toblix Posted April 4, 2008 Nah, I'm just waddling your paddle. It was fun, but it's like they came up with this cool concept of the camcorder but didn't dare to stray too far from what you'd expect from any other monster film. Too much drama, not enough action. Not enough playing with the shaky camcorder format, too much always capturing the action perfectly. Thinking about it, I'm actually kind of disappointed with the whole movie. The whole leaning building thing was cool. The "government archive" stuff was just silly. Telling a "classic" story in a new way is (potentially) awesome, but I think this would be a lot cooler if they made it a mini-series or something, where they could take more risks with the format (off the top of my head, sequences without sound, image or both (omg risky thx!!)) Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Erkki Posted April 4, 2008 I don't like monster movies that much anyway (not sure why I watched this, maybe it was mentioned in the recommendations thread?), but I kind of agree, especially with the too much drama, too little action. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
vimes Posted April 4, 2008 I really enjoyed the movie until the scene in which one of the military men let them through the blocus : to this point the amount of silliness was reasonable but after that it was just completely ridiculous : the impaled girl who can run, the non-threatening spawn from the monster, the fact that they still keep on going together . On the whole, the movie felt like it didn't know how to choose between hollywood standards and a more gritty/realistic setting. For instance, I really enjoyed the characterization of the 'party' segment of the movie but I don't understand how they managed to bring these characters to perform heroic deeds similar to the hollywood canons. I mean, I think the movie could had been largely superior if they had remove the 'fat' from the scenario, canned the this 'rescue' plot and make it only about survival. One thing that surprised me though was that the narrator was a complete distanced jackass ... which, however you look at it, is an interesting choice. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
DanJW Posted April 5, 2008 I guess I agree. It was fun, and compietant, but it played out exactly how you expect it would. At no point did anything really surprise me in the way the film was made. The closest it came was the girl exploding from the bite, but that was heavily foreshadowed. If you say to someone "Godzilla style monster movie plus the camcorder mockumentary style from Blair Witch" then they already have the film in their head. I tried to read up on the meta fiction and outside-film backstory, but it's typical "Lost" pretentious vagueness. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
vimes Posted April 5, 2008 The closest it came was the girl exploding from the bite, but that was heavily foreshadowed. That caused a bit of a 'debate' with the people I went to watch the movie with I say she explodes but others thought she had been executed. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest aarathi Posted April 11, 2008 I saw this film twice. Cloverfield is a monster/horror film directed by Matt Reeves. It is an engaging thriller that should thoroughly satisfy genre fans during a time of year when their choices are essentially between bad and worse. The mechanism is the message in Cloverfield, a movie so aluminum-sleek, ultra-portable, and itsy-bitsy sexy, it’s amazing. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
toblix Posted April 11, 2008 I saw this film twice. Cloverfield is a monster/horror film directed by Matt Reeves. It is an engaging thriller that should thoroughly satisfy genre fans during a time of year when their choices are essentially between bad and worse. The mechanism is the message in Cloverfield, a movie so aluminum-sleek, ultra-portable, and itsy-bitsy sexy, it’s amazing. The film is presented as a series of scenes taken by a digital hand-held camera. Fuck you you fucking piece of shit. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Nachimir Posted April 11, 2008 I really hated Cloverfield for some reason. I suspect because I watched while I was travelling and had been alone for a few days, I wasn't really in the mood for something so desolate. I also found it kind of the opposite to Blair Witch: The characters in that were such a stupid bunch of infuriating assholes that right at the end I said "Oh thank fuck, the last one's dead". The characters in Cloverfield were likeable enough, so I didn't really like watching them all get relentlessly brutalised. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Wrestlevania Posted April 11, 2008 I really enjoyed Cloverfield, because it was everything I hoped it would be: big, stupid, shallow and great fun. Sometimes it's nice to just sit back and watch something that demands nothing more of you than your senses—then sets fire to them. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
twmac Posted April 12, 2008 Sorry I can never get over seeing the 'Administratively raped' tag on first time posters that are spamming threads. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Nachimir Posted April 13, 2008 Hah Never noticed that before. We had the same spam turn up over at Black Cat Games this weekend. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
twmac Posted April 17, 2008 Just got half way through this film... The person holding the camera is called Hud right? Was that meant as a play on H.U.D.? Other than that, I thought it was alright so far. Trying to ignore the niggling feeling that the battery on that camera lasts for an impressively long time. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
brkl Posted April 17, 2008 Is the movie ten hours long? Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
twmac Posted April 17, 2008 No, but he is constantly using the light (and night vision... they have that on cameras now?), I didn't realise that cameras were capable of running that long when using that kind of juice. Then again I didn't know they now had night vision so my oppinion may be outdated. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Wrestlevania Posted April 17, 2008 My cheap little JVC MiniDV camcorder has a low light feature, which is very close to night vision, and that's about 5 years old now. And I believe the solid state camcorders last a decent amount of time, as they don't have any moving parts except the lens. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
twmac Posted April 20, 2008 Well that's confirmed then. I don't know what I'm talking about and the discomfort with watching the film has been assuaged. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites