Cloverfield Director Talks Star Trek Trailer

Matt Reeves is the director for the JJ Abrams produced monster movie Cloverfield…and one of the few people who has seen the teaser trailer for Star Trek (which debuts with Cloverfield). He certainly is the only one talking about it on the record, saying “it’s a teaser trailer. But still, I was like ‘Wow!’ Just the scope of it, the scale of it, you just look at it and it’s so elegantly done.”

Reeves tells MTV:

I think what [he and his producers] are doing with the trailer is fantastic; this is a great way to reboot the franchise, and get people excited about something new….That’s what excited me about seeing the trailer, was that I thought ‘Well, this does look completely different and new, but while having all the stuff that will make fans of ‘Star Trek’ still feel fulfilled.’

More at MTV.com

Cloverfield clip
If you missed it before, here is a clip from Cloverfield and a message from JJ Abrams. You can ‘grab’ this widget and put it on your site (and in doing so you get entered into a contest with many prizes including a personal screening of Cloverfield for you and all your friends)

Cloverfield and the Star Trek teaser trailer hit theaters on January 18th.

Sort by:   newest | oldest
December 28, 2007 9:58 am

Interesting.

Tony Whitehead
December 28, 2007 10:01 am

Sounds like the roller coaster is boarding and the ride is just about to start. Hang on!

MiamiTrek
December 28, 2007 10:07 am

Oh boy, he used the “r” word…..let’s watch the madness ensue.

Flake
December 28, 2007 10:10 am

Its clear that the look will be completly different to TOS and more like the BSG reboot (but more colourful) which will mean all the diehards will whine and all the newbies and casual people will be well impressed.

Diehards make lots of noise, and we will see and hear the most noise in here.

ZoomZoom
December 28, 2007 10:10 am

I’m all for feeling fulfilled!

Alex Trekek
December 28, 2007 10:10 am

I’m really excited and nervous at the same time. I don’t like that it feels “completely” new. I’d hate to think that the kid on Christmas morning feeling of going to see a Star Trek movie is all behind me. Hope I get that feeling from the new ones.

December 28, 2007 10:10 am

I’m down for more trek. Lets see if we can get some decent scripts this time and not hirogen sona or temporal cold wars…

Kirk Thatcher
December 28, 2007 10:12 am

The more I hear people involved in this talk the more I realize that this IS going to be a total re-imagination of Star Trek. It sounds like we can pretty much throw out everything we thought we knew about Trek to make room for Abram’s vision.

Xai
December 28, 2007 10:12 am

ok, he let the “reboot” word slip… but we’ve been assured by JJ it’s not. No riots

Eddy McFadden
December 28, 2007 10:16 am

I’m grateful for New Voyages. At least I can get my real star trek dose from there. I have a feeling they are going to cheese out this movie. Why change something that works so well. I’m keeping my fingers crossed.

December 28, 2007 10:17 am

The worst thing will be this:

People will watch the teaser and complain about it. Those same people (despite previously seeing trailers that they’ve been whining about) go see the movie, and then continue to complain, as if they were duped into seeing it.

Kirk, James T.
December 28, 2007 10:18 am

wow, im getting that tingling feeling – this film will be the film everyone remembers 2008 for! love it :D

Alex Rosenzweig
December 28, 2007 10:22 am

A few thoughts…

1] Reboot: Well, we know the matter’s gotten muddied by the fact that people are using the word in different ways. To wit, is it a reboot as in a restart (like a computer), or reboot as in throw out everything that came before (like the show that bears Galactica’s name)? The implication from the people actually involved in the production is that it’s more like the former than the latter.

2] As to what’s “completely different” and what’s not, is it the style of the trailer that looks new and different, the stuff we’re going to be shown in the trailer, or how the trailer presents familiar material? (‘Course, we’re probably gonna have to wait ’til mid-January to find out the answer to that question. ;) )

Best,
Alex

Ivory
December 28, 2007 10:26 am

We know this is not a 100% reboot. The action takes place in an alternate universe.

