THESE FORUMS NOW CLOSED (read only)
Fun Stuff => ENJOY => Topic started by: Dissy on 20 Nov 2007, 13:53
-
So, the trailer for JJ Abrams movie "Cloverfield" is out. I know everyone has speculations on the creature(s), but after watching the trailer, I believe we were all wrong. I saw the trailer at work, on a crappy computer, but one brief scene made me go back and watch it a couple of times.
What do y'all think? Linkages below
http://www.imdb.com/title/tt1060277/trailers (http://www.imdb.com/title/tt1060277/trailers)
-
Really looking forward to it, like the viral aspect of the marketing so far. I also think movies are good for Abrams because it might force him to work out a storyline in less than three years. If this movie ends in a cliffhanger I may be responsible for the delay of the next Star Trek movie.
The only thing I don't like so far? Him making a big deal of not revealing the name of "Cloverfield" and then the name being Cloverfield. I mean, it's a good name, but if you don't have the drama don't pretend like you do.
-
The one time you actually see something it kinda looked like Godzilla to me. But then there was the scene where there was the sound of wings fluttering, unless that was a helicopter.
Now I am intrigued and want to see it. Grr.
-
i saw a preview for this in theaters a while back and i'm pretty interested to see what it's all about. i'll see it.
-
All the hints and glimpses of the monster have done nothing to convince me that it isn't a giant dick.
Seriously guys it could very well be an oversized penis destroying New York.
-
Actually, that's a lot more interesting than any alternative that suddenly springs to mind.
-
somebody told me they thought it was a gigantic lion. i don't know where they got that information but that would be amazing if that's what it was. unfortunately it will probably be something far less interesting. but we shall see.
-
There was some dispute over some dialog in the original trailer, people thought it said "I saw it, it's a______ it's huge!" Whether it says Lion or alive is up to interpretation.
About 57 seconds in here: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fVQ3cbySLKs&feature=related
-
It's worth noting that Abrams didn't write this.
Drew Goddard is the pen behind this movie and he is, far and away, one of the best new genre writers in Hollywood. His episodes of Buffy, Angel, Alias, and Lost are among my favorites for each series. He is the sole origin of me wanting to see this movie.
-
There was some dispute over some dialog in the original trailer, people thought it said "I saw it, it's a______ it's huge!" Whether it says Lion or alive is up to interpretation.
About 57 seconds in here: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fVQ3cbySLKs&feature=related
Hmm....I think it most definitely says "lion." I listened a few times through my stereo headphones and I'm fairly convinced. This looks cool already but if the monster is a giant lion it's gonna be all kinds of cool.
-
i really does sound like "lion"
i never noticed; i just assumed it was "alive" without actually listening carefully. i really hope it's a lion.
-
JESUS CHRIST IT'S A LION GET IN THE CAR
-
unfortunately it will probably be something far less interesting.
Like a big plume of black smoke?
-
Well, the trailer also mentioned a roar of some kind. I hope it's a lion. I'm sick of every giant monster being a lizard or insect of some kind.
-
Like a big plume of black smoke?
so you saw Rise of the Silver Surfer too huh?
-
Well, the trailer also mentioned a roar of some kind. I hope it's a lion. I'm sick of every giant monster being a lizard or insect of some kind.
I don't know, a lion would be bad ass and a breath of fresh air from the normal monster movie cliches. But I think something humanoid would be more terrifying than a giant lion. But a lion is still awesome. I wonder if they kill it with a giant spear. Like the Lance of Longinus or something.
-
Dudes
(http://img100.imageshack.us/img100/4992/chimerakw4.jpg)
Chimera. It's the only thing that makes sense. The wings, the lion talk, the scales.
Can a Pegasus be far behind?
Hmmm, I'm going to put that on a shirt - "Chimera: It's the only thing that makes sense."
-
I'm trying to remember this because it was a few months ago, but there was an interview I read that mentions the monster being an alien. Don't take this for truth though because the 'interview' was apparently from an 'anonymous' source working on the film.
Edit: I just looked at fan sites and wikipedia. This slusho.jp (http://slusho.jp) is apparently an ARG of some kind, as was hinted at by one of the members of the project. The drink was given publicity by Heroes cast members, which was supposed to bring people to search for this website.
