Rate CLOVERFIELD

[abcdefz]

Pretty darned effective.

I really liked the small monsters.

8/10

[camo]

I saw the trailer for this the other day. It gave me goosebumps.

I hope it does for sci-fi what the blair witch did for horror.

I can't wait (y)

[abcdefz]

I've only seen part of Blair Witch, but I think this was way way way better. The actors in Blair Witch couldn't improvise their way out of a
paper bag, so they just did the cheapest, unimaginative improv possible -- cuss a lot and yell at each other to create "conflict."

As far as shakey-cam goes, I did make a point to sit very near the back. I wasn't bothered at all.

[camo]

Yeah I agree but the Blair witch had the whole 'real' phenominom surrounding and I enjoyed the pretense that it actual footage.

I wanna watch cloverfield in the same mindset (y)

[abcdefz]

It's very very convincing, as far as that goes.

There are a couple of moments where I thought, "Okay -- someone would not keep filming" but overall all the footage is
very well motivated and believable.

Even though you do get to see the main monster in full from various angles, I still couldn't tell you exactly what it looked like.
Which is a compliment, I think -- it keeps the creature mysterious in a way. The movie is surprisingly haunting. I left the
downtown theater and I swear I was vaguely nervous that some monster was going to be out, stomping around. I kinda had
to shake it off. Weird.

[camo]

Even though you do get to see the main monster in full from various angles, I still couldn't tell you exactly what it looked like.
Which is a compliment, I think -- it keeps the creature mysterious in a way.

many a movie should hold it's head in shame for that mistake.


I left the
downtown theater and I swear I was vaguely nervous that some monster was going to be out, stomping around. I kinda had
to shake it off. Weird.

thats the shit I want to feel!!!!!!!!!!!!

[abcdefz]

...I had a similar reaction when Roger Rabbit first came out, actually. Two of us in the group that went to see it walked out to the parking lot
half expecting to see cartoon characters out and about. It was pretty hallucinatory.

[camo]

I came out if the cinema after watching transformers and turned into a road

[adam_f]

I walked out of Die Hard and realized I was impotent.

[Gareth]

i found it hard to watch
my stomach was churning and my head was spinning
luckily it was only a short movie

[monkey]

i was really put off by the movie. maybe it was the cheap 9-11 shots. it shook me, but it didnt scare me. as far as horror films go, it was pretty good. good use of bloody images and whatnot.

i think there's more to be said about how americans feel, post 9-11, that several (at least 2 that ive seen lately) movies are about the destruction of manhattan and leaving the island to fend for itself. but im sure there's going to be people with actual well thought out points that will illustrate better than i could. so ima go be quiet in my corner now. kbye.

[adam_f]

Yeah, you should let the grown folk do the talking.

[Nygel]

only one shot really was 9-11ish, when the empire building went down and the smoke went through the streets, that was about it as far as similiar to 9-11 stuff. Destruction on manhatten isn't a new theme in movies. anyway, i think its well done. every bit was cool, as much as i hated the main guy (rob perhaps?) being the generic dumbass 'have to find muh girlfriend' guy, but without him then the movie would have failed. I'm interested to see the dvd and extra stuff, maybe alternate clips from other cams. it'd be cool.

[funk63]

i saw it with my little sister and it had her projectile vomiting. i guess cuz of the jerky camera. i didnt really have a problem with it but i didnt think the actors were too believable.. i did like it though good shit for the most part didnt know what to expect goin in.

[hardnox71]

I just had the pleasure of walking out on this movie last night. It fucking sucked. I took as much as I could until I could take no more. The jumpy camera made my head hurt and, like someone else already said, the 9/11 shots were too much. It was gar-bage. I stayed long enough until another movie started on another screen and I left.

[abcdefz]

Pussies -- the lot of you! :D

[adam_f]

The part with the giant monster from another world that dripped off other little vicious creatures that would in turn attack civilians also reminded me of 9/11. It was too much.