Everything that occured in the Star Trek universe over the last 40 plus years will remain intact.

Noleuser
December 28, 2007 10:27 am

How long is this teaser trailer?

SuperTrekman
December 28, 2007 10:27 am

I am fine with everything looking new just as long as they dont change any story or canon regarding past and future plots.

Jay - "The Real Jim Kirk"
December 28, 2007 10:29 am

a little bit of wee came out

section9
December 28, 2007 10:29 am
Okay, now I know what they are doing. Anyone familiar with Cowboy Bebop? They’ve got to make the Trek Universe as familiar, gritty, and realistic as that Universe is. They are going to grab the young audience and hold onto it with a hip, bouncy, wagon train to the Stars that isn’t old, tired, and preachy. Kids will want to go see this movie. You’ll see a lot of Anime influence in the new Trek. JJ knows his audience. Lots of cyborg, nanotech, lots of William Gibson stuff but instead of dystopic future, it will be much more utopic, like we’re used to. But the problem with Trek was that there was a point at which the series approached Socialist Realism. The Radiant Future became somewhat unbelievable. Nothing gets dirty in Trek. Nobody ever has to do laundry in Trek. Nobody ever has to go to the bathroom. The replicators always work. It’s not believable. That’s going to change, which is where I think the whole Shirow/Cowboy Bebop/gritty anime influence is going to come in. The characters will be the ones we know, but living adventures that have a Blade Runner feel to them. Don’t be surprised if the music, for instance, has more of a jazzy, bouncy, Kanno feel to it instead of the soaring, orchestral feel to it. The ship will look similar, too, but the Big E will look a heck of a lot more battle ready. The movie is aimed at kids 15-25. Just like Cloverfield.… Read more »
Viking
December 28, 2007 10:35 am

I’ll reserve judgement until Anthony can post the trailer.

Alex Rosenzweig
December 28, 2007 10:36 am

#14- We don’t even know for sure that it’s in an alternate universe. That’s never been confirmed (nor, for that matter, denied), and the implication has been that a considerable amount of effort went into keeping things consistent with the extant universe, in terms of story and characters and situations and such.

It’s in production design that we’re likely to see most of the differences, it seems.

Alex Rosenzweig
December 28, 2007 10:40 am

#18 – “But the problem with Trek was that there was a point at which the series approached Socialist Realism. The Radiant Future became somewhat unbelievable. Nothing gets dirty in Trek. Nobody ever has to do laundry in Trek. Nobody ever has to go to the bathroom. The replicators always work.”

And that really happened, for the most part, in the TNG era material, especially TNG itself. I think that may be, in no small part, why the decision was made to steer away from TNG and go back more to TOS, which was always a bit more realistic about the optimistic future.

section9
December 28, 2007 10:40 am

I don’t know, somehow I think JJ is going to want to turn Chris Pine’s “Jim Kirk” into the new Clint Eastwood.

And I agree with Alex, the director’s have made great emphasis about keeping with Trek Canon. That being the case, I don’t buy the alternate universe angle.

Nathan
December 28, 2007 10:41 am

Huh…I’ll withhold judgement until I see the trailer. But I’ve got to admit I’m pretty hyped about this movie… I can’t wait for more info!

December 28, 2007 10:48 am

I don’t care if it’s a reboot, a reimagining, or whatever, I just care if it’s good.

I want there to be a Trek movie I actually want to go see, because for me it’s _not_ automatic. I’ve only seen about half of the Trek films at the theater (the early half), and there are a couple I _still_ haven’t seen, even on video.

This film already has me more interested (beforehand) than the run-up to any Trek film since maybe STIII or STIV. Difficult to compare, of course, since those were pre-Internet-hype where it was all convention rumors and Starlog articles and whatnot, but I’m kinda jazzed about this movie, for whatever reason. I plan to be there unless I hear something _really_ awful about it.