Edited Edit: (http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/f/f1/Cloverfield_theatrical_poster.jpg)
This is the poster for the movie. Notice the water.
Edited the Edited Edit: http://youtube.com/watch?v=ufYF0f-zMgY (http://youtube.com/watch?v=ufYF0f-zMgY) This is the new trailer, which some of you have probably seen. I like how we are told where the movie is going to end, and that the main characters most likely die in the very beginning of the trailer.
-
hmm the youtubers raise a good point; it could be cthulhu, based on what we've seen so far. i'm not opposed to that. cthulhu is pretty much awesome.
however, i have accepted the possibility that it may never actually explain what the monster is. which wouldn't be all bad either.
-
the youtubers raise a good point
IMPOSSIBLE.
-
hmm the youtubers raise a good point; it could be cthulhu, based on what we've seen so far. i'm not opposed to that. cthulhu is pretty much awesome.
Cthulhu? I would poop my pants with glee. Somehow I doubt it though, I think Abrams wants his own monster, which is pretty awesome. Are there any decent Cthulhu movies? I haven't heard of any.
-
however, i have accepted the possibility that it may never actually explain what the monster is. which wouldn't be all bad either.
That would be a really cool approach to a monster movie. I don't think it's wholly original, though.
-
I saw the preview today when I was watching Beowulf and that film looks pretty cool. I assumed it would be terrorists or something at first but this whole thing just looks awesome.
-
There is already a Cthulhu movie in the works. So it doesn't make sense that this would be a Cthulhu movie.
-
what what what!?
-
There is already a Cthulhu movie in the works. So it doesn't make sense that this would be a Cthulhu movie.
Why would you tell us this and then forget to give a link. Yea, neglect to give a link.
Shame.
-
(http://img141.imageshack.us/img141/3131/cloverfieldvq2.jpg)
-
What if it wasn't?
That's a pretty interesting picture either way. It feels right somehow. Viable.
-
My god, those giant sea-lice are as tall as a New York hipster!
-
Someone should show that to tommy.
-
I knew putting up that tank of 1,000 tons of plankton in Times Square at the beginning of the film would end up biting them in the ass.
So is this movie going to be another Mother-Earth-Strikes-Back movie? I know that Sixth Sense guy is making one too.
-
If Shyamalan's making one, presumably at the end we'll find out it's actually all happening on Mars instead of on Earth, or that the protagonists are all actually shape-shifting aliens and the Earth is fighting back against them to save humanity, or that the whole movie is actually taking place within the dream of an amnesiac dog, or something equally annoying.
-
I figure that the "suicide gas" emitted by the Earth in the film are actually confederate ghosts rising again to take revenge.
You just watch.
-
Guys.
(http://www.pretentiousgamer.com/photos/1195850829105.gif)
It's a giant isopod.
-
And it's got rhythm.
-
Now we need to lure Tommy to this thread.
We must lay a trail of Silkworm vinyls and Low riffs.
-
If it looks anything like Godzilla I will seriously kill someone.
-
The trailer confused me quite a bit. Also Tori Spelling is in it, so there's a big indicator right off.
-
Guys.
Cthulhu.
It is out, and apparently it sucks. (http://imdb.com/title/tt0478126/)
If you enjoyed this movie you'll enjoy Latin Boys Go To Hell and Boy Culture.
-
Wow, that things legs look awful tiny to hold up that torso(?). That is not a cool looking monster from that particular viewpoint. I like the fanart whale much better.
-
i was thinking the same thing. but based on the way it's moving i'm thinking it could also be a quadruped.
-
I am very sure the monster is not bipedal.
-
Guys.
Cthulhu.
It is out, and apparently it sucks. (http://imdb.com/title/tt0478126/)
Is this even about Cthulhu?
-
The HP Lovecraft Historical Society have made a fantastic film version of the Call of Cthulhu. It's filmed as if the rights were optioned at the time the story was written: ie. a black and white silent film, with Ryleh like something out of the Cabinet of Dr. Caligari and a stop-motio Cthulhu. It's better than any modern version you could concievably imagine. As far as I'm concerned, the only Mythos tale that's really filmable is The Dunwich Horror. If I ever make a feature film, I will make an updated adaptation of that set on the Isle of Wight.