[hardnox71]

The part with the giant monster from another world that dripped off other little vicious creatures that would in turn attack civilians also reminded me of 9/11. It was too much.

The part where there was a bunch of shit flying into buildings and exploding and people running through the streets is what reminded me of 9/11, smartass.

And I didn't mean it was too much to take, I meant it was overkill in the movie. Too much,. They over did it on all that shit.



Go outside and talk to strangers.

[adam_f]

I'm still angry the Poseidon Adventure made light of the Titanic. Too soon...too soon.

[hardnox71]

I'm still angry the Poseidon Adventure made light of the Titanic.

You must be out of Ritalin again, aren't you?

Go get your scrips refilled and stay off the computer and away from sharp objects until you do, unnerstan?

Good.

[adam_f]

Yeah, I'm out of Ritalin but I'm full of rational thought.

[dugmatics]

saw the trailer. looks retarded.

[kll]

I was sick 2 minutes into the damn thing and it lasted several hours after the damn thing was over. Bah.

From what I could hear, it was a good movie.

[beastieangel01]

I love love loved it

many complain, and
POSSIBLE SPOILAGE, HENCE WHITE TEXT:
I can kind of understand why. They say they wanted answers, etc. However, one should keep in mind that the viewpoint is from a personal camera and amogst these people in the story. They don't know anything either as far as what was going on during footage was concerned. It's imply the style of the movie, soooo it makes sense to me anyways.

I also am on JJ Abrams dick too when it comes to Lost. So it was right up my alley.

Oh and (again, POSSIBLE spoilage): it may be one of my favorite love stories. If someone asks me what my favorite romance is I'm going to say Cloverfield :p

[beastieangel01]

There are a couple of moments where I thought, "Okay -- someone would not keep filming" but overall all the footage is
very well motivated and believable.

Even though you do get to see the main monster in full from various angles, I still couldn't tell you exactly what it looked like.
Which is a compliment, I think -- it keeps the creature mysterious in a way.

yes yes, agreed. Especially because of the type of character that is holding the character (Hud).

The glimpse of the monster before the subway. LOVED that part. I actually said "holy crap!"

[abcdefz]

No shit. (y)

And I loved the sound of the bridge cables snapping.

[Nygel]

Yeah, I'm out of Ritalin but I'm full of rational thought.

you win (y)

[ToucanSpam]

Loved it.

[Dorothy Wood]

the title isn't very scary. I know that there's a back story to it that's supposed to be cute. but it isn't cute or funny or charming in the least, so I hate the movie already without even seeing it.


I'll probably still see it though. even though people seem to be puking from it. :( I'll take the sitting in the back hint.

[BangkokB]

I hated that movie with a passion. I thought of it as a movie that put together the drama class at a community college and someone of the street that was paid a bowl of soup and some Wild Irish Rose to strap on a camera and walk through a funhouse.

Blair Witch Project with a bigger budget

Total Crap...I hope you walked out bf the 15th minute

[Nygel]

yes, walk out before the 15th minute, that way you can critisize a movie you saw later and claim the entire thing sucked, based on the background building 15 minutes of the movie.

[like2_drink]

i only rated it 2 because i havent seen the blair witch project yet lol

i thought the movie was terrible, hud (the camera guy) was the only entertainging part of the movie. we couldnt get seats at the back, and sitting close to the movie had quite an effect on the people around me, my gf couldnt stand to watch the screen because it was so shaky - she felt sick the entire time, and the chick to my left fell asleep.


granted, the little monster things were pretty cool. but i still think i could kick their ass'

[Nygel]

granted, the little monster things were pretty cool. but i still think i could kick their ass'

you ever pissed on (thus pissing it off) a badger before?

[BBboy20]

The main problems with this film are...well actually a couple but it maybe more in the line "pick peeves".