And if that means a reboot, then baby, bring on the reboot.

Jon C
December 28, 2007 10:50 am

How soon can I expect to see the trailer online ?as I’m not inclined to se that movie.Anybody?

December 28, 2007 10:53 am

How about this… the PEOPLE and EVENTS stay canon, but the look, and the physical DETAILS are upgraded and made fresh and realistic. I can live with that approach. I am imagining the TV TOS with TMP look and feel; the same yet updated.

Gotta be that way. Otherwise we’re back to the 60s’ TV sensibilities.

Myrth
December 28, 2007 10:56 am

#25 Officialy, it will be on the net a day at most behind the release of the film, but most likely the day of the release. Unofficialy, it depends upon the skill and luck of the pirates interested in getting this out early.

December 28, 2007 11:07 am

Actually, other than Kirk getting his shirt ripped occasionally nobody “got dirty, did laundry or went to the bathroom” in TOS either – that’s not something that happened during the TNG era.

For the most part, TOS lacked the time and money to pay attention to authentic little details of visual continuity or that “lived in” feeling. I was ridiculously pleased to see Kirk finally acquire a day’s growth of beard during the events of TWOK – a silly little thing like that was a big deal. :lol:

Stanklin T. "Mr. Optimism" McFibberich
December 28, 2007 11:09 am

re: 12
“wow, im getting that tingling feeling – this film will be the film everyone remembers 2008 for! love it ”

I’d hate to think what your feeling would be if any actual evidence of what it will be like were to come out.

xizro345
December 28, 2007 11:09 am

PR Spin. Nothing else. Still waiting for real stuff.

Dr. Image
December 28, 2007 11:12 am

#10 Eddy
I’m thankful for New Voyages (and Exeter) too. The purist in me will always have ventures like that to go back to. Classic phasers and communicators, miniskirts (!!), the sets, the look- how can you not love it?

This movie’s gonna be interesting, if anything. I’m hoping the “newness” will be due to JJ showing us an era we haven’t seen yet, namely, a period after ENT and before TOS. That would make many people very happy. There’s ample wiggle room there for new designs, events, etc.

A reboot that is incongruous and ignores and disrespects what has come before? BIG mistake, IMHO.
An alt universe plot? Too confusing to “moviegoers.” Won’t happen.

I understand Phil Tippett is handling the creature chores on Cloverfield, so they WILL be showing the monster(s). Good news, since his bug work on Starship Troopers was so brilliant.
But, can yet another CGI monster ever be REALLY scarey?
I have my doubts.

star trackie
December 28, 2007 11:16 am

…”rebooting the franchise” doesn’t absolutely mean rebooting TOS Star Trek. It simply means that they are going a new direction steering things away from the Trek of late that was suffocating the franchise. Although I think we are indded in for some major changes…not just of TOS but the whole look and feel of the last 20 years, I’m cool with it because of the fact that it supposedly does take place in an altered timeline (not alternate universe).

Can’t wait to see the trailer. Cloverfield looks damn good as well.

Picard for President
December 28, 2007 11:17 am

Keep a few things in mind. There’s Star Trek’s “universe” and there is the human need for external validation — especially for those who cannot or will not grow old gracefully.

I’d love to see a Panavision version of Jim Kirk’s Star Trek — and I’d love it to be wildly popular and then I’d be an instant hero to the Western world’s youth.

Given the facts of our present civilzation, that ain’t gonna happen. There are structural changes to the brain in the ADD Generation that preclude the sort of thoughtful, deliberate, almost Shakespearean development of a story.

Rather than the judeochristian “matrix” in which the original Trek was created, we live in a post-Christian world where we worship the Holy Self and medical doctors are our high priests.

The enterntainment implications of these great changes are stupendous, as anyone over 40 knows simply by watching what passes for “entertainment” today.

This is a great pity and we will live to regret doing so to our children.

But since that’s the way it is, this movie must pander to it.

