Cloverfield

[Joker]

I'll try to make a habit of knowing when a movie is devoid of plot, charecters or any sense of basic structure from now on, forgive my stupidity. I guess it is a case of simply not getting it. It was still better than Godzilla, so it cant be that bad i guess.

Plot: They have to rescue Robs girlfriend.

Characters: Rob- stoic lead, Marleana: b**chy hot girl w/heart of gold, Hud: comic relief, Beth: MacGuffin

Structure: the movie starts, a problem arises (it being the classic concept of man vs nature, with nature being played by a giant monster from the ocean depths in this case), and at the end, there's resolution (in the vein of 70's movies like Planet of the Apes, but resolution none the less).

So to me it seems like you went in expecting something like Independence Day, got a shakey cam, handheld film, got immediatly offended by it not being conventional, and decided to hate the entire thing based on it "not being a REAL movie"

 

[Star]

Yeah, I was going to ask... Kez, what exactly did you expect to see and/or what would you have preferred to see?

I assume you hated the shakey camera, but that was one of the main things that made this movie unique.

 

[thejon93]

I thought it was rubbish.

A) I didn't like any of the charecters
B) The first ten minute of introduction was a waste of time
C) This was a short movie, yet it still felt overly long
D) Doesn't have any re-watchibility, throwaway movie
E) The movie was better before you seen the monster, big lead up, big let down

Overall, it didn't feel like a movie, more scenes, cobbled together, very over-hyped.

I hope this guy does a better job on the (unneeded) startrek movie than he did with mission impossible and this.

I agree with some of your points, just not as strongly as you seem to feel about them. Some of the things you say I strongly disagree with like the 'Mission Impossible III' part; I thought that film was a definite improvement over the ass load of crap predesessor known as 'Mission Impossible II' which was a steem-pile of goat-s&%$. And also, what I don't seem to understand about "E)" of your thoughts on the film, how did you think it was better before the monster arrived when you didn't eeven come around to liking any of the characters?... 'Cause that's basically all the beginning right there; a bunch of characters that you don't like walking around and talking, that's about it.

 

[Why Are You Crouching Spock?]

Plot: They have to rescue Robs girlfriend.

Characters: Rob- stoic lead, Marleana: b**chy hot girl w/heart of gold, Hud: comic relief, Beth: MacGuffin

Structure: the movie starts, a problem arises (it being the classic concept of man vs nature, with nature being played by a giant monster from the ocean depths in this case), and at the end, there's resolution (in the vein of 70's movies like Planet of the Apes, but resolution none the less).

So to me it seems like you went in expecting something like Independence Day, got a shakey cam, handheld film, got immediatly offended by it not being conventional, and decided to hate the entire thing based on it "not being a REAL movie"

It is conventional though, all the points you mentioned are conventional in a movie. Everything in it has been done in one form or another, including the shaky cam, something in line of a Michael Bay or Uwe Boll (yes Uwe Boll) movie have more relevance and interest. In fact, If Michael Bay done this, I honestly think it would have been a much better movie.

Man vs nature, I dono, maybe you followed it on the internet more than me, but from what I was watching there didn't seem to be any explanation to the monster, it just seemed to start with an attack. It seems more like a reconstruction of 911 except they have replaced the planes with a monster.

Thinking over it again, you know what it reminds me off?

http://www.universalorlando.com/usf_attr_t2.html

 

[Why Are You Crouching Spock?]

I agree with some of your points, just not as strongly as you seem to feel about them. Some of the things you say I strongly disagree with like the 'Mission Impossible III' part; I thought that film was a definite improvement over the ass load of crap predesessor known as 'Mission Impossible II' which was a steem-pile of goat-s&%$. And also, what I don't seem to understand about "E)" of your thoughts on the film, how did you think it was better before the monster arrived when you didn't eeven come around to liking any of the characters?... 'Cause that's basically all the beginning right there; a bunch of characters that you don't like walking around and talking, that's about it.

Take a movie such as predator (1987 one), it starts in a hazy jungle environment hunting down picking off the soldiers one by one, for a large majority of time, you do not see it, only an outline when it is in stealth, you hear it, see through it eyes, but it isn't till towards the end on in the movie, much like cloverfeild that it reveals itself, when it does, that to me, wasn't a let down, it was memorable, it wasn't a dumb monster,it was a hunter, technologically advanced but on a primal hunt, the way it looks, acts and the weapons it uses, it had conviction to it, a certain credibility, when we finally see the monster in cloverfeild, it just looks like a fairly generic monster.

 

[thejon93]

Take a movie such as predator (1987 one), it starts in a hazy jungle environment hunting down picking off the soldiers one by one, for a large majority of time, you do not see it, only an outline when it is in stealth, you hear it, see through it eyes, but it isn't till towards the end on in the movie, much like cloverfeild that it reveals itself, when it does, that to me, wasn't a let down, it was memorable, it wasn't a dumb monster,it was a hunter, technologically advanced but on a primal hunt, the way it looks, acts and the weapons it uses, it had conviction to it, a certain credibility to it, when we finally see the monster in cloverfeild, it just looks like a fairly generic monster.