-
After looking at that monster a couple of thousand times I am hoping for NY to be attacked by a giant Isopod.
-
Whether or not these pictures of "concept art" are just red herring or not, I have no idea, but these are some things that people a lot more curious than I am are coming up with.
http://i40.photobucket.com/albums/e240/bubhui/FAN15.jpg (http://i40.photobucket.com/albums/e240/bubhui/FAN15.jpg)
http://www.conceptart.org/artimg/image.php?img=smellybug/full/smellybug-22.jpg (http://www.conceptart.org/artimg/image.php?img=smellybug/full/smellybug-22.jpg)
http://www.massiveblack.com/stabby/paint16.jpg (http://www.massiveblack.com/stabby/paint16.jpg)
-
I'm reasonably confident this will be one of those movies where the trailers are OMGWTFBBQ AWESOME and the actual movie is a major disappointment.
Just like M. Night Shyamalan's films, in fact.
-
the first picture isn't it, well at least I don't think it can be without getting them sued since it was the monster in Godzilla the Movie 2000
-
it cant be that second picture either, on the massive black website they have more pictures of taht thing, i think its from a videogame or someting
-
also if you forgot you can view 15 other pictures of the stabby monster by chaning the number after the word paint in the url from 2-16
-
zomg forget about that, on the Company section of the massive black website you can see the monsters from picture one and picture two in clay, just sitting on the desk. not cloverfield, move on...
-
If the "monster" really does end up just being some big Godzilla thing, I think the first hour will be tense and exciting and then, once they show the monster, it will be another generic action flick.
I'd to be proven wrong somehow, but can't think of anything that would add a significant twist.
It probably doesn't help that I don't trust JJ Abrams (I know he didn't actually write it, but it's his baby).
-
I just hope that it avoids the many cliches of his other baby Lost.
-
Lost is quite possibly the worst drama that has ever been on television, from a writing standpoint, that has actually managed to have fans. Fans who actually don't care that the writers have no idea where the show is going and just throw weird shit in for no other reason than to be weird.
Anytime someone tells me how "intellectual" and "deep" Lost is, I throw episodes of The Prisoner at them until they're unconscious.
-
And, as everyone knows, MASS MYSTERIOUS NUMBERS = INSTANT WIN.
It's even worse because the first season showed potential. But as soon as everyone and their brother speculated "I think I get it - they're all dead and in Hell/Purgatory" the writers, who had probably intended something like that to be true, had to backpedal like crazy and try "rationally" explaining it.
Lost is like watching your 7 year old brother play an Infocom game.
-
I have a feeling that first concept drawing, with the louse that is as big as a hipster is real. In the trailer you see silhouettes killing a girl, and they look a lot like the louse. I was thinking perhaps something reptilian that also brought children with it or an alien robot craft. The deep-sea monster thing with louses seems viable.
-
Lost isn't J.J.'s baby.
He hasn't even been involved with the show since the first episode, really. ABC had a Gilligan's Island drama pilot and J.J. was brought on board to actually make it interesting. Damon Lindelof and Carlton Cuse have been the showrunners since then.
Also, it's good and fuck you, get back to talking about Cloverfield.
-
Lost isn't J.J.'s baby.
He hasn't even been involved with the show since the first episode, really.
He is still credited as being an executive producer, writer and co-creator so I think it's likely has still has creative input.
Networks don't just keep paying someone for a job they're not doing.
-
I dunno, Bill O'Reilly's supposed to be relevant but they're still cutting him a cheque.
-
Lost isn't J.J.'s baby.
He hasn't even been involved with the show since the first episode, really.
If you give a baby up for adoption and never see or hear of it again, it's still your baby.
Back to Cloverfield, I have a funny feeling that there will be more than one monster, bar the lice on the giant louse if that is real, in this film.
-
when I heard about this I was really hoping it was going to be something Lovecraftian, but I don't think that's what the movie is going to about.
-
I'm pretty certain it's going to basically be a Spielberg-remake War of the Worlds ripoff, where nothing at all about the monster is explained, and people just basically get increasingly fucked over the course of 2 hours until something "wacky" happens at the end and everyone is okay.
