[ARCHIVED THREAD] - Cloverfield (Page 1 of 4)
Posted: 9/7/2010 10:08:29 PM EDT
|
So I watched it tonight. I liked it. I thought this one wasn't supposed to be that good? The only part that was a little tough was the shaky camera, but I think my eyes adjusted. |
|
I went into the movie with the expectations that it would be a pretty good movie. Turns out, it indeed was a pretty good movie. I thought it was the best "large monster runs rampage on a major city" movie in years. Much better than "Godzilla" with Matthew Broderick by a long shot.
I guess after watching "Blair Witch" (which nearly made me motion sick the first time I watched it), I've just gotten used to the no-Steadycam thing. Any word of a sequel? |
|
Quoted: I thought it sucked. My wife watched it earlier too. She came to the same conclusion. Everything they did in the movie was idiotic. That's pretty much what they usually do though. I was mostly disappointed in the military's weak attack. But I still liked it. |
|
Quoted:
Quoted:
I thought it sucked. My wife watched it earlier too. She came to the same conclusion. Everything they did in the movie was idiotic. That's pretty much what they usually do though. I was mostly disappointed in the military's weak attack. But I still liked it. The military wouldn't have been there to attack it at all for a while, in 'real life'. National Guard units don't just sit around on their tanks in Central Park waiting for a big monster to attack. |
|
Quoted:
I thought it sucked. My wife watched it earlier too. She came to the same conclusion. Everything they did in the movie was idiotic. well, 1) it's a movie 2) it's a movie about a huge monster If you are looking for accuracy, you're already two strikes in the hole. Granted, climbing umpteen stories into a building that's already leaning on another to save your girlfriend was asking for trouble but then again, see points one and two. |
| I enjoyed it. I've come to the conclusion that if a movie isn't completely realistic in every single aspect, most of GD will hate it. I go to movies to be entertained, not for a science/history/physics lesson. YMMV. The Blair Witch style cinematography left a bit to be desired, but the movie was meant to be actual footage shot by the people going through the experience. I don't know what's hard about that to understand for some. |
|
Quoted:
Quoted:
I thought it sucked. My wife watched it earlier too. She came to the same conclusion. Everything they did in the movie was idiotic. well, 1) it's a movie 2) it's a movie about a huge monster If you are looking for accuracy, you're already two strikes in the hole. Granted, climbing umpteen stories into a building that's already leaning on another to save your girlfriend was asking for trouble but then again, see points one and two. I can only reasonably suspend my disbelief so far. I'm more talking about it seemed like they spent the entire movie running towards the monster rather than away. Hell, even in the helicopter. Rather than heading opposite the direction the monster was going, they just cruised along right with it. |
|
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
I thought it sucked. My wife watched it earlier too. She came to the same conclusion. Everything they did in the movie was idiotic. That's pretty much what they usually do though. I was mostly disappointed in the military's weak attack. But I still liked it. The military wouldn't have been there to attack it at all for a while, in 'real life'. National Guard units don't just sit around on their tanks in Central Park waiting for a big monster to attack. Sadly... 
 I liked the movie myself...
|
|
Quoted:
Quoted:
I thought it sucked. My wife watched it earlier too. She came to the same conclusion. Everything they did in the movie was idiotic. well, 1) it's a movie 2) it's a movie about a huge monster If you are looking for accuracy, you're already two strikes in the hole. Granted, climbing umpteen stories into a building that's already leaning on another to save your girlfriend was asking for trouble but then again, see points one and two. We have a winner.... |
|
Quoted:
Quoted:
I liked the fact it showed what happended to an unarmed sheeple society. The only people you see with weapons in that movie is the military. In the context of the movie, even if they'd all had AR-15s, the result would have been much the same. Oh, I don't know. Click To View Spoiler |
|
Quoted:
I enjoyed it. I've come to the conclusion that if a movie isn't completely realistic in every single aspect, most of GD will hate it. I go to movies to be entertained, not for a science/history/physics lesson. YMMV. The Blair Witch style cinematography left a bit to be desired, but the movie was meant to be actual footage shot by the people going through the experience. I don't know what's hard about that to understand for some. very accurate |
|
Quoted:
I was cheering for the monster......  Yep, anything that would eat those lame 20 somethings gets my support too. The military should have got out of the way and maybe the lame-assed movie would have been over in a half-hour. It made my ass tired just to watch it. I only paid a buck for the DVD at a yard sale and after watching it I considered going and asking for my dollar back. Lame. Lame. Lame. |
|
Good film...... did what it was supposed to do which was entertain me for two hours for cost of £5, some popcorn and soda.
