• Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.

Cloverfield Hype & Movie Thread *Spoilers Ahoy!*

Status
Not open for further replies.

Bebpo

Banned
Vark said:
That they continued to not give the viewer a clear view of the monster. They did great for the first hour or sol.

Well, I'll agree with you a bit here. I think the last shot was unnecessary. The film had shown enough angles of all body parts that you could get the general idea and didn't need to see it so close up where it just looks like another CG monster.

As for the design I thought both designs were fine for the theme they were going with (water creatures). If they were from space I would have wanted something more original and different looking, but I'm ok with what the designs were.

I had the same issue with The Host but on a larger scale since straight from the outset they showed this CG monster running around in front of everyone and it just looked silly. I'm glad the movie was mainly about the human drama because I really was not impressed by the monster aspect in The Host.
 

Vark

Member
Crushed said:
That would have been stupid. The monster needed to be clearly seen eventually.


Why? The individuals imagination is way more capable of creating something horrifying for any given concept artist.

They could have gotten along fine just showing parts, hinting at things, and letting the audience fill in the gaps.
 

Nicodimas

Banned
Giant~ Was anyones elses theater really loud? Like i am hearing ringing like a rock concert loud?

Everyone in my theater cheered at the end and were talking about how much they liked it. I must admit there was something off that I could not descibe, but I try not breaking down a monster movie to much.
 

Crushed

Fry Daddy
Vark said:
Why? The individuals imagination is way more capable of creating something horrifying for any given concept artist.

They could have gotten along fine just showing parts, hinting at things, and letting the audience fill in the gaps.
Eh, I just think that that shot is a requirement. You can't just do the hinting thing, since apparently people couldn't even get the names of the characters straight despite near-direct explanation! :lol


It's like Jaws. The Gonna Need a Bigger Boat scene, where you finally see the shark clearly. They were able to do some terrifying stuff that worked only by showing it clearly (Quint's death and the shark cage come to mind), even though the rest of the film relied on this "shadowy glimpse of a fin and a head and teeth."
 
What I'm saying is the point it was trying to make (and it was attempting to make one) fell flat, I gave some reasons why. If that makes me an elitist prick then pop open the scotch and bring me my pipe and slippers.

I wasn't actually referring to you, but some earlier "these people don't reaffirm the things I think and are therefore unintelligent, which makes the movie unintelligent" posts.

Why? The individuals imagination is way more capable of creating something horrifying for any given concept artist.

I agree with this, but I think that ultimately Crushed is right. If people were upset at the dangling ending (even though the romance plot thread was resolved, I suppose), they would've pissed fire if they weren't handed a good look at the monster.
 

Reilly

Member
Bebpo said:
Well, I'll agree with you a bit here. I think the last shot was unnecessary. The film had shown enough angles of all body parts that you could get the general idea and didn't need to see it so close up where it just looks like another CG monster.
I'm under the impression that the monster at the end was a different monster. Mainly, because it didn't seem as big as the big one. I mean, the one crushed a tank, so it's really big. But the one at the end can't even eat a whole human? I agree, that was the only part of the movie I really didn't like.
 

LowParry

Member
Vark said:
Why? The individuals imagination is way more capable of creating something horrifying for any given concept artist.

They could have gotten along fine just showing parts, hinting at things, and letting the audience fill in the gaps.

Ya know a great example of this is the movie Alien. I thought it was well executed throughout the movie and seriously scared the shit out of me the first time I saw it.
 

Vark

Member
Crushed said:
Eh, I just think that that shot is a requirement. You can't just do the hinting thing, since apparently people couldn't even get the names of the characters straight despite near-direct explanation! :lol


It's like Jaws. The Gonna Need a Bigger Boat scene, where you finally see the shark clearly. They were able to do some terrifying stuff that worked only by showing it clearly (Quint's death and the shark cage come to mind), even though the rest of the film relied on this "shadowy glimpse of a fin and a head and teeth."


Yea thats a giant shark though. Giant killer versions of real things people are already afraid of can work (spiders, sharks, snakes, etc).

When it comes to aliens / monsters its really, really, really hard to come up with a design that people will genuinely find scary. Chances are they're going to find it awkward or ridiculous so you're better off not showing it if you can.

People find unidentifiable enemies inherently frightening. You can't put a face on something then you may as well be in the dark, at that point its the scariest thing your mind can come up with, which is going to be personalized to the viewer.

A person that's scared shitless of spiders will imagine something completely different than someone thats scared of snakes and has no issues with spiders.
 

fallengorn

Bitches love smiley faces
KidGalactus said:
I agree with this, but I think that ultimately Crushed is right. If people were upset at the dangling ending (even though the romance plot thread was resolved, I suppose), they would've pissed fire if they weren't handed a good look at the monster.
Yep, just look at all the backlash Lost gets. Even though this isn't really a monster movie, people came for it and they'll feel obliged to get at least one decent view of it.
 