-
i read somewhere that this movie is from the perspective of people that were at a going away party and a lot of the filming is done as if it were from a handheld camcorder type thing.
this leads me to believe that the camera motion in the movie will induce some serious nauseu for me. damn... i still want to see this one. if it comes to it i could just leave halfway through like i had to for 28 weeks later and fellowship of the ring.
-
Yes, from the commercials and pre-release info, the movie is mostly/entirely filmed in camcorder-vision.
-
Which is potentially really cool but also in danger of becoming a gimmick the director uses to make it stand out.
LOLOLOL BLAIR WITCH LOLOLOL.
Although, it's a cool way to do a monster movie. I guess it would make it feel more immersive.
-
Blair Witch was a very good film, especially if you're old enough to have seen it in the theater without any spoilers.
-
I'm pretty certain it's going to basically be a Spielberg-remake War of the Worlds ripoff, where nothing at all about the monster is explained, and people just basically get increasingly fucked over the course of 2 hours until something "wacky" happens at the end and everyone is okay.
This is how the movie needs to be. End with "and everybody died" after all that, and it will be my new favorite monster movie. Especially if it's a giant isopod.
-
Jesus, aren't we over the whole handheld camera thing yet? Not to come over all David Stratton on you all (that's an Australian cultural reference, folks), but it's getting a bit old. I want to be able to actually see what's in the movie, instead of just watching it in shaky-vision. As for handheld god-damn camcorders, why would I fork out good money to spend an hour-and-a-half or more watching something that goes out of its way to look like shit? I mean hell, next someone's going to make a feature filmed entirely on camera-phone (if they haven't already).
-
Well, this movie has a four BILLION!!!!! dollar budget for it's special effects, I'm sure you'll get to see them quite clearly at some point. If you watch the trailers and TV spots, there are clearly shots that are NOT done in 'home cam' mode. I hope this calms you down!
-
Four billion? I don't believe that, there's no way they could ever recoup that kind of expense.
-
wow, I wonder if Abrams is going to bring back animatronics as a substitute for CG. I really ca not think of any other way to justify that kind of budget.
-
HUGE SPOILER
(http://media.filmschoolrejects.com/images/cloverfieldmonsterart01.jpg)
-
You should probably just link that image, considering when I clicked the button for new replies it took me directly to the picture and not the text that said HUGE SPOILER.
Just so you know.
-
Blair Witch was a very good film, especially if you're old enough to have seen it in the theater without any spoilers.
Sure, but what about Blair Witch 2?
checkmate.
Anyway, I would expect this to be the kind of movie that capitalizes on memories of 9/11, what with the handheld disaster-vision and all.
Thoughts?
And does it really matter what the monster looks like?
-
I'm going to go with no it doesn't matter what the monster actually looks like. I want to know what it is in the sense of whole "Project: Cloverfield" is this some government genetics experiment gone horribly wrong or what?
I too worry about the handheld camcorder because I had to leave Blair Witch due to motion sickness issues.
-
HUGE SPOILER
(http://media.filmschoolrejects.com/images/cloverfieldmonsterart01.jpg)
Does that thing have balls on the side of its face or is it just me?
-
Does that thing have one completely unnecessary pair of legs or is it just me?
-
I liked the other one with louses on it. < <
-
This one has louses on it. They chase people down and bite them, which makes them explode, apparently.
Also, I enjoyed Blair Witch 2 for what it was. I enjoyed it in much the same way as I enjoyed Loaded, for many of the same reasons.
-
In the trailer you see silhouettes killing a girl, and they look a lot like the louse.
I think those are supposed to be dudes in hazmat suits. Jury's still out on whether they're killing her or not. That'd add a fun dystopian veneer to this flick.
-
frame by frame, as well as shot comparisons to the seconds before the silhouettes show that they ARE guys in hazmat suits, and the girl is the one you see looking all pale and bleeding from the eyes. Presumably, they're leading her somewhere, and she blows up or something?
-
Yes, the girl with the Hazmat guys explodes. Like I said, the dog-lice bite you and you blow up for whatever unexplained reason.