And yes I would like to see a sequel. To those pulling the movie apart for its "accuracy": Its a film about a big monster the size of a skyscraper that appears out of nowhere, is covered in giant toothy fleas and stomps around New York breaking stuff. The whole premise of the film is that it is unstoppable, that the survivors are facing terrible odds, and that confusion reigns. It would be dull as hell if everyone went "Oh look a monster, and here comes the airforce with a bomb to kill it" in the first 5 minutes. I'd be wanting my money back. IT'S NOT REAL 
|
|
Its was entertaining. My wife didn't like it but she's mostly a romantic comedy kinda' gal. The story was okay, I don't know about climbing up the skyscraper that was mostly falling down. But people tend to be idiots in real life so why not. The bit with the head of Liberty landing in the street at the start was really well done. I don't usually watch monster movies for the realism, so in that respect it did not disappoint. |
|
I really liked it and thought it was a pretty original idea considering Hollywood is drowning in remakes. So its American Godzilla. I got the same feeling watching it as I did when I rode the Kongfrontation ride down in Universal Studios when I was a kid. My favorite part of the film was this http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VscMtP-jK6U I hope the sequel takes place with one of the surviving armed forces personnel with his helmet cam recording all of the footage. If you look closely there is another guy filming on the bridge so they'll probably go with another group of 20 somethings instead.  The Bluray has this mode that you can watch the film and it gives off these little facts and tracks the characters, monster and military movement. This is like that but its not as cool |
|
Quoted:
I liked the fact it showed what happended to an unarmed sheeple society. The only people you see with weapons in that movie is the military. i dont think AR-15s and M1 garands are going to do much good against something 300 feet tall and sheds parasites the size of dogs that are voracious predators |
|
I thoroughly enjoyed the movie at the theater and bought it on DVD when it released.
It is first and foremost a story about love, sacrifice and never giving up. There happens to be a pretty cool monster in it also. I thought it was a pretty good representation of what would happen if a 350 foot ocean dwelling "monster" were unleashed on Manhattan island. |
|
Quoted:
Quoted:
I liked the fact it showed what happended to an unarmed sheeple society. The only people you see with weapons in that movie is the military. i dont think AR-15s and M1 garands are going to do much good against something 300 feet tall and sheds parasites the size of dogs that are voracious predators Looks like a big stick killed the "fleas". Just stay out of the Big Boy's way. Did I say it was lame. 
|
|
Quoted: Quoted: I really enjoyed it. One of the better movies that year. I loved the neat little bit near the end, where you realize the original footage on the guy's camcorder accidentally captured the creature arriving. Explain please. At the end, when the tape plays of the earlier events, there is a shot out towards the water. If you watch carefully you can see the creature falling from the sky and landing in th water. Easier to see on the Blu-ray version.  |
|
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
I really enjoyed it. One of the better movies that year. I loved the neat little bit near the end, where you realize the original footage on the guy's camcorder accidentally captured the creature arriving. Explain please. At the end, when the tape plays of the earlier events, there is a shot out towards the water. If you watch carefully you can see the creature falling from the sky and landing in th water. Yup - but it's a very quick sequence, and it looks nothing like the creature, implying that perhaps it's some kind of capsule or something. I'm not sure if we're told how long ago the footage with his GF was from - was it a week or two earlier? - so I think it also implies that the creature was probably in the water off NY for a while, growing. |