CLOVERFIELD (1-18-08)

[zaika]

i saw it. it was okay...but i wasn't expecting much anyway. i think the gimmick is not so much the POV but the fact that it's "raw" footage and was marketed as such. but it's not an original idea. blair witch anyone? with that movie, though...i saw it when it was just being shown in a few cities in small theaters...and going into it, i thought it was a real documentary. so it freaked me the heck out until about 3/4 of the way in when i realized that it was just a movie.
seeing as "cloverfield" was supposed to be a showing of raw footage taken during a real event...i wasn't surprised that we didn't get to know the characters at all. i wasn't surprised that there was no story. wait, let me put it this way...i WAS surprised that they attempted to tell a story at all. lol because the story they tried to pull off was stupid. it would have been better to throw away the thin as paper "love" story and instead make it a story of survival. also, it would have been better to cast normal looking people as the main characters. seriously, i don't know about anyone else, but...i don't have friends who look like that. maybe one who is close-ish.
and they should have waited to show the monster in all its glory until way later in the film. it was scarier when we only caught glimpses...and i lost interest in it when they showed the whole body pretty much right away. [huh]
what else...
i cried when the guy had to tell his mom about his brother's death. i have no idea where that came from...but there you go.
and...that battery would NEVER have lasted that long. lol
those are my scattered thoughts.

 

[flat-top]

"Easter Egg" *Spoiler*

Not sure if anyone stayed til after the credits, but there is a backwards soundbite that says "It's still alive!"

 

[Doh!]

I'll listen for that on DVD. I missed it splashing into the water at the end, too.

 

[flat-top]

I missed it splashing into the water at the end, too.

Was that the creature, or a satellite crashing into the water "waking" the beast?

 

[Doh!]

Have you seen the oil rig video? Pretty clever marketing campaign, even though I wasn't that impressed by the movie itself:

http://www.horror-movies.ca/horror_10473.html

 

[RIOT]

I blame the monsters temper on that green toxic New York City water.

 

[Alan Eardley]

Wow! Original marketing idea!

The fact that you don't actually see the monster clearly is being seen by some as something highly original and innovative.

Presumably by those people who weren't old enough to experience the same marketing/plot device in 'Alien'. Whan was that?

Alan

 

[Doh!]

1979.

Great movie.

 

[Feraud]

1979.

Great movie.

Agreed. Even then it was not original.
Didn't Val Lewton specialize in low budge b-movies where the horrific element was not shown?

 

[Edward]

It sounds fun enough.... I might go and see it. Viral marketing always puts me off stuff, though - I tend to see it as manipulative, underhand, or whatever. Maybe I'm just annoyed still at how the man took over myspace etc.....

Blair Witch was quite possibly the least original pile of overrated rubbish I've ever seen in my life, and I've seen a lot of crap in my time...

 

[rumblefish]

[/QUOTE] From Doh!:

Have you seen the oil rig video? Pretty clever marketing campaign, even though I wasn't that impressed by the movie itself:

http://www.horror-movies.ca/horror_10473.html [/QUOTE]

An oil spill at the Mid Atlantic Ridge [is] dangerously close to the coast of Connecticut???
Yeah, oil has a way of moving against the gulf stream and targeting a section of coast inside of Long Island Sound bypassing and avoiding everywhere else.
Well at least the movie depicted some of our media fairley accurately. Uninformed, unresearched,,,,,,

One thing I'm not a big fan of is-suddenly having toxic fish in my body. lol

 

[Edward]

Brave, brave, brave Sir Robin!



Oh sure, it's all a laughapalooza until something sucks your brains out through your ear canal. [huh]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RQsYUxlpI4g

lol

 

[Josephine]

The fact that you don't actually see the monster clearly is being seen by some as something highly original and innovative.

Presumably by those people who weren't old enough to experience the same marketing/plot device in 'Alien'. Whan was that?

Alan

Jaws did it in '75, of course, it was mainly because they couldn't afford a decent shark... lol

 

[rumblefish]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RQsYUxlpI4g

lol

lol lol lol Thanks for that, I haven't seen that in a long while and never with subtitles. I never understood what he was not afraid of happening to his nostrils. lol lol lol

 

[Dalexs]

The fact that you don't actually see the monster clearly is being seen by some as something highly original and innovative.

Presumably by those people who weren't old enough to experience the same marketing/plot device in 'Alien'. Whan was that?

Alan

And at least Alien was able to scare the living sh*t outta you!
Even today that movie holds up to todays horror junk!

 

[Doh!]

Jaws did it in '75, of course, it was mainly because they couldn't afford a decent shark... lol

Could you imagine if Lucas had directed that instead of Spielberg? The original print would be locked away and he'd only give us the "special edition" complete with CGI shark in all its glory.

You know, to "improve" things.

 

[jake_fink]

Could you imagine if Lucas had directed that instead of Spielberg? The original print would be locked away and he'd only give us the "special edition" complete with CGI shark in all its glory.

You know, to "improve" things.

And all the characters would have silly names... Mace Windoo?

 

[Edward]

... and the Special Edition would be edited so that the humans attacked the shark first.

 

[Jerekson]

Give Lucas a break, you guys.

 

[Doh!]

... and the Special Edition would be edited so that the humans attacked the shark first.

Edward, that cracked me up -- it truly was an "LOL" moment!