(-1)Now I don't have a problem with the story not being spoon fed but given the fact that this movie has J.J. Abrams invovled (Who has become the new de facto "master" of sci-fi mystery ideas set in modern times and total mind *Censored* plot twists kind-of-guy after Lost and maybe even Alias); even so he was only one of two producers of the film, you'd think he would be endorsing this project as being something more then just Blair Witch with a Big Monster. Sadly, that's what this movie was: Blair Witch with a Big Monster.
Now, I can somewhat understand why they don't reveal anything but you see, the problem is that, because he has established himself as this kind of person thanks to his recent creation, and that the previews make it seem also vague and mysterious, that it also got the ARG treatment, you'd think that something is bigger is crawling around that all the efforts those who did all the Alternate Gaming would be solved but no. Now I'm not saying that should have revealed what the monster is and origin but they could have, maybe created other "cameras" to focus on the "plot" but no, all you get is people running and trying to survive. Great for those who love monster films and I'm sure plenty probably don't care about this aspect that I have already typed two paragraphs on but for me, it's rather a downer.
Of course, Lost gets away with this because it's a TV show and you'd expect a new season coming soon but movies are rather generally you have to wait (Unless you were some slasher film that somehow got enough popularity to make more) for a very long period of time. Given the fact that
they don't reveal what Cloverfield even means, any more anticipation for a sequel just only drops even further. Now I don't know if you have to watch the movie again just to see what you missed but even then, those "hints" probably still doesn't really answer much. IMO, this is bullshit because the writers seem to forget that people have to pay every time just to watch a movie; how do justify somebody paying 7 bucks just re watch it to see if they're any hints when there wasn't even a story or plot to begin with to base it on?
---
(-2)The Monster: Those "Resistance" hints was not only from the face and upper body of the creature but also the Russian from the film and some of the crew's name with Russian last names. (In Fall of Man, the Chimera army seem to originate from Russia) As I said, it's just a coincidence but I can't help but feel that the writers and crew seem to play video games...a lot (Even my bro pointed out that the parasites reminded him of the "parasites" from R:FOM as well). Personally, it should have been something that makes you want to go into the feedle position while also making you to throw up but I've played plenty of video games to notice similarities.

Otherwise, it's already the best thriller of the year.

[BBboy20]

The main problem with this film is...well actually a couple but it maybe more in the line "pick peeves".

(-1)Now I don't have a problem with the story not being spoon fed but given the fact that this movie has J.J. Abrams invovled (Who has become the new de facto "master" of sci-fi mystery ideas set in modern times and total mind *Censored* plot twists kind-of-guy after Lost and maybe even Alias); even so he was only one of two producers of the film, you'd think he would be endorsing this project as being something more then just Blair Witch with a Big Monster. Sadly, that's what this movie was: Blair Witch with a Big Monster.
Now, I can somewhat understand why they don't reveal anything but you see, the problem is that, because he has established himself as this kind of person thanks to his recent creation, and that the previews make it seem also vague and mysterious, that it also got the ARG treatment, you'd think that something is bigger is crawling around that all the efforts those who did all the Alternate Gaming would be solved but no. Now I'm not saying that should have revealed what the monster is and origin but they could have, maybe created other "cameras" to focus on the "plot" but no, all you get is people running and trying to survive. Great for those who love monster films and I'm sure plenty probably don't care about this aspect that I have already typed two paragraphs on but for me, it's rather a downer.
Of course, Lost gets away with this because it's a TV show and you'd expect a new season coming soon but movies are rather generally you have to wait (Unless you were some slasher film that somehow got enough popularity to make more) for a very long period of time. Given the fact that
they don't reveal what Cloverfield even means, any more anticipation for a sequel just only drops even further. Now I don't know if you have to watch the movie again just to see what you missed but even then, those "hints" probably still doesn't really answer much. IMO, this is bullshit because the writers seem to forget that people have to pay every time just to watch a movie; how do justify somebody paying 7 bucks just re watch it to see if they're any hints when there wasn't even a story or plot to begin with to base it on?
---
(-2)The Monster: Those "Resistance" hints was not only from the face and upper body of the creature but also the Russian from the film and some of the crew's name with Russian last names. (In Fall of Man, the Chimera army seem to originate from Russia) As I said, it's just a coincidence but I can't help but feel that the writers and crew seem to play video games...a lot (Even my bro pointed out that the parasites reminded him of the "parasites" from R:FOM as well). Personally, it should have been something that makes you want to go into the feedle position while also making you to throw up but I've played plenty of video games to notice similarities.