I hope there are a few timeless truths embedded in the story and that it have some kind of lesson to it, rather than being a simple two hour cortizone trip.

Yeah, I know. Silly of me to expect “art for the ages” our of Hollywood ;-)

Happy new year, all of you!

Alex Rosenzweig
December 28, 2007 11:19 am

#26 – I think that’s probably what’s in the cards.

#28 – Dennis, I agree with you that TOS couldn’t always visually portray that sort of stuff, but they talked about it much more often than did TNG. e.g., Kirk et al. got pretty dirty and scuffed in several TOS episodes (usually after getting in a fight ;) ), there were references to the ship’s laundry, there were mentions of things going on with actual machinery, and so forth. It was little touches like that that made TOS’s world seem more “lived-in” than TNG’s.

(To be fair, I tend to have a fairly strong leaning toward TOS in such comparisons, but as much as I enjoyed parts of TNG, it tended to come off as a bit too “sterile” for my tastes.)

Alex

Paul
December 28, 2007 11:22 am

re nuBSG: if new Trek movie uniforms are to classic Trek like young Bill Adama’s uniform in Razor flashback is to classic BSG, it is completely okay for me.

December 28, 2007 11:24 am

Please be awesome, please be awesome, please be awesome.

No, really- Please be awesome, please be awesome, please be awesome.

If there’s any confusion, I am asking that you Please be awesome, please be awesome, please be awesome.

http://CaptainKirksGuideToWomen.com

Paul B.
December 28, 2007 11:25 am
I think Abrams and his team have found a way to restart everything while allowing this to fit into the timeline; that is, I think Old Spock is necessary because we know he’s still alive in the TNG era, and Nimoy already said that he’s interested in seeing where his Spock is a dozen years or so since we last saw him, which suggests that Old Spock will be in a post-Nemesis time–the latest we’ve seen, right? So, the one person–Spock/Nimoy–who has been part of Trek since the first pilot episode, is the key to this movie. Yet it’s going to reboot, look “completely new,” and yet fulfill us and make us happy. How? Well, Old Spock must be going back to Young Spock somehow, and I think a throwaway line from one of the producers might give a hint of a neat scene. The producer said the writers had a rare knack (or some such words) for writing a mind meld. Well, Old Spock melding with Young Spock would be fascinating…ahem…and a logical way to connect and restart. Think about Quinto’s deep passion for this character and his interest in avoiding the old episodes, etc. Well, if the two Spocks meld for some reason, then Young Spock would have Old Spock’s entire life’s memories. This would mean that Quinto is playing literally a new Spock: starting with meeting Kirk, but THIS Spock has already lived a lifetime as Kirk’s friend. Think how that would revamp the character to make… Read more »
Iowagirl
December 28, 2007 11:26 am

#8
– It sounds like we can pretty much throw out everything we thought we knew about Trek to make room for Abram’s vision. –

Let’s hope there’s still enough time to run away or to take counteractive measures if they’re coming to carry out that brain wash you’re describing.

December 28, 2007 11:29 am

Not an “alternate” universe so much as an altered one – all Nero’s d***ing around probably results in the alteration of so many details and circumstances that any departure from what’s been established can be justified on that basis.

Not terribly different conceptually from “Enterprise’s” Temporal Cold War, but presumably delivered with more elan.

Phil123
December 28, 2007 11:30 am

#24 “I don’t care if it’s a reboot, a reimagining, or whatever, I just care if it’s good.” Here Here.

#32 “supposedly does take place in an altered timeline (not alternate universe).” surely an altered timeline is an alternate dimention if every desision we make has happened and formed its own timeline, but we don’t have access to them so its another dimention?

Will Doe 68
December 28, 2007 11:32 am

Cloverfield comes out on the 18th,You know someones going to leak the trailer just before that date. And I don’t think this website’s going to available for a day or so afterwards. Going to be wwwwwwwayy too much traffic!