A lot of people have seen it already and so I've read basically the entire movie description, since I know I'll never bother watching it.
Apparently you do see quite a bit of monster action, which is a little disappointing. I liked it better when it was assumed it would be a Cthulhu-type thing, where you never see anything but it's implied it's so huge and horrible you'd go insane if you did. But, no, it's just an American Godzilla, ho hum.
-
http://media.filmschoolrejects.com/images/cloverfieldmonsterart01.jpg
I liked the super-sized lion idea better. Or the giant whale-thing.
-
yeah, that whale-thing was cool.
-
Pretty much.
-
On the other hand, a movie version of Robot Alchemic Drive as shown only from the POV of the pilots? I would so watch that.
-
and there was me hoping it'd be a cloud of black smoke.
-
This actually is a big spoiler. This is from a bootleg of an advanced screening posted on those silly imdb forums.
So, here is the obligatory HUGE SPOILER
http://img118.imageshack.us/img118/6899/cloverfieldsmalleq0.gif (http://img118.imageshack.us/img118/6899/cloverfieldsmalleq0.gif)
-
The entire thing looks like a cross between Independence day and the Blair Witch Project. Neither were much good. The fact that they had a good mystery going and then revealed another typical monster looking "bad guy" just makes it look worse. Is originality really such a sin that everyone must avoid it?
-
Anything of the sort would never get a producer.
"That's kind of the whole point of the movie, you never actually get to see it."
Sorta reminds me of Jaws, where you didn't see him the first half of the movie.
And, more relating to your comment, if an older, more respected, director/screenplay writer did that, they would do it.
-
After reading all the spoilers I can safely assume that my original prediction that this would be like the first hour of Spielberg's War of the Worlds is pretty accurate.
-
This actually is a big spoiler. This is from a bootleg of an advanced screening posted on those silly imdb forums.
So, here is the obligatory HUGE SPOILER
http://img118.imageshack.us/img118/6899/cloverfieldsmalleq0.gif (http://img118.imageshack.us/img118/6899/cloverfieldsmalleq0.gif)
That thing looks like a cross between Venom and like, the Incredible Hulk, or some shit like that.
-
That thing looks like a cross between Venom and Gollum
-
Really? Looks like a little yellow frog to me :-P
-
vid
http://cloverfield.blog.com/2539926/
-
Ok, seriously. I'm gonna Skullfuck me some J.J. Abrams. What the fuck...
-
Haha, I mean that the ending left me wanting more. It left a bunch of questions unanswered, but I guess it was the only way they could have ended it...
-
oh so it IS like lost.
-
Saw it tonight. I expected 3 tons of questions and no answers, and thats what i got. I would like to see it again without the people I saw it with, because they came out of the theater proclaiming their hate for the ending.
<spoilz>
I thought the ending was great; it is different from most movies where everything is tied up. reminded me of John Carpenter's The Thing a little bit.
</Spoilz>
-
Seeing this tomorrow after work, will post about it then.
-
I went to a midnight show and was absolutely blown away by this movie and cannot wait to see it a second time. I expected an intense, stylistic, and original monster movie with essentially little to no explanation (c'mon, Abrams producing? no one should expect any less) and that is exactly what i got, plus you get some great money shots of the monster without going overboard. The ending was great and the tie in with the characters sub plot i thought worked perfectly.
-
Thing is, all of the things that suck about Lost come from the story, the characters and the need to drag out a non-existant plot out over several seasons. I imagine that if Cloverfield sucks, it's for very different reasons.
-
I don't know how to feel about Cloverfield right now. I liked it, but I'm not sure how much I liked it. To be completely honest though, it was definitely worth my money, as it must have been one of the most entertaining movies I have seen in a while. Entertainment value is different from excellence in moviemaking value though, and I'm not sure yet how well this stands as a movie. The thing about it that made it worthwhile for me was the way it was filmed, surprisingly. This may not be anything new, but it works so well with for the basic premise that I cannot imagine it being done any way else cinematography-wise and getting as excellent an experience as I had. The movie gets another plus for no explanation, because a mystery like this solved wouldn't be as fun. WE DON'T NEED TO KNOW EVERYTHING GUYS, SPECULATION MAKES THINGS AWESOME.