Otherwise, it's already the best thriller of the year.


Also note that this comment was in prior knowledge of the ARG that I later found out about...still, it would be nice if they creatively revealed something that wasn't in the ARGs.

[ericlee]

you ever pissed on (thus pissing it off) a badger before?

yeah and oddly, my nickname became stubbs. I don't know why though:confused:

[like2_drink]

you ever pissed on (thus pissing it off) a badger before?

not a badger, but ive snuck up and slapped a ground hog on the ass..thing acted tough but it just wanted to get out of there lol

[beastieangel01]

I do not understand the comparisons to Blair Witch, aside from the handheld camera, AT ALL.

The two don't even relate what-so-ever. Wtf?
Regardless of what you think of either film, I call bullshit comparison, but maybe that's just me.

[Nygel]

I do not understand the comparisons to Blair Witch, aside from the handheld camera, AT ALL.

The two don't even relate what-so-ever. Wtf?
Regardless of what you think of either film, I call bullshit comparison, but maybe that's just me.
thats the only real comparison. really... and the viral marketing over internet. so handheld first person storytelling will get an automatic comparison to these two movies.

[beastieangel01]

thats the only real comparison. really... and the viral marketing over internet. so handheld first person storytelling will get an automatic comparison to these two movies.

I suppose because it's not common that KIND of makes sense, but then saying they are same or similar or even reviewing them against each other?

I wish people would use their brains a little bit more.
Just a little.

[like2_drink]

I do not understand the comparisons to Blair Witch, aside from the handheld camera, AT ALL.

The two don't even relate what-so-ever. Wtf?
Regardless of what you think of either film, I call bullshit comparison, but maybe that's just me.

actually they do, at the end in the tunnel, that dumb bitch that was stuck on a pole totally pulled out the "im soo scared" line, and she fuckin had a sweaty/buggery nose. i demand you take your comment back:P

[checkyourprez]

The premise really peaked my interest. However when I left the movie, I felt like I was hardcore ripped off of my hard earned 8 bucks.


First of all the movie was short. Not to mention the first 20/25 minutes are of that party, which really didnt do shit for me. They are introducing you to forgetable characters and basically wasting my time.

Now that there is only 2/3s of the movie left the group of 4/5 friends go on a stupid clearly pointless treck to find that one girl. This is so stupid and corney to me. Is this honestly a realistic plot? I know it draws 9/11 comparisons (I dont necessarily agree with them but I'll mention it to prove a point), did anyone in real life (other than fire fighters or police) go back into the twin towers and try and save someone? To my knowledge, no. That is what is so fucking stupid about that guy, its just totally unrealistic. Everyone here knows it, if that was real life, they would have gotten the fuck out of that city as fast as possible.



I really could go on about other things i didnt like but I will end with this one. Its billed as a "monster" movie. The soul reason I went to this was for the monster. I am a curious fellow, I wanted to know where it came from, what happens to it, what those little spider things were, ect. Now they didnt have to go into great detail about it or answer everything pertaining to the monster, but something, ANYTHING, would have been nice. Its bascially a monster movie, where the monster plays a bit part.

It ended up being a love story with a monster mixed into it to facilitate the love story. Complete and utter garbage.

[abcdefz]

This was interesting. Kind of long, but worth it:

From DenOfGeek.com (http://www.denofgeek.com/movies/8783/press_conference_report_matt_reeves_director_of_cl overfield.html):

Q: What inspired the monster design?

