Kevin Smith gives thumbs up to Star Trek

It appears that J.J. Abrams has produced a rough cut of his new take on the classic Star Trek world. And he has allowed a select few to have a look, one of whom is writer/director Kevin Smith. And according to him it’s looking good. Thanks to we have Smith giving it a very positive review, albeit in a very roundabout, “not actually saying what movie it is but strongly implying it” kind of way. Check out his TV interview below:

Host: So thumbs up on The Watchmen, what else you got?

Smith: I saw a movie last night that I cannot talk about.

Host: Was it good?

Smith: It was phenomenal.

Host: Any stars, any break out stars, and do they trek?

Smith: The stars absolutely trek in this film. It is fantastic. Anybody who was worried doesn’t need to be worried–about this film I cannot talk about…It was in very capable hands. The director did a phenomenal job–the director and his crew. Top notch cast and the guy that plays the lead is an instant star. That dude is going to be so famous. He is so wonderful. He picked up a role that I would say is pretty challenging for someone to step into the shoes of, because it is a role that has been played before many times by the same guy.

Host: How do you out Shatner, Shatner?

Smith: I don’t know what you are talking about.

Host: I was just saying that as an expression.

Smith: Yes, absolutely, in a world of expressions, I would agree with that…I am so not good with this game, you are going to bury me man.

Host: We had you on before The Dark Knight and I remember asking you if you could direct a movie like Dark Knight and you said ‘hell no’ it was so far out of your sphere…but I bring that up to preface this. Let’s say a franchise like Star Trek, not that you have seen the movie or we are talking about the movie, but we are talking about it for example. That is something that is so dangerous to attempt. Is that the kind of project you would like to do? Would you like to be the guy who gets to do a movie like that?

Smith: I would not like to be the guy. In the case of something like Star Trek, it would take a really insanely talented filmmaker–storyteller. Like in the case of Star Trek, JJ Abrams. So leave it to the people who are best equipped for it. I am just the guy who should be watching those movies.

This is very good news indeed. As someone who is not at all a fan of Star Trek (I’ve never seen any of the movies and can only vaguely recall the TV series) I am strangely very much looking forward to J. J. Abrams’ takes on it. Since he was one of the people who originally brought us my favourite TV show of all time, Lost, and he was the man behind the insanely fun and original monster movie Cloverfield, I subsequently have every confidence in the man that he is going to give us something special with this.

In my following of the man, Smith has always been someone who’s early opinion of a film has been very trustworthy. I suppose since so many people love his films, filmmakers seem to want to want to show him their movies before pretty much anyone else. They also know that the general movie going audience, those who will end up seeing the movies, see Smith as a movie god and know that people will listen to his opinion. I am certainly one of those people.

J.J. Abrams Says Cloverfield 2 Will Not Be ‘Literal Sequel’

During a panel at this year’s Comic Con, J.J. Abrams let slip a piece of information about the sequel for Cloverfield. We get the story thanks to SlashFilm:

“During the Comic Con panel for Fringe, someone asked J.J. Abrams if there were any updates on a Cloverfield sequel. Abrams response started off very much in the same way that it did when he was asked about it before, but then he let slip a piece of information that is sure to spark conjecture amongst fans.

“There’s something we’re playing with now that may or may not happen. There’s an idea we have that plays with… it’s not a literal sequel.“

I thought Cloverfield was a great experiment in mainstream Hollywood cinema. They employed some bold techniques, not least of which was the hand-held camera technique, but in my opinion they paid off and it was a very invigorating time at the movies.

However I don’t at all feel there should be a sequel; I think it worked as a one-off type project and to me any addition to it would kind of cheapen the first one. However if there has to be one it’s good they are taking some time to think about it and not just hashing one out for the sake of making quick cash. What do you think about what Abrams said? Like the idea of a sequel and if so do you like the idea that it’s not a traditional one?