C L O V E R F I E L D - Page 4

IsiliRunite · #31 01-21-2008, 01:11 PM

It's not like Godzilla as much as it is the Jurassic Park theme park ride.

cured · #32 01-26-2008, 10:08 PM

I really enjoyed the movie. With all the warnings of the shaky cam, we sat in the very back of the theater and it wasn't too bad. Loved it. Gave a very drawn-in feel to the movie and you knew just enough about the characters to understand the motivations for doing what they did. The monster was pretty nice, too.

GforGroove · #33 02-01-2008, 10:35 AM

worst movie i've seen in a while.
the background is sort of itneresting but is totally blown away not by the monster.. but by the stupidity of the characters.

" MOM. is jason is dead" hahaah.... I spend the whole movie laughing crazy... is so stupid you cant get excited...

i still can't believe how bad it is....

potatobroth · #34 02-02-2008, 01:49 PM

i liked it a lot. did you expect a literary masterpiece adapted for film? fuck no, you expect to see a big monster eat a city as seen through the POV of a video camera. its not a top-10 movie for me, but it was certainly fun and worth the admission price.

Stephen · #35 02-03-2008, 11:35 AM

Just seen this and I thought it was great.

Scott Warner · #36 02-03-2008, 11:51 AM

Quote:

did you expect a literary masterpiece adapted for film?

I see this opinion a lot in defense of this film: "What did you expect?"

Have you ever seen 'Alien'? That's what I expect. There's the bar. To paraphrase Ridley Scott, a low budget but well crafted b-movie.

Or more specifically, I care when every single character in 'Alien' dies because all of them are likable in their own ways. In 'Cloverfield' I could care less because none of the characters are likable at all. It is story development 101: I HAVE TO CARE ABOUT THE CHARACTERS IN ORDER TO CARE ABOUT THEIR PROBLEMS.

GforGroove · #37 02-08-2008, 08:21 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by potatobroth

did you expect a literary masterpiece adapted for film? fuck no, you expect to see a big monster eat a city as seen through the POV of a video camera.

No, but at least give me a good POV camera view. You can play video games if you want to see things blow, mosters eating cities and just a robot with no brains running.. and it makes way more sense. This movie does not make sense at all. I think this "videogamish" format is kind of interesting in film though..videogame to screenplay. but im not sure if its that entertaining.. 11.50 for admission for a cheap comedy has never been cool with me.
cloverfield super sucks.

potatobroth · #38 02-08-2008, 09:07 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Scott Warner

I see this opinion a lot in defense of this film: "What did you expect?"

Have you ever seen 'Alien'? That's what I expect. There's the bar. To paraphrase Ridley Scott, a low budget but well crafted b-movie.

Or more specifically, I care when every single character in 'Alien' dies because all of them are likable in their own ways. In 'Cloverfield' I could care less because none of the characters are likable at all. It is story development 101: I HAVE TO CARE ABOUT THE CHARACTERS IN ORDER TO CARE ABOUT THEIR PROBLEMS.

Yeah, it was a cheesey defense, but I wasn't really defending the movie. I know a lot of people that hated it and their reasons are spot on. Its not a great movie, but it was still really enjoyable for me. Its the same reason I love horribly stupid horror movies or disaster movies, sometimes its just fun to watch things that could never happen.

I didn't feel bad about the characters because this is a 1.25 hour blurry destruction movie. Its not like Magnolia where I cry for each character's dilemas. It's not like Alien where I hold my breath worrying about the feelings of the crew as their friend dies from an alien bursting out their stomach. And although the only time I felt bad in CLOVERFIELD was when Marlena died, I still enjoyed the movie a lot.

Enjoyable doesn't always have to equal good. There are plenty of movies that I enjoy watching but when broken down, are just not good movies.

This movie wouldn't have worked for me if it was shot traditionally. I've thought about this and came to that conclusion. What makes it fun for me is the dizzying glimpses and losing-battle aspect.

@Gof
What doesn't make sense? Rather, I thought a large part of this movie was that you didn't know where it came from, why its there, and what it's doing outside of when the 5 kids interact with it. Making sense doesn't factor in when you aren't being told details. That was a nice touch I thought. Rather than having some mega-scientist giving a 10 minute diatribe on where it came from and how to defeat it, it added to a faux realism for the video camera. Again, its not a GOOD movie, but its a FUN movie and one I would recommend for that reason alone.

jOHN rODRIGUEZ · #39 02-08-2008, 09:10 AM

Spirits In the Material World

Ally · #40 02-09-2008, 03:32 AM

I thought it was wicked - the most thoroughly entertained I've been in the cinema in a long time. I did well to avoid all exposure to it in the week from when I first saw the trailer cme out at me from left field to going to see the midnight showing. As such everything was a surprise to me, I nearly lost my shit when you saw the things falling off it... Five stars.