-
Once again the company that owns my local theaters is being cheap. This is from their website:
“Our negotiations with this film distributor have again reached an impasse. Marcus Theatres did not show Sweeney Todd on its first run availability date because acceptable terms could not be negotiated and now we will not be exhibiting Cloverfield at any of our locations for similar reasons,” said Bruce J. Olson, president of Marcus Theatres®. “Our ongoing negotiations have not resulted in film terms that are acceptable to Marcus Theatres and this film studio. Unfortunately, Cloverfield will not be exhibited on the date of its first run availability at our theatres.”
I hate them all.
-
I don't know how to feel about Cloverfield right now. I liked it, but I'm not sure how much I liked it. To be completely honest though, it was definitely worth my money, as it must have been one of the most entertaining movies I have seen in a while. Entertainment value is different from excellence in moviemaking value though, and I'm not sure yet how well this stands as a movie.
I find that it is getting harder and harder to actually find good movies, as in the "excellent moviemaking" idea of good. Most of what I see is really entertaining and I generally have a lot of fun when I go to the cinema but actual good pieces of filmmaking are few and far between. I'm looking forward to seeing Cloverfield but I'm not expecting it to be cinematic mastery, simply a good film.
-
I didn't see it tonight, but that's my general feeling about it, too. We figured 10$ for a 73 minute movie is a bit much, though. Probably seeing a matinee of it some other time.
-
I am glad I read the past few pages to realize that I don't want to see this movie. It looks like it's Godzilla from the sea with louses and erratic camera movement and you also don't get the whole story, it seems.
-
Yeah, but people die! And buildings fall down! What are you waiting for?
-
Do not forget explosions, because there are explosions.
Also Coney Island.
-
(I hadn't originally wanted to see it, but I just don't want to see it in a theater. Maybe when it comes out on DVD, I'll rent it. Maybe.)
-
Okay, guys. Here's the thing I think most people are missing that no one who has actually seen the movie has seemed to point out:
This isn't a monster movie. It's a movie about a group of five friends that just happens to have a monster in it. It doesn't tell the backstory of the monster, the history of the monters, what the monster is or any of that (though if you followed the viral marketing you can pretty much put it together), because it's NOT NECESSARY TO THE MOVIE. The movie isn't about the monster, which is why we don't learn that much about it. What we DO learn about is the people in the movie, their story, and - in that vein, the movie is told and ends perfectly.
Yes, there is a lot of action, a lot of monster-destroying-stuff action, people blowing up, some HOLYSHITRIGHATMYFACE moments, etc. But the reason we are left with questions about the monster is NOT the same reason as why Lost always leaves people with questions (For the record I HATE Lost with a passion), it's because it's not necessary to the true story.
-
what he said. only I want to add that it's character driven rather than ridiculous and absurd plot driven like your typical godzilla movie. This is more horror than sci-fi, there's no white lab coat guys. Also, once the shit goes down, it just doesn't stop, so you get your money's worth from the 80 minutes. I HIGHLY encourage you to see this in a theater, I don't know if it'll be as gripping on DVD
-
I have to agree with this being something to see on a screen in theaters. This really gives you breathtaking looks at the visuals, which are quite beautiful to look at.
SPOILERZ
I loved the shot where they were crossing back over to the other building after rescuing Rob's girlfriend and Hut looks to the left with the camera to see the monster basically charging straight in their direction.
END SPOILERZ
The way this movie is shot makes it like going on one of those movie rides at Disney world, whether your seat squirts you or the entire theater starts moving, this could almost mentally emulate these, and without the big screen, the almost pitch dark theater, and the completely booming sounds, you can get quite gripped to where you might be sitting.
I think I have pinpointed what I liked about this film. It was immersive as hell.
-
Oh dude like those 3D ride things with all the effects and stuff? When I went (when I was like 7) I saw the Muppets one and the Honey We Shrunk the Audience. I remember trying to catch one of the little puffs of air that blew from underneath the seat to emulate thousands of mice. Now I have to see this movie(having not read the thread because I'm sure there are a bunch of monster movie killjoys) since it has been linked to my childhood.
