Scots Taffer on 5/2/2008 at 23:59
Oh yeah, I mean when you analyse the camera's role in things it's retarded but that's the point, I meant from an "ingenuity in forced filming" perspective that they could have done a few more cool things with the camera as a gimmick. i.e. imagine if when they entered beth's apartment, Hud trips and falls, camera bounces out of his hand and slides all the way to the blownout windows - first you the viewer is like FUCK WHOOOOOOOOOOOA GOING OUT THE WINDOW but then it snags, and you listen to people shouting at hud to leave the fucking camera and gives him the opportunity to make one or two more "documenting" style jokes and opens the door for some tension etc.
And I swear if that fat fuck dies...
Gingerbread Man on 6/2/2008 at 02:00
Quote Posted by Stitch
... despite a few money shots you leave the film without a clear idea of what the monster looked like.
Yeah, there was a lot of OH GOD WOULD YOU JUST SHIT OR GET OFF THE POT? I like monster movies where you see lots of glorious monster, I like movies where it's virtually left to your imagination and whatever fragments of memory you have of quick flashes of parts but never a whole. But Cloverfield went from burqa to panties in very short order and then STAYED THERE WAGGLING ITS NASTY COOTER IN MY FACE. :mad:
I think I
should have left not really knowing what it looked like. I didn't know what it was or what it wanted or where it came from or any other things.
I think the movie would have been perfect if that retarded face shot never happened. And maybe that retarded "lol he crahs his arm on the building" shot.
Should have been less of the monster or way, waaaaay more. And the "way, waaaaay more" way would have been a totally different and not really as good a movie.
*GBM's English brought to you by The Republic of KazakhstanShug on 6/2/2008 at 02:08
SPOILT
It was pretty decent, although I felt like the best moments of the film were right at the start and it was hard to match those moments of panic early on.
Obviously with any movie of this type you need to let them stretch things a bit - I assumed Beth was as good as dead with the concrete staking straight through her... wait, no, she's okay. And now she's running! Fair enough, I've seen worse. But when old mate has feet the size of two or more army trucks, rips a helicopter out of the sky with its gadget arms then shows up at the chopper crash site and looks about 20 feet tall max... what just happened
Also, something of an odd decision to show the monster clearly for the first time on a plasma screen in an electronics store. Not to mention you can clearly see something enormous stomping about while the newsreader seems to think it's just another night at the office, and happens to either not realize there's a fucking dinosaur in the middle of New York or else doesn't seem to think it's out of the ordinary
Scots Taffer on 6/2/2008 at 02:12
I assumed it was the anatomically varying tentacale-tail (tentacail) that took out the chopper.
edit; holy shit it had been bugging me but now I get it, the cloverfield monster is basically a starved rancor with a big fucking tail
<img src="http://i32.tinypic.com/2ylqu1d.jpg" width=600 height=450>
Sypha Nadon on 6/2/2008 at 04:22
Well, the monster was getting bombed with all kinds of missles and shit the entire film, so it's probably not that big of a surprise if how it appears during the money shot scene looks slightly different than how it appeared earlier. Or maybe it's evolving as the movie progresses. Or maybe it can shapeshift. Does it really matter? I mean, we're talking about a film where one of the main characters is named Hud for pete's sake. I never looked for logic in those old Godzilla films (probably for the best... I seem to recall a plotline about alien cockroaches launching an invasion of Earth from an amusement park or something like that).
Scots Taffer on 6/2/2008 at 04:37
I thought Hud was a bit of a self-aware reference.... or maybe I'm giving them too much credit. Definitely the whole "TEARS THE MYSPACE BRIGADE A NEW ONE" crew are giving the writers far too much credit.
Thelink on 6/2/2008 at 05:13
Quote Posted by Gingerbread Man
Yeah, there was a lot of OH GOD WOULD YOU JUST SHIT OR GET OFF THE POT? I like monster movies where you see lots of glorious monster, I like movies where it's virtually left to your imagination and whatever fragments of memory you have of quick flashes of parts but never a whole. But Cloverfield went from burqa to panties in very short order and then STAYED THERE WAGGLING ITS NASTY COOTER IN MY FACE. :mad:
This needs to be an official review on AICN or Rotten Tomatoes. :laff:
thefonz on 6/2/2008 at 18:26
I need to fucking see this movie NOW.
This is starting to fee like i'm the kid left behind while all his mates are off having sex with the girls at the party.
Sigh.
This weekend it is then!
Jusal on 7/2/2008 at 06:51
I got a few free tickets to the movies and thought I could go see this since so many people seem to like it. Then I went to IMDB only to find out that it's not coming here until 29th February.
29th February, for fuck's sake. By then they've probably given it some idiotic name as well.
N'Al on 7/2/2008 at 14:09
Saw this one yesterday. Really enjoyed it, even though most of the criticisms in this thread (Hud's a nonce (then again, hobos on fire, lol), damsel in distress plot, should have ended after the crash, shitty monster face, etc.) are pretty much spot-on. Still, it's a monster movie, so these things are all rather secondary to the everyone-running-around-like-headless-chickens bit. Also, to reiterate: Watch this at the cinema!
Finally, still grinning about the woman two rows in front of me who lolled when the 'Rambo' trailer came on.