Etha Williams
December 28, 2007 11:39 am

Slightly off topic, but speaking of time travel and alternate vs altered universes, has anyone read the Millenium DS9 novel series? I thought it handled this sort of time travel remarkably well, and JJ’s movie is similar, I’d be quite happy.

Balock
December 28, 2007 11:43 am

well, I believe that it will have a big budget epic production feel to it. Shamefully, only ST1, ST4, and ST6 (sort of) had that.

i’m also expecting them to mess around with Enterprise exterior (shameful). Hopefully, they throw us alot of mini-skirts to make up for it….

Alex Rosenzweig
December 28, 2007 11:47 am

#40 – You have it exactly. Semantical hair-splitting aside, if they alter events to the extent that they can start ignoring what’s previously established, it is de facto an alternate universe.

NCC-73515
December 28, 2007 11:48 am

the 18th is my birthday… the trailer will come out on my 23rd birthday, isn’t that great? :D

AJ
December 28, 2007 11:53 am

#8: There are over 700 episodes of Trek pre-JJ, so throwing it all out would be pointless.

Canon-fanatics can take Trek XI like Sybok and his “Vulcan Princess” should they so choose, and ignore it if it is too painful to digest.

SPB
December 28, 2007 11:55 am

I HOPE THEY GET A BIG “NAME” TO NARRATE THE TRAILER…

In the tradition of Orson Welles narrating the TMP trailer or Christopher Plummer and TREK VI, I’d love to see (or is that “hear”) a great, recognizable voice narrate the new TREK XI trailer.

First vote: Ian McKellan.

Second (subversive) choice: James Earl Jones.

Or maybe Anthony Hopkins?

December 28, 2007 11:58 am

You know what, folks? All this talk of Romulan interference in the timeline, future Spock going bck to young Spock, a new timeline, etc., is just fanboy wanking, as they say. JJ’s goal is to make the new ST immediately accessable to the new/casual viewer, not to make them bring in a scorecard or past movie/episode synopsis guide in order to follow.

People are not going to have to know “Kirk died in Generations” and “Spock is alive on Romulus” and “the Guardian of Forever is a time portal from TOS,” and “this is a different timeline now,” etc. etc. etc.

The general audience, the people they want to make new fans of, will be able to come see it with only a general idea of what ST is, and go away with a new image of it. So, this means we are going to see a straighforward adventure with young Kirk and Spock, and how they began together. Old Spock will be the framing device, who is narrating or setting it up as a flashback.

Forget all this convoluted explanation of “how this is going to be a different timeline” and such. The general public couldn’t follow it or come in on it and follow it.

Captain Amazing!!
December 28, 2007 12:11 pm

It’s cool with me…and as far as I’m concerned they can throw out the totally meaningless, senseless death of Kirk in Generations. In fact, thanks to Rick Berman and his complete disregard of continuity in the Next Gen movies that he himself oversaw during his run on the Next Gen series, none of them deserve consideration as canon. That’s not to say they aren’t enjoyable in their own way, they should be considered alternate storylines like DC Comics’ Elseworlds or Marvel’s What If? series. The Original Series had it’s considerable share of continuity errors, however they weren’t blatantly done in a careless way just for the sake of a line of dialog or a clever scene as in the Next Gen movies. Scotty’s knowledge of Kirk’s supposed death and his obvious remorse for his “loss” in Generations, Data’s emotion chip in Generations, First Contact, and Insurrection, and Deanna’s supposed first kiss with a bearded Riker are just a few examples. I’m not even going to get into his personally led near destruction of the franchise at least when it comes to Gene Roddenberry’s vision. Thank God someone else is in charge who has a little more respect for the material and obviously has the attention and interest of the powers that be at Paramount. I’m all for a return to the Original Series era. These characters deserve no less.

Jeffrey S. Nelson
December 28, 2007 12:19 pm

If James Cawley ain’t happy with the changes to the Big E, I ain’t either…

wpDiscuz