-
HUGE SPOILER
MONSTER PIC
I can't really remember how big this thing is in relation to the statue of liberty. If it took off the head, it would have to be pretty big but I don't think it was that large.
maybe i should see it again?
-
yeah, the greatest thing about this movie for me was the new star trek teaser
no, seriously? it was a very good idea executed wonderfully. I liked the characters, the camera was handled well enough that i didnt get too carsick, all in all not bad
-
I heard that the monster SPOILER SPOILER SPOILER
was a moldy vagina with teeth
-
God bless those brave people.
-
This was a really, really good movie, and unless you have a big TV and a good sound system you probably won't feel as involved as when it's in the theatre.
-
*SPOILERS*
I only skimmed the thread, but this is pretty much directed at people I've talked to who didn't like the movie. I'm pretty sure this movie wasn't about the origins of the monster or even the monster itself. I mean really, who cares where the monster came from? Who cares what happened to it? There was ship of radioactive material that leaked into the ocean or there was some government testing fuckup. [Insert any other disaster movie cliche of your choice.] What happened after? The monster decided that he needed to ride his rocket ship back to his home planet. Or, more than likely, the nuclear explosion killed the thing. Again, not what the movie was about. It wasn't like Lost in that they hinted or spent any time whatsoever trying to find out why the monster was there or where it came from and then delivered no (or stupid) answers. Only the viewers wondered that because they are used to being spoon fed explinations. The movie was about how this small group of people handled the situation, and that's it. You know, a movie about characters in a situation and not the situation itself. Also, the ending was perfect. I wish more movies ended like that.
Thank you for your time. :)
-
But I didn't really empathize with the characters, and in the end, it felt rushed. Omg Hudd just got munched by the monster! Omg the bridge just got bombed! Wtf!? Maybe that was the point... :?
-
This movie was pretty much amazing.(of course, I went into expecting nothing great, because everyone has been telling me how terrible it is)
Basically, it's not a monster movie! People keep bitching that they didn't show the monster enough. They didn't need to. The monster was a plot device. Not the whole plot.
-
I refuse to watch this movie because using a giant lizard as an allegory for being at ground-zero on 9/11 is one of the few things I would genuinely attach the word "pretentious" to.
Seriously, guys.
-
Man. I feel the same way about Cloverfield as I did about Children of Men.
The sudden infertility of the human race is not the plot. It's the context. The plot is a man trying to save a woman. The plot is trying to make sure the future of the human race has a chance.
The monster is not the plot. The monster is the context. The plot is a group of friends trying to survive. The plot is a man trying to get to the love of his life amidst the destruction of New York.
It's like people who are HURR HURR HURR I know how Titanic ends! The ship sinks! DOOPY DOOOOOO! The fucking ship is not the plot.
Needless to say, I loved it. I loved it so much. I went in with high expectations and it met them on every level. It was completely immersive, tense as hell, and ridiculously well made. I can't begin to imagine how they managed that CGI with the shakiest camera in the history of cinema, but it was amazing. I don't want a sequel. I don't want any more. It was perfect.
Idle notes:
The name of the cameraman was truly inspired (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/HUD_(computer_gaming)).
The brief flash of the Dharma logo at the beginning of the movie made me happy.
The dialogue was fantastic, especially the unexpectedly funny moments. Great Drew Goddard writing, funny without being obvious about it. ("What's that?" "A terrible thing." "What the hell was that?" "Another, different thing. Uh. Also terrible.")
-
Hmm, so it's like Titanic, then?
I'll pass.
-
...actually, yeah.
It is kinda like Titanic, when you think about it.
Weird.
-
Good post.
I agree completely.
A sequel would be silly, and unnecessary. It'd be the same exact movie, only with different characters. It'd be pointless. Even a movie explaining the attack, and what happened afterward would be kinda pointless. It would take the fun away from the original.
-
It'd be cool to have some illuminating documentaries and the like on the DVD though. < <
-
I guess it would be nice to be told why the monster attacked and what eventually happened with it but, I mean...I can't really seem to care.
