Showbits

For years, I have relied on StarTrek.com as the official source of information for all things Trek. It has also been a special source of comfort these past two years since Enterprise went off the air: in lieu of new episodes, I've subsisted off their streaming reports of alumni affairs, remastered episodes, actor interviews — even comic strips. With Star Trek: The Tour kicking off next month, and a new Star Trek movie launching in just one year, one week, and one day, the time is ripe for StarTrek.com to enjoy a renaissance as the center of Trekkie online activity.

Apparently, the powers that be see things differently. This shocking and abrupt note was posted to the site on Friday:

Sadly, we must report that CBS Interactive organization is being restructured, and the production team that brings you the STARTREK.COM site has been eliminated. Effective immediately.

We don't know the ultimate fate of this site, which has served millions of Star Trek fans for the last thirteen years.

If you have comments, please send them to editor@startrek.com — we hope someone at CBS will read them.

Thank you for your loyal fandom over the years. It has been a pleasure to serve you.

This action is disrespectful and inhumane not only to the team that has created and maintained the site since its founding in November 1995, but also to the legions of fans who have respected and appreciated their efforts. Though I've worked at papers where a new editor-in-chief laid off the entire existing staff, I'm flummoxed to find a similar justification here. From the vast reference library to the daily updates, there's nothing wrong with the existing StarTrek.com. The brusque manner of the current staff's dismissal does not bode well for a transition that will leave this resource intact.

Please make your voices heard by emailing someone at CBS. May the integrity of StarTrek.com, its creators, or both live long and prosper.

Here's a five-minute clip from Cloverfield:

I'm amused by the reaction of the New Yorkers to seeing Lady Liberty's decapitated head; I would think 9/11 would've struck a bit less shock and somewhat more caution around seeming catastrophes. The videographer does not seem to manifest himself much, though it does seem my previous concern that the film would be shot entirely from that character's perspective will be realized — but the motion is far less jerky than I feared. Perhaps my stomach will tolerate it after all.

Earlier this month, a full-length trailer was released for Cloverfield. Before then, the film's title was only a rumor, with the project being better known by its release date — 01-18-08 — or as "J.J. Abrams' new monster movie." Even with this trailer, little is known:

What is known: Cloverfield is an American-made film about a giant monster attack on New York City, from the director of Lost, Alias, and Star Trek XI. I've not actually seen these samples of Abrams' work, but they've earned enough publicity to make his latest venture worth a look.

For all the secrecy around the film, the most intriguing element is the antagonist itself. In the last decade, Hollywood has seen the reimagining of the archetypal behemoths, Godzilla and King Kong. How will Abrams' threat to the Big Apple set itself apart from its ill-received predecessors? The Internet is abuzz with speculation: could it be a Lovecraftian, Cthulu-type abomination? A giant mechanoid? The Stay Puft Marshmallow Man? As depicted in the trailer, the destruction of the Statue of Liberty suggests the seriousness of the assault, but pure mayhem on a major metropolis has been done often enough, including in Independence Day. To engage and retain the audience, Abrams has to produce something original — assuming the monster is even a central figure, in much the way the Autobots were not the stars of The Transformers.

Regardless of the content, it's vital Cloverfield be presented in an easily-consumable format. The entire film appears to be shot in the amateur style of The Blair Witch Project, which I hope is not the case. As I've learned with that film and the likes of the last two Bourne films, I haven't the constitution for the irregular motion and unfocused shots. Films should be emotionally, not physically, demanding. Give me a clear and shocking view of a creepy colossus, and I'm sold.

Several titles have been bandied about for the next Indiana Jones film. Some may've been tongue-in-check references to its aging cast, such as Ravages of Time. Others, such as The City of the Gods, suggested a continuation of the first and third films' theme of searching for Biblical artifacts.

Finally, today we are presented with the official title — which tells us almost nothing:

HOLLYWOOD, Calif. (Sept. 9, 2007) — The title of the new Indiana Jones adventure, now in production under the direction of Steven Spielberg, is Indiana Jones and the Kingdom of the Crystal Skull, it was revealed today by actor Shia LaBeouf.

LaBeouf, who stars in Indiana Jones and the Kingdom of the Crystal Skull with Harrison Ford, Cate Blanchett, Karen Allen, Ray Winstone and John Hurt, announced the title during today's MTV Video Music Awards, which were broadcast live from Las Vegas.

Indiana Jones and the Kingdom of the Crystal Skull is a Lucasfilm Ltd. and is being distributed by Paramount Pictures. It will be released in the U.S. and simultaneously in most territories worldwide on Thursday, May 22, 2008. Frank Marshall returns as producer, with Kathleen Kennedy joining George Lucas as executive producer.

Breaking news about Indiana Jones and the Kingdom of the Crystal Skull can be found at http://www.indianajones.com.

Now, I don't need spoilers anymore than this film needs advertising. And maybe, not being an archaeologist myself, I'm missing the connotations and backstory implied by the title. But it sounds as fabricated as the Temple of Doom. Come on, Steve — just a hint as to the plot? Pleeease?

May 13th marks the two-year anniversary of the airing of the series finale of Enterprise — what may've been the last episode of Star Trek ever. My viewing habits precluded catching most of the fourth and final season when it originally aired, so this past weekend, I engorged myself on the last 19 episodes (which I shall attempt to discuss spoiler-free).

(more…)

Paramount has officially announced Star Trek XI, scheduled for a Christmas Day 2008 release.

Though J. J. Abrams is confirmed to direct, only rumors exist as to the film's plot and cast; therefore, I posit that that it will be a cinematic adaptation of the following poem.

(more…)