I respect that, nothing really mesmerising in the monster on the outside but I had respect for the fact that it wasn't a monster you can nessesarily route for, in this case you find yourself routing for the characters to find their way to safety whenever they encounter the monster. Most monster movies, and even horror movies where they have serial killers running around and what-not fail because you don't care about the people who are in this danger because they're either ass-champs or simply have no character whatsoever and what's the reason for them to even live?

 

[Joker]

It is conventional though, all the points you mentioned are conventional in a movie. Everything in it has been done in one form or another, including the shaky cam, something in line of a Michael Bay or Uwe Boll (yes Uwe Boll) movie have more relevance and interest. In fact, If Michael Bay done this, I honestly think it would have been a much better movie.

Man vs nature, I dono, maybe you followed it on the internet more than me, but from what I was watching there didn't seem to be any explanation to the monster, it just seemed to start with an attack. It seems more like a reconstruction of 911 except they have replaced the planes with a monster.

Thinking over it again, you know what it reminds me off?

http://www.universalorlando.com/usf_attr_t2.html

Wow...This was no where near Uwe Boll or Michael Bay levels of badness, and if you think so, you have terrible taste. The characters were likeable, and by the end I was really hoping they would make it out. And they never reveal where the monster came from totally, but they pretty much spell out through dialouge and news reports that it came out of the ocean.

 

[Chaos Bringer]

It sounds more like you just don't like the opinion.

there's lots o' that round here pardner

 

[Joker]

Look, if you dont like something, why talk about it? I think Wanted is going to be a cinematic abortion, so you know what? I dont go into the damn forum.

 

[Laderlappen]

I can see that one can be annoyed by the hand camera thing. But it's new, it's original, it's different, and people liked it. It's supposed to feel like a documentary. They want to make it see´m as real as possible. The characters are supposed to be more real than interesting(though that Marlena girl was great). Hence 'don't feel like a movie'. Of course everybody can't like it, but many people did.

 

[Sava]

havent heard anyone mention this, but did anyone see somthing crash into the ocean at 1hr 13min 21secs?

 

[Gotham]

havent heard anyone mention this, but did anyone see somthing crash into the ocean at 1hr 13min 21secs?

Many of us did. No one has any clue what it actually meant, but Matt Reeves did mention it, so it's important somehow.

 

[Sava]

Many of us did. No one has any clue what it actually meant, but Matt Reeves did mention it, so it's important somehow.

the monster landing?

 

[Gotham]

the monster landing?

Could be. A couple of theories out there, and I know that's one of them.

 

[Sava]

Could be. A couple of theories out there, and I know that's one of them.

it kinda makes sense, if it was here all the time, someone somewhere would have seen it, it's not that hard to miss. But it being from outer space craps all over the Lost connection though.

 

[lollycop]

No, it was Galacta taking a crap..DUHHHH.

 

[gtkilla]

havent heard anyone mention this, but did anyone see somthing crash into the ocean at 1hr 13min 21secs?

Isn't that supposed to be the Slusho satellite that awakens the creature?

 

[thejon93]

Isn't that supposed to be the Slusho satellite that awakens the creature?

Yeah, so it's been confirmed by Matt Reeves.

 

[Untilteld]

Yeah, so it's been confirmed by Matt Reeves.

source?

 

[thejon93]

source?

I believe I read it somewhere, so either here:
http://movies.ign.com/articles/846/846669p1.html
or...
http://www.comingsoon.net/news/movienews.php?id=41100

 

[hammerhedd11]

when we finally see the monster in cloverfeild, it just looks like a fairly generic monster.

Generic? Name one movie that has a monster like that.

 

[Gotham]

I believe I read it somewhere, so either here:
http://movies.ign.com/articles/846/846669p1.html
or...
http://www.comingsoon.net/news/movienews.php?id=41100

He doesn't confirm that what dropped into the water awakened the monster. I believed he confirmed that something dropped, and it's in there for a reason. Nothing else, I don't think.

 

[Untilteld]

He doesn't confirm that what dropped into the water awakened the monster. I believed he confirmed that something dropped, and it's in there for a reason. Nothing else, I don't think.

Yeah, he confirmed something dropped, not that it awoke the monster though, but I like to believe that.

 

[Why Are You Crouching Spock?]

Generic? Name one movie that has a monster like that.

Spoiler

Spoiler

Spoiler

Spoiler

Spoiler

Spoiler

Spoiler

Spoiler

Spoiler

Spoiler

Spoiler

Spoiler

Spoiler

Spoiler

Spoiler

Spoiler

RAWR!!!!!!!!

 

[Midnhtsun]

I get your point but your reaching here. Just because a monster has small black eyes, sharp teeth and looks like a reptile, its generic? Clovie has some thought put into the design of the monster. One of the things that surprised me about the design was how skinny his limbs actually were. The fact that smaller monsters fell from it and had their own characteristics sets him apart from about 95% of any other giant movie monsters.