The movie, for me, was about the breathtaking moments of destruction against the heartbreaking moments of gain and loss. The universe doesn't need to be fleshed out any more than it is. It was about the "Oh fuck." of them seeing Beth's building, or flipping on the night vision to see "Holy shit!" or watch the F-16 bombing run from another angle that isn't horrifyingly perched on top of a crumbling skyscraper and the success of the military against the monster is just irrelevant against the final moments under the bridge and "I had a good day."
Hell, the only thing I think I really want to know more about is what happened to Lily.
-
i think it would be cool if they made some comic books or something to fill in A FEW gaps, but not everythiing. i like the mystery.
SPOILER
at the very end, where they have the bit at coney island, and you're looking out over the water, if you look at the far right of the screen, you see something fall out of the sky and hit the water.
END
-
'twas a satellite, I think.
-
With what I have seen from the back story it may very well be A) Pieces of a whae that was ripped apart and washed on shore, or B) Pieces of the rig that were demolished a few days ago
-
I refuse to watch this movie because using a giant lizard as an allegory for being at ground-zero on 9/11 is one of the few things I would genuinely attach the word "pretentious" to.
Seriously, guys.
Um. Except it's not an allegory for that.
At all.
The ONLY thing any member of the production team said about it being like 9/11 is that they used how the buildings fell, with the clouds of dust and stuff, as a VISUAL REFERENCE for what would happen in their movie when the buildings fell. Way to spread misleading, misinformed information.
-
With what I have seen from the back story it may very well be A) Pieces of a whae that was ripped apart and washed on shore, or B) Pieces of the rig that were demolished a few days ago
but the coney island bit happened like two or three weeks before the monster came. i think it's the monster falling from space... or something.
-
I am not really sure of the time frame, but there was a drilling rig located some miles away from the shore of Manhattan and it was pulled under water, then rocketed into the sky. There was a "news story" (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KarNwKx5mGY) about it
-
A few nights ago I went looking online for a picture or video of this falling object, because, alas, I did not catch it when I saw the movie. I looked all over youtube and other sites, but only found extremely blurry 'proof'. Hence, I have not seen this yet. Does anyone have a possible link?
-
In other news, Hud's Myspace page was edited after the movie was released. His height now reads 2'6".
Oh God hahaha.
I just saw this movie after being hardly spoiled on it at all (I saw a relatively inaccurate drawing of the monster on this thread, that's it). I couldn't even watch the entire trailer because youtube is a fuckup on the campus network here. This movie was pretty excellent, I thought. I'm pretty tired right now, so I'll have to put into words why I like it so much at some later time.
-
Just saw it tonight. Not normally the kind of film I'd see unless I happened across it on T.V., but it was screening as a late show at my local
fancy-pants art-house cinema, so I thought "why the hell not?"
It was pretty good, better than most monster movies out there. Even if it was basically a big non-interactive computer game. The characters were pretty dull, though. The whole "boring but hot guy tries to rescue boring but hot girl" thing was a pretty uninteresting plot. Got me thinking, though: with this whole viral marketing thing they've got going on, I haven't seen any advertising for the film (maybe because I never go to more commercial, blockbuster-oriented cinemas). If they decide to go for a more traditional marketing approach, obviously they're gonna need a tagline for the posters. I humbly suggest:
CLOVERFIELD
History's deadliest booty call
-
...Thank you for existing.
-
Should I pass that on to my parents?
-
I refuse to watch this movie because using a giant lizard as an allegory for being at ground-zero on 9/11 is one of the few things I would genuinely attach the word "pretentious" to.
Seriously, guys.
Um. Except it's not an allegory for that.
At all.
The ONLY thing any member of the production team said about it being like 9/11 is that they used how the buildings fell, with the clouds of dust and stuff, as a VISUAL REFERENCE for what would happen in their movie when the buildings fell. Way to spread misleading, misinformed information.
I dunno, Gojira got away with it in the 50's, no one really considers that pretentious. To quote Abrams, the idea is catharsis; you're seeing images that definitely evoke 9-11, yet the thing creating those images is this inconceivable abomination. It's combining real terror with unreal circumstances, which is the cornerstone to the carthartic, enjoyable fear that filmgoers take from horror films.
It's like vampires as analogy for rape and zombies as metaphors for the destruction of the human spirit via capitalism or whatever; serious themes+presentation in kind of ridiculous contexts=highly effective and fun