A-Dale.

For now, BBC America has not confirmed any role for Miller, except as a “storming villain” to go against Peter Capaldi’s Doctor. Best known for being one half of the comedy duo Armstrong and Miller, the actor was recently seen in BBC’s Death in Paradise as DI Richard Poole. Interestingly, Miller’s comedic partner, Alexander Armstrong, already had a stint on Doctor Who, appearing in the 2011 Christmas Special as Reg Arwell.

Wait, you mean to tell me that this was a holiday weekend?  You certainly wouldn’t know it from the box office, which had its worst Memorial weekend showing in ten years.  Remember when Memorial weekend signaled the beginning of the summer movie season?  Studios usually unveiled a surefire hit to serve as a harbinger of the season.

This weekend, a holdover (Shrek Forever After) beat out two newbies, Sex and the City 2, and Prince of Persia: Sands of Time.  This is rather unusual for a holiday weekend, so let’s take a closer look at what may have happened, based on Sunday’s totals.

At the time of this writing, Shrek had collected about $43.3 Million, while SATC 2 made about $32 Million (this does not count the Thursday totals for the movie.) Meanwhile, Prince of Persia made about $30 Million.  So, the two new entries almost exactly split the vote, so to speak. Between the two of them, they made over $60 Million.  However, they were targeted to complete opposite demographics, while Shrek still appealed to families this weekend.  It should be noted that Shrek is still playing at almost 1,000 more theaters than any other movies this week.

SATC 2 cost less to make ($100M), so it will probably be fine over the upcoming weeks, but Prince of Persia had a hefty price tag of $200 Million, and it will have an uphill battle to win back its budget, not to mention that the appeal of Jake Gyllenhaal as an action hero comes into question.

At any rate, I think most of us expected SATC 2 and Prince of Persia to make $50 or $60 Million each. Yikes.

Iron Man 2 came in in third place with $16 Million, bringing its cumulative to $274 Million after four weeks in release.  Robin Hood managed to rake in another $10 Million, and now stands at $83 Million, but that is still a long, long way from its reported budget of close to $200 Million, though foreign ticket sales are helping cushion the blow.

Letters to Juliet continues to quietly perform well.  Now in its 3rd week, the film only dropped 34%, and has made over $36 Million in three weeks. The big loser this weekend was MacGruber, which plummeted 63% from its already less than stellar opening weekend, and only made $1.4 Million.

Next week we have Splice, Get Him to the Greek, and Marmaduke.  Talk about counter-programming!

Normally $71 Million sounds like a pretty good haul, but despite making that over the weekend, Shrek Forever After was widely considered a box office disappointment, compared to its predecessors.  In 2007, Shrek 3 made over $121 Million on its opening weekend, a cool $50 Million over this total.

Consider that the 3D ticket prices were much higher for Shrek 4, and it seems that not near as many people were clamoring to see the final chapter of the fairy tale franchise.  It also opened on a staggering 4,300 screens, which is a full thousand more than most tent-pole movies get, so lack of accessibility certainly wasn’t the issue.

However, word of mouth by exiting audience members is good (cinemascore of A, according to Entertainment Weekly), and the kiddos will be out of school in the next few weeks.  The family demographic will likely provide Shrek 4 with a long run at the box office, similar to How to Train Your Dragon. The movie will need to have that very thing happen to earn back its reported $165 Million budget.

Coming in at a very strong second place was Iron Man 2, earning a robust $26.6 Million in its third week in release. Not too shabby.  Robin Hood earned another $18.7 Million, bringing its two-week total to $66 Million. The film still is performing better overseas, so it should earn back its whopping $200 million budget.

Iron Man 2 made mincemeat of the competition this weekend, decisively beating rival Robin Hood.  Dropping off 59% from its opening weekend, Iron Man made about $53 Million, easily beating  the Ridley Scott helmed movie, which made around $37 Million over the weekend.

Robin Hood has been rumored to have a budget around $200 Million, so that sub-par opening might be disappointing to Universal, but the good news for Universal is that the film is performing well overseas, which will most likely cushion the blow of the somewhat soft American opening. Robin Hood made over $74 Million in foreign markets, and seems to be getting a warmer reception.

Letters to Juliet didn’t benefit from  counter-programming as much as I would have thought. With all the testosterone at the multiplex, I thought women would eat up the romantic offering. It had a decent take ($13.7 Million), but apparently women didn’t have a strong need to see it.  Incidentally, most critics I spoke with were pleasantly surprised by the movie, and found Vanessa Redgrave delightful in it.

Queen Latifah’s latest offering, Just Wright, was not able to muster much interest, and brought in $8.5 Million for fourth place.  How to Train Your Dragon continues to hang out in the top five, and made another $5 Million over the weekend.

On paper, Robin Hood appears to have it all: an amazing cast, beautiful costumes, spectacular set pieces, meticulously choreographed fight scenes, and a beloved protagonist. Yet somehow, I found the movie stultifying. It’s dull, complicated, and waaaaay too long.

Essentially, this serves as an origin story for Robin Hood. Russell Crowe stars as Robin Longstride, an archer fighting with King Richard (Danny Huston), who stumbles into a sequence of events that ultimately result in him being condemned and banished as an outlaw.

I was rooting for this Robin Hood retelling: after all, my last name is Hood, and I have had such a life-long affinity for the character that at my wedding reception my father made a toast about me finally meeting my Robin. I have been trying to pin down exactly why this movie just didn’t do it for me, and I offer you the following observations:

We all know the original story, but director Ridley Scott’s take is more of a historical drama. Admittedly, Scott has an astute eye for detail. That’s admirable, but most of us associate Robin Hood (the character) with swash-buckling heroics and swoon-worthy romance, not body odor and grimey fingernails. In the opening sequence, do we really need to see Robin playing parlor games? Of course not.