DaMan121

Member
It's like Jaws. The Gonna Need a Bigger Boat scene, where you finally see the shark clearly. They were able to do some terrifying stuff that worked only by showing it clearly (Quint's death and the shark cage come to mind), even though the rest of the film relied on this "shadowy glimpse of a fin and a head and teeth."

"The shark still looks fake" :) Honestly up until the end scene when you see the monster in daylight, the use of CG in Cloverfield was probably the best since Jurassic Park imo.
 

Vark

Member
CcrooK said:
Ya know a great example of this is the movie Alien. I thought it was well executed throughout the movie and seriously scared the shit out of me the first time I saw it.

Yea, thats an exception in a sea of crappy, crappy monster designs.
 

Reilly

Member
DaMan121 said:
"The shark still looks fake" :) Honestly up until the end scene when you see the monster in daylight, the use of CG in Cloverfield was probably the best since Jurassic Park imo.
When you consider the movie cost 25 million to make, yes, it's very, very impressive.
 

Nicodimas

Banned
I guess the time stamped video at the end of the movie is really important with them being happy...damn it going to have to see it again. Can anyone verify what they saw in the background? Or is this just BS?
 

Bebpo

Banned
I wonder when we'll get to a technology point where we can have up-close plain view CG monsters/characters that don't have that videogame CG look and actually look like animatronics/aka. real.
 

Koojay

Member
Bebpo said:
Hey, I have a question:

Why for the early stuff you have a date/time stamp in the bottom left corner but then it totally is gone for the rest of the movie being filmed? Did the main camera holder turn the stamp off at some point or something?

The time stamp pops back up when the movie switches to Rob/Beth scenes, right?
 

Eggo

GameFan Alumnus
Interesting movie. G/F and I enjoyed it, but my roommate hated it. She couldn't get past the shaky-cam. I found the shaking a bit much. Luckily, we took some Dramamine before the showing. If used artfully and discretely (e.g., when running in a panic), I can live with moderate shaking, but the entire party sequence could have been much more level while still being very real. I think I'll pass on future Shaky Cam Productions.
 

Reilly

Member
Nicodimas said:
I guess the time stamped video at the end of the movie is really important with them being happy...damn it going to have to see it again. Can anyone verify what they saw in the background? Or is this just BS?
The Coney Island trip is about a month (I think) before the party. I can verify that the "the thing" at the end scene is real.
 

Phoenix

Member
Nicodimas said:
I guess the time stamped video at the end of the movie is really important with them being happy...damn it going to have to see it again. Can anyone verify what they saw in the background? Or is this just BS?


According to many of the recently read cloverfield sites it is an unknown object falling from space.
 

Vark

Member
Bebpo said:
I wonder when we'll get to a technology point where we can have up-close plain view CG monsters/characters that don't have that videogame CG look and actually look like animatronics/aka. real.

We were there, we should just go back to animatronics and good lighting :(
 

RSLAEV

Member
Did not like it at all. It was half a monster movie and half survival horror with shallow 2 dimensional characters. Unfortunately the two halves didn't add up to a single quality movie.
 

Lonestar

I joined for Erin Brockovich discussion
you can barely see it. It's like a couple pixels big, and you see a splash that is maybe...1 or 2 inches on the video screen (and on the theater screen, maybe a foot wide versus a large large screen.) Just a dark spot falling like a meteor.
 

Dead

well not really...yet
Bebpo said:
I wonder when we'll get to a technology point where we can have up-close plain view CG monsters/characters that don't have that videogame CG look and actually look like animatronics/aka. real.
Jurassic Park had it right. Mix of animatronics and CG.

That animatronic T-Rex close up in the rain was incredible.
 

newsguy

Member
Nicodimas said:
I guess the time stamped video at the end of the movie is really important with them being happy...damn it going to have to see it again. Can anyone verify what they saw in the background? Or is this just BS?

I can confirm it 100% as I just left the theater. I didn't read anywhere to look for it, I had just put 2 and 2 together. I figured the monster came from there so I knew that last shot was going to give up something. Some shit falls from the sky full blast into the ocean. Right side of the screen.
 

Kintaro

Worships the porcelain goddess
Eggo said:
Interesting movie. G/F and I enjoyed it, but my roommate hated it. She couldn't get past the shaky-cam. I found the shaking a bit much. Luckily, we took some Dramamine before the showing. If used artfully and discretely (e.g., when running in a panic), I can live with moderate shaking, but the entire party sequence could have been much more level while still being very real. I think I'll pass on future Shaky Cam Productions.

