> The official Star Trek XI website has made available the teaser trailer
> for which a bootlegged version had already appeared on YouTube. There's
> more detail visible in the official version of course:
>
> http://www.paramount.com/startrek/

> In article <13pa6l3jovui74b@corp.supernews.com>, "Steven L."
> earthlink.net> wrote:
>

>> The official Star Trek XI website has made available the teaser
>> trailer for which a bootlegged version had already appeared on
>> YouTube. There's more detail visible in the official version of
>> course:
>>
>> http://www.paramount.com/startrek/

>
> ComingSoon.net has a couple of updates about the trailer on the
> official website ...
>
> UPDATE:
> In addition to the new trailer coming online in High
> Definition quality, the official website has added a
> red blinking light to the right of the words "UNDER
> CONSTRUCTION", which, if clicked on, takes you to a
> new viral site with the URL NCC-1701.com. It features ...

> Anybody wrote:

>> In article <13pa6l3jovui74b@corp.supernews.com>, "Steven L."
>> earthlink.net> wrote:
>>

>>> The official Star Trek XI website has made available the teaser
>>> trailer...

> In article giganews.com>, "\(not
> quite so\) Fat Sam" knox.orangehome.co.uk> wrote:
>

>> Anybody wrote:

>>> In article <13pa6l3jovui74b@corp.supernews.com>, "Steven L."
>>> earthlink.net> wrote:
>>>

>>>> The official Star Trek XI website has made available the teaser
>>>> trailer for which a bootlegged version had already appeared on
>>>> YouTube. There's more detail visible in the official version of
>>>> course:
>>>>
>>>> http://www.paramount.com/startrek/

>>>
>>> ComingSoon.net has a couple of updates about the trailer on the
>>> official website ...
>>>
>>> UPDATE: ...

> "Anybody" anywhere-anytime.com> wrote in message
> news:230120080908102872%%anybody@anywhere-anytime.com...

>> In article giganews.com>, "\(not
>> quite...

> In article , "RuPEDski"
> hotmail.com> wrote:
>

>> "Anybody" anywhere-anytime.com> wrote in message
>> news:230120080908102872%%anybody@anywhere-anytime.com...

>>> In article giganews.com>, "\(not
>>> quite so\) Fat Sam" knox.orangehome.co.uk> wrote:
>>>

>>>> Anybody wrote:

>>>>> In article <13pa6l3jovui74b@corp.supernews.com>, "Steven L."
>>>>> earthlink.net> wrote:
>>>>>

>>>>>> The official Star Trek XI website has made available the teaser
>>>>>> trailer for which a bootlegged version had already appeared on
>>>>>> YouTube. There's more detail visible in the official version of
>>>>>> course:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> http://www.paramount.com/startrek/ ...

> Well as I mentioned, I've got an extremely limited sample and I have no idea
> how much his influence as central to Cloverfield but I can say that it was
> just...plain...awful. I snorted out loud a few times and I looked around the
> packed theatre several times. There were many teens and they laughed at the
> 1 liners...thought maybe it was aimed at them and somehow they could enjoy
> it despite it being SO fundamentally flawed....but at the end, the general
> feeling seemed to be serious disappointment. Clear grumbling as we all filed
> out of the theatre. Even the fat ADD 14 yr old beside me who had VOCALLY
> supported the movie 3 or 4 times during was the first to speak up as the
> credits rolled and many of us sat dumbstruck...."that was RETARDED!!!".

>
> Well, some folks must like "Cloverfield."  Out of some 25,000 votes onwww.imdb.com, it's scored an average rating of 8.1, which is pretty good.
> Just for comparison, ST II: TWOK scored 7.7, "The Day The Earth Stood
> Still" scored 8.1, and "Back to the Future" scored 8.2.  And those are
> considered to be damn good movies.
>

> On Jan 23, 2:13 pm, "Steven L." earthlink.net> wrote:

>> Well, some folks must like "Cloverfield." Out of some 25,000 votes onwww.imdb.com, it's scored an average rating of 8.1, which is pretty good.
>> Just for comparison, ST II: TWOK scored 7.7, "The Day The Earth Stood
>> Still" scored 8.1, and "Back to the Future" scored 8.2. And those are
>> considered to be damn good movies.
>>

>
> I cannot comment on the quality of Cloverfield (2008), since I have
> not seen the film. However, Cloverfield (2008) is benefiting from the
> initial enthusiasm that many feature films receive shortly after they
> debut. On Monday, 41.2%% rated the film a 10. Today only 37.8%% have
> rated it a 10. The votes are primarily from males aged 18-29. Younger
> male viewers under 18...