Matt: The monster was designed by a man named Neville Page who’s a creature designer. He’s just amazing. I would go into his office
and he had these computers and he would sketch on them, and on his wall he had all of these little photographs. They covered the entire
wall and from afar you looked at it and you thought, oh, that looks interesting, you’d see little bits of red, and as you got closer you
suddenly wanted to turn away because actually what they were, were photographs of intestines, photographs of eyeballs and body parts.
I referred to it affectionately as his Wall of Terror. The idea was that the creature would have some kind of evolutionary biological basis.
It wouldn’t just be random things coming out of its arm or some weird thing. There are actually things that he designed that are part of
the monster that we never got to use. He had these feeding tubes which were just wild - he would come up with these crazy ideas that
were just amazing and very creepy. Within the course of the movie, we could only reveal certain aspects of it, so that never got released.
That was really fun and what was important to me was, again, thinking about things being based in a kind of reality. In the movie we’ll
never know where this creature comes from because we have a limited point of view. We’re going to go through this experience with
these people who don’t have the knowledge that someone from another perspective would have - they’re just trying to survive. We need
to start describing the things that they are seeing. I can only understand that really from, I would say, an emotional point of view.


So the secret that we had was that the monster was a baby. Having just been born it was going through separation anxiety and had
no idea where its mother was and was freaking out and was in a completely foreign place, didn’t understand a thing and that that would
be sending it into a kind of infantile rage. Which was very frightening, but the thing that was also frightening to me was the idea that not
only was it going through an infantile rage but, because it was suffering from this separation anxiety, it was spooked. It was really afraid.
And as the military started shooting at it, I started thinking, like if you were attacked by a swarm of bees for the first time, it wouldn’t
necessarily kill you but you’d be terrified, you’d be like, "What are these things doing?!" And for me there’s nothing scarier than thinking
of something that big that’s spooked. Like if you’re at the circus and suddenly the elephants are spooked, you don’t want to be anywhere
near that, you’ll be crushed. And so that just became a way to again find an approach to giving an emotional or a grounded point of view
to something that was completely outrageous. I mean a giant monster is absurd, but you have to find a way to make it real. And part of
it was the stuff that Neville was doing, and then the secret that it was a baby. When we were talking about that I said, "Well, can’t we
communicate something in the eyes?" So he started showing us like the look that horses have when they have that spooked look, and all
of that was to convey that kind of feeling. So those are sort of the sources of it. We also really loved the idea that the creature in
contrast to other creatures you might have seen was sort of a pale, white and again because it’s a baby, it’s just been born and it has
this ugly translucence to its skin.

[checkyourprez]

^That was more informative than the entire movie. Wish you would have put that up before I spent my 8 dollars watching that "movie".

[Waus]

^That was more informative than the entire movie. Wish you would have put that up before I spent my 8 dollars watching that "movie".

I don't even get that. You want to know the whole story, you have to know where the monster came from, why it looks how it does...

The whole movie is done from a limited viewpoint, the handheld camera of someone going through it - why would it make sense for you to know all that?

Because it's satisfying to know more than the characters in the movie know? Because it gives you some kind of closure on the event?

All the complaints I've heard about this movie just rail against cliche film-making and I think most of the criticism is bullshit.

[abcdefz]

You don't need to know that stuff at all, but it's kind of neat to know afterward.

[Waus]

I wish they did Cloverfield more like Donny Darko as far as the viral part. It felt too much like Lost to me - where there's lots of details and weird stuff but feels lacking a greater plan.

There ought to be some way you can creatively figure out everything behind the story, but still leave the integrity of the limited viewpoint intact.

[checkyourprez]

I don't even get that. You want to know the whole story, you have to know where the monster came from, why it looks how it does...

The whole movie is done from a limited viewpoint, the handheld camera of someone going through it - why would it make sense for you to know all that?