The Shaky Cam stuff is what is making me hesitant to go see it. I really, really dislike it's use in almost all movies.
 
A few things which are probably already known..

1) the girl passed out on the couch is jamie lascano (jamieandteddy.com) whose boyfriend was in an eco-terrorist group that attacked the drilling station that woke up the beasty. he recently sent her a sample of the main secret ingredient in Slusho (which tagruato, the oil corporation, also develops), she ate it, and has been fucked up out of her mind since...

2) rob was leaving for japan to go and work for slusho. they sent him some complimentary t-shirts and stuff and he was wearing one in the movie.

3) the monster was scratching its back on a building to clean the parasites off of it...i thought they just jumped off when i first saw it.

4) in the final scene (although a month previous to the attack,) when rob and beth are on their date at coney island, he pans the camera over to the water and you can see something fall into it...

5) after the credits you can hear some whispering. it is "it's still alive." backwards...and it sounds like rob's voice...
 

Nicodimas

Banned
Also I never got into the Viral marketing, but after reading some other places this stuff details a cool backstory to this movie.

nevermind..thanks ookie :)
 

Reilly

Member
Nicodimas said:
Also I never got into the Viral marketing, but after reading some other places this stuff details a cool backstory to this movie.
oh, i think the story to this movie isn't finished at all and I think the story will grow to something really cool.
 
Reilly said:
oh, i think the story to this movie isn't finished at all and I think the story will grow to something really cool.

Abrams has said that he wants this to become America's own Godzilla type thing, I have no doubt we will hear alot more.
 

ckohler

Member
Eggo said:
What was at the end of the movie after the credits? As soon as we saw credits, we left. :(
Just a brief bit of static audio. When played backwards, it says "It's still alive". Not really worth sticking around for. The awesome Michael Giacchino theme song that plays over the credits is, however.
 

Bulla564

Banned
I can't believe I am the 3rd person to mention this here but
the monster, and even the spider thingies just came right out of Resistance, as if this is how the invasion started in the US. It is almost a carbon copy of a chimera
. This made the movie SO MUCH MORE EPIC for me.

After going in tipsy from a few drinks, I managed to survive unscratched from the shaky cam, but was extremely pissed that the sound seemed a bit low in my theater. There is no fucking excuse for my home theater system having more "umph" than the big screen.

I loved the movie, and I thought it just fell a bit short from being a modern classic. I was extremely satisfied with the ending, and would hate to see it screwed up with a sequel.
 

Phoenix

Member
Nicodimas said:
My only question that is baffling me now is how did anyone find the tape?


Its an SD card according to the movie, and I would imagine that after the creature left and they were trying to find survivors or clean up from the aftermath they found it. We don't really know when the "viewing" of this tape is taking place - could be decades in the future.
 

teiresias

Member
Saw this tonight and WOW, I really enjoyed it. It's really a weird experience though. When I think back on it, if you'd told me the running time of the party sequence in the beginning before anything actually happens with regard to the monster, i probably would have told you it was way too long. Actually seeing it though I was kind of getting into the vibe and was thinking, if this were just a comedy filmed in this style I'd sit through it.

I'm also just a fan of this "style" - ie. Blair Witch, Diary of the Dead, etc. and when done with the proper material and actors that can make it natural enough it really works on a very visceral level.

Now I need to go back and partake of the internet backstory that I missed, is there any place that has it all conglomerated somewhere, or at least has links to the stuff?

I have a feeling when this comes out on video there will probably be alot of little things you'll see on multiple viewings, closer inspections, and with frame-by-frame that are hints about things.

newsguy said:
My question was more along the lines of how did they find a never ending camcorder battery.

Considering the conceit of the movie is that this apparently isn't an edited tape and is what is actually shot, the camera obviously got turned on and off throughout the day so it really only ran for the runtime of the movie - which was just a little over an hour. Your complaint is ridiculous unless you just always buy crappy camcorder batteries and don't know any better.
 
People suggesting the weak ass characters of this movie take precedence over monster pr0n are retards.

The only engaging characters in this movie get killed off in the process, Marlena and Hud. The rest can go screw. Uninteresting white business man and the dumb broad he boned once and now feels a colossal obligation to rescue.

Overall not a bad movie.

However if the stupid audio byte at the end of the movie undoes the ending, then Cloverfield can officially go fuck itself.

I don't need everything hunky dory and candy coated every fucking time.
 

Reilly

Member
oh, at the start of the movie, did anyone else think the theater fucked up? Everyone was like "wtf, fuck this theater, it's a piece of shit" :lol
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top Bottom