Jan
18
Posted on 01-18-2008 at 09:30pm
And some movie plays after it…
Filed Under (Television, Movies) by Big Orange Michael on 01-18-2008

In case you missed it, the much-anticipated Cloverfield opens this weekend. It’s been interesting to hear the speculation of just what the movie is about since the trailer hit theaters last summer, though part of me wonders if it can live up to the hype. Newscoma went to see it today and talks about it. She does warn you that she gives aways SPOILERS so read at your own risk…

For me, the real excitement about Cloverfield is the teaser trailer for the movie event of the year, the new Star Trek film. A really low quality version of it turned up on YouTube and, of course, I watched it. Spartickes saw it and has this to say:

I’ve never watched an episode of any iteration of Star Trek. I have watched the first movie (or more correctly Motion Picture), but haven’t gotten into any of the mythos of the series (serii?) at all.

That being said, I got damn goosebumps watching the trailer for the upcoming J.J. Abrams version.

I have to admit I can’t have seen at least one episode of classic Trek. It should be taught in schools as required viewing. It’s just part of our cultural identity.

That said, I have to admit that I waver between pathologically excited and extremely wary for this film. I’ve heard details of the plot of the film and have to admit I’ve got some reservations about it. And you know, I hate to say it but you just can’t have a classic Trek film without Shatner. It’s just wrong. I am hoping all this “Shatner isn’t it” stuff is just hype and misdirection so I can weep like a girlie-man when he does come on screen.

Oh and Sparticles, if you only saw TMP, you really need to put Wrath of Khan in your Netflix queue at the top immediately…..BEST..MOVIE…EVER!

Share and Enjoy: These icons link to social bookmarking sites where readers can share and discover new web pages.
  • Digg
  • del.icio.us
  • Furl
  • RawSugar
  • Reddit
  • StumbleUpon
  • Technorati
  • SphereIt
    Read More   

Comments

spartickes on 19 January, 2008 at 12:05 am #

I hate to whinge after my first MCB shout-out but the handle is Spartickes, like that Kubrick flick with Kirk Douglas. As in “I am…..Spartacus” Only it’s spelled differently in my case as my last name is Ickes.

Yeah, it’s kind of a corny pun.

Do I need any sort of background info to appreciate KHHHHAAAAANNNNNNNN?


Frank on 19 January, 2008 at 6:57 am #

Roger Ebert reviews “Cloverfield”:

“The initial scenes of destruction are glimpsed at a distance. Then things heat up when the head of the Statue of Liberty rolls down the street. Several shots of billowing smoke clouds are unmistakable evocations of 9/11, and indeed one of the movie’s working titles was “1/18/08.” So the statute has run out on the theory that after 9/11 it would be in bad taste to show Manhattan being destroyed. So explicit are the 9/11 references in “Cloverfield” that the monster is seen knocking over skyscrapers, and one high-rise is seen leaning against another.”

Yep. That’s ENTERTAINMENT, right?


John Carney on 21 January, 2008 at 7:19 am #

I don’t think you really need much background for “Wrath of Khan.” Technically, it’s the sequel to a particular episode of the original series, but the background is explained well enough that no real knowledge of that earlier episode is required.

“Star Trek: The Motion Picture” was all about special effects and seemed to have forgotten about character development. But “Wrath of Khan” has much more interaction between Kirk, Spock and McCoy. Even so, it’s pretty accessible without knowing much about the canon. Knowledge of “Moby Dick” and “A Tale of Two Cities” would be helpful, however. :)