Because it's satisfying to know more than the characters in the movie know? Because it gives you some kind of closure on the event?

All the complaints I've heard about this movie just rail against cliche film-making and I think most of the criticism is bullshit.



When I first heard it was a handheld type of movie, I didn't know it was from just one point of view. I thought it would be multiple handhelds shot like a normal movie from multiple points of view, just in the vain of handheld. The fact that it is from only from one point of view is not my main problem with it. My main problem is that overall, it just sucked.

And yes, it is more satisfying to know what is going on, because it’s a movie, I want to know what the f is going on. Otherwise is just a quagmire of bullshit. Which this movie was.

Once again to answer your question, yes I would like closure. Like my previous answer, why would you NOT want closure? I don’t want to be part of some bullshit scheme by the movie company to re-release a movie a bunch of times in different perspectives to try and bilk people out of money. It’s a movie; there should be a beginning and an end.


The whole movie just seems unfinished and half assed.

[abcdefz]

The sequel is the creature's video diary, so that should help. (y)



Dear diary,

I hate Manhattan. HATE IT. Makes me so mad.

Today I had krill for breakfast. Not bad.

LEAVE BRITNEY ALONE!

Love,

Cloverfield

[checkyourprez]

HAHAHAHAHA

:cool:

[Waus]

Hah!

Sorry CYP, I'm not trying to be argumentative. I'm just saying that movies where the characters stumble into some high-ranking government scientist and conveniently have all the details of their situation explained to them seems contrived to me.

I think the whole "not knowing what's going on" confusion lends a sense of immediacy to this kind of movie that appeals to me because other movies lack it. If I had nothing to contrast it with I'd demand more details...so I guess I really like this movie more because there's a base of movies that do it differently that I can compare it to.

[abcdefz]

You couldn't explain everything and still make that movie with integrity. The camera only gets to know what the characters know
(actually, less, since humans have a wider field of vision and can smell, etc.).

I guess you could add a fake documentary or something at the end, but it's supposed to be a found object. It's just the tape, now
classified and played.

Like: I wrote a novel that was entirely e-mail. It was just opening up this one character's inbox and sent items, then stitching them
together. And it told a story. But, because of the form, there were certain things I just couldn't do and still make it read
authentically. This is a similar situation.

[checkyourprez]

fair enough. i see what you mean about how its different, and what it lacks is actually a plus. you dont see it everyday, or ever. and also the first person view can almost make you feel like you are there. that part is cool to me. maybe it can just be chalked up to differening in opinions on movies, or maybe just this one in general.

to me i guess it would have been a more satisfieing watch had (instead of having them run into a government scientist and him rolling that beautiful bean footage) they it been more of a conventional movie. they showed more of the monster, making him more of a character (not in a corney sense, like hes talking or taking a shit(although i would assume he must shit sometime)) show more of him coming up from the water

o my god, messi just killed 3 dudes in the copa del ray against villareal. alright this is enough, this whole thing is a bit of a rambling rant, im pretty stoned, ive got some fifa 08 to play. maybe something to much on. ill adress this later. really excited for lost tonight by the way.

[beastieangel01]

Otherwise is just a quagmire of bullshit.

or perhaps just a style of film that you don't personally enjoy
...

[checkyourprez]

or perhaps just a style of film that you don't personally enjoy
...


o you know that old saying...one mans quagmire of bullshit...

[abcdefz]

...can be two men's half-quagmires of bullshits.

[BangkokB]

XYZ

[checkyourprez]

i would have liked the movie had it went more akin to war of the worlds(just happend to be on tonight), im not saying war of the worlds should be winning awards or anything for being a good movie. i just feel i got way more closure with that movie than with CF, and man i need closure.

[venusvenus123]

The premise really peaked my interest. However when I left the movie, I felt like I was hardcore ripped off of my hard earned 8 bucks.


First of all the movie was short. Not to mention the first 20/25 minutes are of that party, which really didnt do shit for me. They are introducing you to forgetable characters and basically wasting my time.

Now that there is only 2/3s of the movie left the group of 4/5 friends go on a stupid clearly pointless treck to find that one girl. This is so stupid and corney to me. Is this honestly a realistic plot? I know it draws 9/11 comparisons (I dont necessarily agree with them but I'll mention it to prove a point), did anyone in real life (other than fire fighters or police) go back into the twin towers and try and save someone? To my knowledge, no. That is what is so fucking stupid about that guy, its just totally unrealistic. Everyone here knows it, if that was real life, they would have gotten the fuck out of that city as fast as possible.



I really could go on about other things i didnt like but I will end with this one. Its billed as a "monster" movie. The soul reason I went to this was for the monster. I am a curious fellow, I wanted to know where it came from, what happens to it, what those little spider things were, ect. Now they didnt have to go into great detail about it or answer everything pertaining to the monster, but something, ANYTHING, would have been nice. Its bascially a monster movie, where the monster plays a bit part.

It ended up being a love story with a monster mixed into it to facilitate the love story. Complete and utter garbage.

haha, i agree with you on a couple of points. you're the only person (i think) to point out how ridiculous it is for 4 people who are offered a safe exit from the city to traipse uptown to rescue someone who may or may not still be alive. that makes no sense. oh except, wait a minute, she was the prettiest girl of the group, so on the other hand perhaps it makes perfect, HOLLYWOOD sense.

i can see the comparison to blair witch. me and my husband decided it was blair witch meets godzilla. i preferred blair witch though--one of the reasons was that it was more realistic as the actors looked like real students going on a trek.

all in all, i admire it for doing something a bit different from the norm, apart from the usual, unadventurous casting of unrealistically beautiful twentysomethings in their perfect apartments.

i thought the party was a clever device of getting us involved in these people's lives although it gave me a bit of a headache with all the jumpy camerawork and not being able to follow a conversation through.

i thought of 9/11 only when they came out of their apartment and all the dust was coming through the street.

ps. i was glad that between us, we only paid £6.50 to see it.

[camo]

I'm not into long posts so to summarise:

First 20 odd minutes of party nonsense was pointless especially when you realise that you've just spent precious character building time getting to know the usual goodlooking, shallow monster fodder.

The guy 'behing the camera' was annoying. He seemed like he had a mental age of 6.

The pace was great though and it was well edited and the special effects are great up until you see the monster in daylight.

It was also good to see a monster flick void of a scene involving the president declaring a state of emergency (for a change) so I'll give it an extra point for that.

6/10

[Yorkshire~Rose]

I finally got round to seeing this yesterday and i thought it was great.


First 20 odd minutes of party nonsense was pointless especially when you realise that you've just spent precious character building time getting to know the usual goodlooking, shallow monster fodder.


Contrary to what most people think, i thought the party at the beginning was neccessary. I like to get to know a character in a film...if it just went straight to action i wouldn't have given two hoots who got killed and who didn't.

I'm not one to jump during films either but this one had me clinging to my arm rests on a few occasions.

9/10

[abcdefz]

The party is the whole set up for -- among other things -- why they'd do something as stupid as going back for that girl.

I don't understand the derision for the characters. There's this complaining about how they're shallow etc. etc., but pretty much most
of what you know about them is from the party footage. I have a feeling that, unless you're the pull-someone-into-the-corner-and-
talk-philosophy type, most people that age would come off as superficial based on party conversation. That's what most party
conversation is.

[checkyourprez]

someone posted a still frame of it in here i believe. unless i saw it on another site. either way its out there.


and i hope they pick option 1. i want monster movie.

[abcdefz]

SPOILER AHEAD:





























...am I right, and the monster jumped all the way up to swat the helicopter?

I swear that's what I saw, and that was a jolt. The thing had been so landbound that it hadn't occurred to me that it might have some reach.

[HEIRESS]

mickill said one of the characters looked like me. the girl that straight up explodes at one point apparently. thanks :confused:

[alien autopsy]

i liked it in that i was entertained...i saw it on the mothership, and, being an alien and all, i admit i might have been a little biased. but honestly, being thousands of miles from earth, i had no idea what this movie was about until i actually saw the little critters! i recognized them right away! its really a shame what they did to NYC. little creeps.

well, im a peaceful alien, so i hope that this movie doesnt make you hate on me. i dont steal cattle, and i dont probe people. im just here to watch with a patient eye. cheers on cloverfield, although when the movie was over i felt like i drank 34 cups of coffee and my heart was about to explode. a little too exciting perhaps.

live long and prosper

[abcdefz]

J J stated that at the end of the film when they show the closing scene with Beth and Rob .... you can see a pod fall into the ocean behind them ... I didnt see it ....




...actually, he said it's a satellite that fell, and that's what disturbed Cloverfield's thousands-year slumber underwater and set him off.

[alien autopsy]

someone told me it was going to be voltron. i admit i was sad when i realized it wasnt voltron. but then i was happy again to see that voltron is now available in its entirety on dvd format. then i realized i had no money.

[camo]

The party is the whole set up for -- among other things -- why they'd do something as stupid as going back for that girl.

I don't understand the derision for the characters. There's this complaining about how they're shallow etc. etc., but pretty much most
of what you know about them is from the party footage. I have a feeling that, unless you're the pull-someone-into-the-corner-and-
talk-philosophy type, most people that age would come off as superficial based on party conversation. That's what most party
conversation is.

Well thats true. It was a party, with drink involved and it did set up some inter-involvment with the characters but did it have to be so long? It may have only been a short period in actual minutes, but in movietime it felt like ages. Maybe it was because I was looking forward to seeing the actual monster. BUT the film was marketed on monster speculation and how this monster was a bit of a USP - so I assume most people wanted to get to the monster parts!!!!!!

[checkyourprez]

Well thats true. It was a party, with drink involved and it did set up some inter-involvment with the characters but did it have to be so long? It may have only been a short period in actual minutes, but in movietime it felt like ages. Maybe it was because I was looking forward to seeing the actual monster. BUT the film was marketed on monster speculation and how this monster was a bit of a USP - so I assume most people wanted to get to the monster parts!!!!!!


you nailed it my wo/man

[abcdefz]

I saw almost zero of the marketing. The poster, I think. In fact, I pretty much stayed away from any of the fanboy IwannasuckJJ'sdick
anticipatory articles I came across. Then I remembered I actually liked MI:3, so I read about the premise, sounded cool, so I went.

Maybe that helped.

[checkyourprez]

fact is no one cares about those loser characters in that movie if its not for the monster, giving you a reason to. that party in the begining was sooo long and lame, im glad the monster snuffed them out. pseudo ass monter movie.

I WANT MORE MONSTER!!!!!!!!!

[camo]

you nailed it my wo/man

FYI!!! man

[checkyourprez]

FYI!!! man


well than you nailed it, man!!




(can never be to sure on these boards knowimsayin knowimsayin)

[TAL]

It finally opened here. Great stuff!!


one error though ... the statue of liberty head would have been much bigger than it was.

Nope, the real statue isn't actually very big:
Head from chin to cranium: 17 ft 3 in
Head thickness from ear to ear: 10 ft 0 in
So it would fit easily on a street.

[abcdefz]

It finally opened here. Great stuff!!






The voice of reason.





Nope, the real statue isn't actually very big:
Head from chin to cranium: 17 ft 3 in
Head thickness from ear to ear: 10 ft 0 in
So it would fit easily on a street.



The voice of reason.

[mickill]

mickill said one of the characters looked like me. the girl that straight up explodes at one point apparently. thanks :confused:

Again, let me clarify: Before she exploded.

Apart from some shitty acting here and there and a few too many moments of utter retardedness during the last 10 minutes or so, I found most of it very entertaining.